[Article] The Demigod Deck [Archive]

undone

12-03-2008, 01:07 PM

Hey, way to nuke the yard. Out of idle curiosity, what were you planning on doing about my dragon?

Dragon?
Maindeck:

Artifacts
1 Engineered Explosives
3 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Vedalken Shackles

Creatures
3 Demigod Of Revenge
1 Shriekmaw
4 Tarmogoyf

Enchantments
4 Counterbalance
2 Pernicious Deed

Instants
4 Brainstorm
2 Diabolic Edict
4 Force Of Will
1 Gifts Ungiven
3 Intuition
1 Smother

Sorceries
1 Life From The Loam
1 Raven's Crime

Basic Lands
2 Island
1 Swamp

Lands
1 Breeding Pool
4 Flooded Strand
1 Lonely Sandbar
4 Polluted Delta
3 Tropical Island
2 Underground Sea
1 Wasteland

Legendary Lands
1 Academy Ruins
3 Urborg, Tomb Of Yawgmoth
1 Volrath's Stronghold
Sideboard:

1 Tormod's Crypt
2 Yixlid Jailer
4 Engineered Plague
4 Blue Elemental Blast
4 Thoughtseize

Unless you mean the demigods which I would swords. Then your just a bad version of a U/tarmogoyf/countertop deck.

EDIT: thats one way the other is to slowly eat the yard over and over untill theres nothing left in it just by default if intuition doesnt resolve.

Cabal-kun

12-03-2008, 01:14 PM

Uhwah?

I didn't intend much with the Demigod of Revenge deck but it became, I think, premier combo-control deck in Legacy because of the multiple avenues of both attack and defense.

Did I sleep through something? :eyebrow:

frogboy

12-03-2008, 01:16 PM

So, with the "return" trigger on the stack, I'll counter Demigod. Then, I'll activate Relic.

Yeah, I guess making the opponent two for one himself kind of sucks.

(well, it's not, but realistically people would be playing Crypt here, so, you know.)

It's also unfortunate that the deck has no way of removing a yard hoser as needed or ways to counter back when the opponent tries to stop you or anything.

Honestly. I'm not even a super big fan of the deck beyond it's 'omg brawr' awesome but people are being way too dismissive.

(ps, Anusien, fourth Top, kthx)

Nightmare

12-03-2008, 01:20 PM

I'm not really trying to be dismissive, but w/e. I was merely pointing out that it's not really that difficult to play around the Demigod ability.

And I've gotta agree with Cabal-Kun. What could possibly have inspired that idea in Binswanger's head? I've seen literally zero people play this deck. Premier actually has a meaning. Look it up.

Anusien

12-03-2008, 01:34 PM

Relic of Progenitus is actually really unimpressive. Extirpate is better because you have to get lucky to counter it with Counterbalance. And in either case it's not like you completely lose; I've easily won through that before. They can stop your Loams or your Demigods but not both and certainly neither of these plans beat "Counterbalance Goyf RARRR".

So which Threshold cards are supposed to scare me? They have Daze, possibly Stifle, and StP as just about the only relevant cards I care about (aside from Counterbalance, Force and Goyf which I also have). But hey, we never question all the other Counterbalance + Pernicious Deed + Tarmogof decks beating Threshold, so why start now?

Nightmare

12-03-2008, 01:37 PM

What could possibly have inspired that idea in Binswanger's head? I've seen literally zero people play this deck. Premier actually has a meaning. Look it up.

Address this point.

Anusien

12-03-2008, 01:47 PM

Address this point.
I think it's really good. It tests well. Frogboy had some success with it, and everybody who saw the deck at that tournament seemed to be at least somewhat impressed. People I know online are excited by it.

deviant

12-03-2008, 01:49 PM

"Generally in this matchup you want to cast Sensei's Divining Top on turn 1 and play a removal spell on your own Tarmogoyf on turn 3 (to play around Daze)."

Now this really baffled me. For like five minutes. I read it four times and did not get it.

..until I realized I read it wrong and I'm just too tired. It says "or your own tarmogoyf" in the article.

Just felt like sharing this with someone.

Oh! Oh! When I played the deck at a local tournament I used the prerelease Demigods. It's really fun to slam three penises on the table and make some stupid jokes about "are you going to take it to your face?".

Nightmare

12-03-2008, 02:04 PM

I think it's really good. It tests well. Frogboy had some success with it, and everybody who saw the deck at that tournament seemed to be at least somewhat impressed. People I know online are excited by it.

You thinking its good, and online excitement don't translate into it being the best control/combo deck in the format.

It's comments like these that undermine your credibility as a writer, and piss off the people who actually have a clue about the format.

undone

12-03-2008, 02:11 PM

Demigod might have a place in legacy but I think that honestly it isnt in U/X intuition decks, its either in goyf sligh, sui or trainwreck or something.

Illissius

12-03-2008, 02:30 PM

I thought this was a pretty solid article marred by an (admittedly very) dumb sentence in the first paragraph. This place needs less hyperventilating. I suspect if someone popular with the Source had written the same article there would be a lot less sniping going on.

EDIT -- With Dragon Stompy seemingly having fallen off the face of the Earth, and that deck being the original impetus for the design of this one, perhaps that should lead to some rethinking of the deck for the new metagame?

Anusien

12-03-2008, 02:32 PM

If the (mis?)use of one word upsets you this much, I feel very bad for you.

xsockmonkeyx

12-03-2008, 02:40 PM

I suspect if someone popular with the Source had written the same article there would be a lot less sniping going on.

This.

Pulp_Fiction

12-03-2008, 02:48 PM

Relying on blind luck as an answer to Extirpate seems like a bad plan. Also, when did he break the format the first time? I remember a 4C Landstill variant with 8-10 colorless lands that consistently lost to its own mana problems ...

frogboy

12-03-2008, 02:54 PM

You thinking its good, and online excitement don't translate into it being the best control/combo deck in the format.

It's comments like these that undermine your credibility as a writer, and piss off the people who actually have a clue about the format.

The comment was prefaced.

...I think...

Besides, it's competing with what, It's the Fear for that title? I can buy that.

nitewolf9

12-03-2008, 03:00 PM

Besides, it's competing with what, It's the Fear for that title? I can buy that.

I don't think I can. But at least this deck runs a single breeding pool to not just lose on the spot to extirpate on tropical island.

frogboy

12-03-2008, 03:03 PM

I don't think I can. But at least this deck runs a single breeding pool to not just lose on the spot to extirpate on tropical island.

obligatory LOL EXTIRPATE SUX post here.

Now that it's been said, how about we avoid a thread derailment?

Volt

12-03-2008, 03:06 PM

This place needs less hyperventilating. I suspect if someone popular with the Source had written the same article there would be a lot less sniping going on.

Dittos from me, too. This thread reminds me of why the Source annoys me at times.

xsockmonkeyx

12-03-2008, 03:14 PM

This thread reminds me of why people dont like the Source.

fixt.

Nightmare

12-03-2008, 03:25 PM

Yeah, I'm sure I'm super biased against such a ridiculous claim because of who said it, not because it's such a ridiculous claim.

Let's see: A deck which has been played by one person at one event is claimed to be the best combo-control deck in the format. This deck is not a Painter deck, nor is it a Dreadnought deck. Nope, it really doesn't even have, like, a combo in the deck! Unless of course you count Urborg+Intuition+Demigod as a combo. Which you shouldn't.

But who am I to judge? I mean, I barely even play this format, and I certainly don't have any idea what decks are being played successfully in the format. I must simply be biased against Kevin.

God forbid we require accountability from writers.

nitewolf9

12-03-2008, 03:33 PM

Now that it's been said, how about we avoid a thread derailment?

Obligatory "why the fuck would you run breeding pool when you aren't even running 4 tropical islands" here. It's a relevant design question about this deck. I would think the extra 2 damage is probably going to matter more often than the extirpate scenario. Do people really live in fear of wasteland -> extirpate on tropical island?
Actually, yes. Yes they do. Sorry, I answered my own question.

PS. Extirpate sucks. I think more people are realizing this.

Omega

12-03-2008, 03:45 PM

I did enjoyed the decklists and the article overall. But like most people, i have yet to see this deck in action.

About the comment that it is favorable against Tres hold: It looks like that all decks being created nowadays are favorable against Tres hold...

Robert

Cabal-kun

12-03-2008, 03:57 PM

If the (mis?)use of one word upsets you this much, I feel very bad for you.

Because everyone knows that the introduction/first paragraph isn't important at all.

Pulp_Fiction

12-03-2008, 03:59 PM

Whether Extirpate sucks or not has no relevance to anything. What does have relevance is if people play the card and if people in your meta do in fact run this card that "sucks" then be able to deal with it rather than dismissing it as a fluke or "scrub" card.

Peter_Rotten

12-03-2008, 04:03 PM

Dittos from me, too. This thread reminds me of why the Source annoys me at times.

QFT. I swear, there can't be a single article that ppl like. And, god-forbid, Anus writes it! Then fuck, it MUST be shitty.

Unfortunately, Legacy players are like the players of every other format: they know everything and they especially know that you are wrong.

It is also nice to see that we have found the single line in the article that we should extensively bitch about. Anus called it "the premier" deck. :eek: Blasphemy. Tar and feathers. See if he floats.

Personally, I feel that mediocre-to-good articles are better than nothing. I clearly recall the days when we had NOTHING. Hell, I remember co-authoring an article with Scrumdogg! We were hard up!

Nightmare

12-03-2008, 04:15 PM

QFT. I swear, there can't be a single article that ppl like. And, god-forbid, Anus writes it! Then fuck, it MUST be shitty.
You can't paint a turd.

Mordel

12-03-2008, 04:20 PM

Anus writes it!

I lol'd.

Peoples' ire over tremendous use of hyperbole has actually managed to overshadow the conflict between people that like and people that hate extirpate.

I have to admit, I am somewhat partial to writers avoiding hyperboles when writing about a deck lots of people have not seen in action before, but whatever.

What I am honestly confused by is this: In light of all of the criticism a legacy article will see here and a large portion of the people that read these articles reside here, why on earth would anyone leave an exaggeration that will obviously been pounced upon in the article?

I don't get it. I read the article before checking out this thread and when I saw the introduction I thought to myself; "oh god...people are going to shit bricks": as if the writer didn't spot this too.

Whyyyyy???!

I am probably one of the few, but I kind of like the source for the "rabble rabble rabble!!!" factor. I get my daily chuckles out of lots of threads here. When a new scg article comes out, I can pretty much bank on getting some lulz out of the ensuing discussion.

jazzykat

12-03-2008, 04:22 PM

Relic of Progenitus is actually really unimpressive. Extirpate is better because you have to get lucky to counter it with Counterbalance.

I am sending this snippet to Deep6er.

Relic of Progenitus can come down before counterbalance, besides the fact that when activated it draws you a card...I'm not going to argue.

Also, I don't play in a meta where I face blood moon every game, but it looks like you would need 1 Gifts+1 Intuition or 2 Intuitions to set up the Demi-God plan. It's been said before but this looks like ITF metagamed to beat Blood Moon. Honestly, if I'm worried about Blood Moon I play UR Dreadstill with 6 basic islands and proceed to almost completely ignore it.

frogboy

12-03-2008, 04:51 PM

Under Blood Moon you need Intuition, a basic Island, and five nonbasics, and then your opponent dies.

Let's see: A deck which has been played by one person at one event is claimed to be the best combo-control deck in the format. This deck is not a Painter deck, nor is it a Dreadnought deck. Nope, it really doesn't even have, like, a combo in the deck! Unless of course you count Urborg+Intuition+Demigod as a combo. Which you shouldn't.

I actually just sort of lump all the Counterbalance decks together in my mind, and since I think of Dreadnought decks as being more adorable than anything else and stone forgot about Epic Painter, misspoke. This is a reasonable point. Can we pretend he said he 'thinks it might be the best Counterbalance deck?' I'm not even sure if that's true, but it will probably foster more productive discussion.

Artowis

12-03-2008, 05:27 PM

Under Blood Moon you need Intuition, a basic Island, and five nonbasics, and then your opponent dies.

I actually just sort of lump all the Counterbalance decks together in my mind, and since I think of Dreadnought decks as being more adorable than anything else and stone forgot about Epic Painter, misspoke. This is a reasonable point. Can we pretend he said he 'thinks it might be the best Counterbalance deck?' I'm not even sure if that's true, but it will probably foster more productive discussion.

No. Because that's clearly not as much fun as just harping on the same point over and over. It totally worked for the burn and team america threads. We can only hope to meet those lofty standards of threadrrifcness.

Nihil Credo

12-03-2008, 05:45 PM

Under Blood Moon you need Intuition, a basic Island, and five nonbasics, and then your opponent dies.
I suspect (Average #turns Dragon Stompy needs to kill you - Average #turns to draw and play all of that) may be a negative number.

klaus

12-03-2008, 05:58 PM

Also, I kind of like the deck. I like it like an uncle might like his odd looking nephew who's really got balls and does impressive stuff at times but, well, looks odd.

Anusien

12-03-2008, 06:14 PM

I suspect (Average #turns Dragon Stompy needs to kill you - Average #turns to draw and play all of that) may be a negative number.
Actually it held up well against Dragon Stompy in testing*. In game 1 situations you have Force, some small amount of removal and Tarmogoyf. A lot of games come down to them playing some insignificant creature and bashing for 2 while you hold Force of Will for the one relevant card in their hand (the Slogger, Pit-Dragon, Jitte, whatever). That gives you plenty of turns to 15 them. Games I won against Dragon Stompy are split pretty closely between stopping their early assault and blowing them out, and just 15ing them.

*Pretty well in this case really does mean slightly favorable; the matchup is something like 55/45 or an equivalent. But considering how abysmal the matchup was for Vorosh, I feel pretty damn good about that.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-03-2008, 09:07 PM

You thinking its good, and online excitement don't translate into it being the best control/combo deck in the format.

It's comments like these that undermine your credibility as a writer, and piss off the people who actually have a clue about the format.

+1

@Defenders of Anusien:

Are you for fucking serious? Dreadstill? Anything Painter-Stone? Solidarity is still far and away more popular and proved than this. This demonstrates a severe lack of understand of either the format or the English language, or more likely, both.

I'd rather have no Legacy articles than grossly misleading Legacy articles.

The article wasn't terrible otherwise, but this is actually a very relevant complaint, and it's hardly an error; it's the entire focus of the opening paragraph.

frogboy

12-03-2008, 09:13 PM

This demonstrates a severe lack of understand of either the format or the English language, or more likely, both.

Meh. I took it to mean a control deck with a combo-esque finish. I don't think Solidarity really counts; it's a combo deck that happens to play Remand and Force of Will.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-03-2008, 09:33 PM

Dreadstill? Anything Painter-Stone?

Nydaeli

12-03-2008, 09:41 PM

What makes you think that playing a gimmicky win condition that happens to work under Blood Moon is a better plan than just fixing your mana base?

Props for running Gifts, though. I'm not sure this is the deck, but it's been begging to be used somewhere for a long time.

Shriekmaw

12-03-2008, 09:49 PM

Volt

12-03-2008, 09:55 PM

Jesus Christ. There was an "I think" thrown in the middle of that overly maligned sentence.

I don't know that it's the best deck of its type in the format. I also don't know that it isn't, and neither do any of you. I do know I've seen enough of it to know that it's somewhere in the vicinity of good.

I'm all for constructive criticism and "accountability from writers" and all that. I just think that some of you are coming from more of an "I'm the cool kid who likes to trip the unpopular kid in the hall and then laugh at him with all my cool friends" place than an "I'm going to demand accountability from you" place.

@Tool: Jerk. That link was epic.

AnwarA101

12-03-2008, 10:13 PM

I think articles about new decks in legacy should have a big tournament win behind them because what would make a better point then a win.

I think at that point, more people would take the article and the deck more seriously, especially when your trying to convince the hard core legacy community here on The Source.

Do you mean that any deck that is written about should have won a large tournament? That seems like a particularly high standard. No decks would be basically written about until it was obvious that they were very good.

New decks should be greeted with skepticism, but also with an open mind. The problem isn't writing about new decks, but the way in which we discuss them. If we observe their strengths and weaknesses and stray away from simple conclusions then we all can evaluate the deck in a realistic way. To do otherwise just obscures the deck's actual potential.

socialite

12-03-2008, 10:33 PM

I'd rather have no Legacy articles than grossly misleading Legacy articles.

IMO

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Posting garbage like the afore mentioned article (not that I have tried to do better) in well traveled public forums like SCG scares me. People complain about the neglect our format receives. If I were new to Legacy and took this article at face value, which someone who is new to the format may - as being posted on SCG it should contain some amount of valuable material, I would be rather put off. Seriously Demigod of Revenge? With our card pool seems rather unoriginal and boring. For it to be a dominant force in the format, epic fucking fail.

IMO

xsockmonkeyx

12-03-2008, 11:28 PM

Blah blah blah...God forbid we require accountability from writers.

Actually, I was objecting to your attitude.

EDIT: and you're fun to troll.

Aggro_zombies

12-03-2008, 11:46 PM

I love how two people genuinely criticized the deck, and then the thread degenerated into "lol anusien". That said, I read the thread first and then went to the article, which was fortunate because skipping the first section altogether and just starting at the list made the article much less controversial.

That said...

No Aggro-Loam testing? It seems like that matchup would be really bad for you because they're playing a deck that can do a lot of what your deck can do, except it's faster and hits harder in a relevant time frame (and can disrupt you along the way). Actually, I'm suspicious of the general lack of mention of Loam decks, and the relatively light of mention of control decks like Standstill. In fact, while we're on the subject, that list of test decks looks slightly outdated...not unlike what I used to test against when I last played Legacy seriously - a year ago. The more things change, the more they stay the same, eh?

I also don't like how the numbers are all over the place. I can see why you'd want a lot of outs, and you are running tutors, but I'm inclined to think that a Wishboard would be the better solution, especially given that a lot of the one- and two-of "solutions" your deck runs eat up a lot of space and aren't universally useful. Seems like classic Cunning Wish fodder to me.

Stronghold is nice, but you know what's really retarded with Intuition if you're looking for creature recycling? Genesis. They give you a 4/4 beatstick, or they give you an unlimited creature recursion engine that doesn't eat a draw step. And just to head this off at the proverbial pass: if you're so fucking paranoid about Extirpate, don't fucking play a deck that uses the graveyard as a resource. If you're using Stronghold just to put a Demigod on top as your last card to smash for fifteen, you really need to do your play testing under a fifty minute time limit. Cute tricks are cute, but [snip because I was an ass].

All told, I'm incredulous about a deck that's been worked on primarily by two people, with no strong tournament showing and with an outdated matchup list posted. As far as I was able to tell, the deck only does exceedingly well in the Threshold matchup, but since Thresh seems to be the worst deck in the format now in terms of its matchups, I'd say that this would seem a pretty poor choice. All the other matches seem to be prefaced with "Slightly," which is never a good sign. Furthermore, I don't buy the argument that you'd win enough after sideboarding to swing a significant number of matches in your favor. If you lose game one, you have to win two more games, whereas they only need to win one. With that kind of math, I'd really want to see "post-board is exceedingly favorable" to "post-board is a total blowout," ESPECIALLY if the first game is so close.

All told, 7/10.

EDIT: Okay, maybe I was a bit harsh. I still want to see more testing against a broader array of decks, though.

hi-val

12-03-2008, 11:53 PM

I am interested in other Intuition targets for fatties; namely, Gigapede (IBA is grinning here), Graveshell Scarab (now IBA is insatiable) or something else along those lines. I meaaaan, if repeatedly pounding someone with Gigapede is wrong...

I'm also interested in cooking up an Intuition/Demigod/Magus of the Moon/THE BLOODENING deck to utilize all those red mana symbols.

Resist_Temptation

12-04-2008, 12:23 AM

I think that this list looks very good and i really like how intuition is being used in here. i have not seen it used very often, besides in counter control(many variants but all have samebasic gameplan). To downgrade this deck is not giving it a fair chance. on paper it looks really good, and obviously they wrote an articale on it so it can't be that bad. I highly suggest playing a few games with this before saying whether it is good or bad.

Bardo

12-04-2008, 01:21 AM

Strange. I thought this was a good article and one of the better Kevin has written. The writing is fine, the sections have headings and it doesn't randomly jump around like some of Kevin's other article (which personally bug me). Once you get past the "premier" fuck-up and get into the content, it's a fine Legacy article (though a bit sloppy in the "combo" section). I find it weird that it's getting such a shitty response.

(Comments in chronological order, since I'm in that kind of mood.)

Dragon?
Maindeck:
"Dragon" is a generic term for a 5-power flier; like a "bear" is a 2/2 for 2 and a "gray ogre" is a 2/2 for 3.

This thread reminds me of why people dont like the Source.

Ditto. :/

And, god-forbid, Anus writes it! Then fuck, it MUST be shitty

'Tis the season and apparently the fashionable thing to do.

I'd rather have no Legacy articles than grossly misleading Legacy articles.

Except for the "premier" thing (which people totally need to untwist their panties about), it was not "grossly misleading," and if it was, I still believe no press is worse than bad press. At least bad press gives people something to talk about.

The article wasn't terrible otherwise, but this is actually a very relevant complaint, and it's hardly an error; it's the entire focus of the opening paragraph.

Erm, I should have read this before I wrote what I wrote above, Chris. :) Still, I'll let it stand, though it isn't directed at you any longer.

I think articles about new decks in legacy should have a big tournament win behind them because what would make a better point then a win.

It would be nice, but a lot of perfectly fine decks have been built by writers/pundits and "thrown out there" for further tuning and development. Big 1.5 tournaments are few and far between (unless you live in a couple of pretty specific geographical locations or are willing to drive like a mad-man to get to them) and this seems like an unreasonable standard to achieve, well-meaning as it may be.

Posting garbage like the afore mentioned article (not that I have tried to do better) in well traveled public forums like SCG scares me.

I'll give you the first paragraph, but the article was not garbage. It was actually quite fine, in my opinion.

As for the deck, it looks fucking awesome. I have no idea how well it plays, I'm concerned about the low number of blue cards, the manabase concerns me, I'm not sure Demigod is worth it (though, it is completely sweet as hell in theory (to me)), but again, it's a Swiss Army Knife of Awesome Stuff. I dig it.

Everyone's a critic, don't let it get to you, Kevin. Keep up the good work.

Mordel

12-04-2008, 01:23 AM

I don't have an opinion on this deck as a whole really because I have never in my life seen it or played against it, despite all of my random matches on mws and so forth. I didn't really learn anything from the article either, considering the deck seems strikingly similar to ITF at a glance.

One thing I did notice that I hadn't noticed before is that Anusien is easily shortened to "Anus". I laughed at this because it seemed so obvious and for those guffaws, I am happy that this article came about.

The article in question was at least well-written though. I enjoyed reading it.

Bardo

12-04-2008, 01:33 AM

What the shit, "premier" does not mean what I had in mind (which was something like "headlining" or "popular and a big deal" sorts of assumptions).

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=premier

Using "premier" as a synonym for "new and emerging" makes that a little easier to accept. So, nevermind, good article. :)

Volt

12-04-2008, 01:37 AM

Bardo: Just to be clear, those quotes you attributed to me aren't mine.

Sorry, it was IBA. I have no idea how or why I confused the two of you. - Bardo

juventus

12-04-2008, 01:47 AM

This place needs less hyperventilating. I suspect if someone popular with the Source had written the same article there would be a lot less sniping going on.

yep

I think articles about new decks in legacy should have a big tournament win behind them because what would make a better point then a win.

I think at that point, more people would take the article and the deck more seriously, especially when your trying to convince the hard core legacy community here on The Source.

That's results oriented thinking which is a fairly bad thing. Winning a tournament generally doesn't prove anything.

Unfortunately, Legacy players are like the players of every other format, except they're worse at magic and don't have enough meaningful tournaments to prove they know what they are talking about.

fixed

Forbiddian

12-04-2008, 03:29 AM

I thought the article was pretty good. The sentence in question about premier was him just trying to make a decent hook. I do think that READERS should have some accountability and understand that the opening paragraph needs some controversy and not to take it too seriously.

I do think that the first paragraph was a real bag of shit, though, even without the premier fiasco.

Chases. Escapes. Lies. Truths. Passion. Miracles. I didn't intend much with the Demigod of Revenge deck but it became, [a good] deck in Legacy because of the multiple avenues of both attack and defense.

Seriously? I can't believe I didn't stop reading right there. You might as well have said, "I woke with a start, covered in sweat. Peering out my window, I could see the dawn breaking and the dew drops glistened on the lawn. Nestled between two blades of grass, I saw a dumb fucking cliché." Anyway, the rest of the article is a really solid primer.

It keeps the general strategy of the matchups in focus while also digging down to some intricate expert tricks like using Stronghold to combo with Counterbalance to counter Force of Will or some of the more obscure Intuition piles and the situations where you'd look for them. Combining the two while keeping it interesting is pretty difficult, and you did a really good job Anusien.

What I really wished the article had were more headers. No heading (intro) --> The Deck --> Matchups --> Tricks (tiny section at the end). If I ever go back and want to find something out of the article, or even want to get up to take a piss halfway through, I'll be SOL finding where I left off.

At least stuff like "Strategies" "Theory" "Card Selection" "Criticisms of the Deck" would be nice. I know you won't please everyone, but I think it'd be more readable and easier to reference with more/better headings.

I also thought there were a lot of matchups you didn't get to. The section called Combo is pretty short and only talks about Ad Nauseum decks with a mention of Belcher (which is played in some AdN, I believe).

I know a big criticism of this deck's forebears was Dragon Stompy, so it was nice to see a section on that, but just talking numbers: Survival, Affinity, Dreadstill, Goyf Sligh, Wombat, Ichorid, and Loam are all undiscussed and are as common or more common than Dragon Stompy and B/x discard.

You don't have time to review all of those decks, but I feel there are a lot of questions in the air that could have been answered with a few more matchups.

frogboy

12-04-2008, 04:31 AM

Dreadstill? Anything Painter-Stone?

as I mentioned earlier, I forgot about Painter-Stone because I typically associate it with the straight combo builds and not the EPIC Counterbalance shell. And I make fun of Dreadstill at every opportunity, so, um, yeah.

Posting garbage like the afore mentioned article (not that I have tried to do better) in well traveled public forums like SCG scares me. People complain about the neglect our format receives. If I were new to Legacy and took this article at face value, which someone who is new to the format may - as being posted on SCG it should contain some amount of valuable material, I would be rather put off. Seriously Demigod of Revenge? With our card pool seems rather unoriginal and boring. For it to be a dominant force in the format, epic fucking fail.

In terms of being a primer, the article was pretty good. More matchup analysis, sure, but there's so many fucking decks that it's hard to do. It was designed to fix the Dragon Stompy matchup and still beat Thresh, so that was the focus.

If you're using Stronghold just to put a Demigod on top as your last card to smash for fifteen, you really need to do your play testing under a fifty minute time limit.

If you think this is true you need to play faster.

edit:

All told, I'm incredulous about a deck that's been worked on primarily by two people, with no strong tournament showing and with an outdated matchup list posted. As far as I was able to tell, the deck only does exceedingly well in the Threshold matchup, but since Thresh seems to be the worst deck in the format now in terms of its matchups, I'd say that this would seem a pretty poor choice. All the other matches seem to be prefaced with "Slightly," which is never a good sign. Furthermore, I don't buy the argument that you'd win enough after sideboarding to swing a significant number of matches in your favor. If you lose game one, you have to win two more games, whereas they only need to win one. With that kind of math, I'd really want to see "post-board is exceedingly favorable" to "post-board is a total blowout," ESPECIALLY if the first game is so close.

Like, if you're slightly favorable in all three games, you're more than slightly favored in the match. Besides, it's basically ITF with a different Intuition suite. Do some extrapolation.

also I did basically no work but I did top four a thirty person tournament with it respeck imo.

Mordel

12-04-2008, 04:33 AM

Unfortunately, Legacy players are like the players of every other format, except they're worse at magic and don't have enough meaningful tournaments to prove they know what they are talking about.

Uhhm...whoa. I would like to think that part of the issue lies in the fact that legacy is notably more diverse than standard and extended have been in an excruciatingly long time and as a result a lot more issues fall into the category of conjecture.

If legacy was a bullshit format like standard or 1.x and had extremely well-defined tiers of decks, you might find a lot less division and cynicism in the player base...I have been keeping up with extended and standard a lot, despite loathing them profoundly and the second tier of competitive decks showing for top-level tournies has been disappearing faster and faster.

The question with the most variables will earn a more lively and lengthy debate and extremely controlled formats like standard and [more recently] extended have little in this. People with the big tech in PTQ constructed formats tend to keep it to themselves as a rule. The general impression I have gotten from legacy since I started getting more into it seems to be people trying to keep tech to themselves, but more often than not, they crack and get excited and share it at one point or another.

Maybe all of this is just me because I consider most of the people on this site and the legacy format in general to be a better overall class of person and player than enthusiasts of Standard and [the more recent] Extended.

What I am getting at is that if you give some dipshit something simple to debate, chances are he will be more apt at it. Give that same dipshit something more complicated and everything goes to shit. Even randoms that I play on MWS seem to have a better grasp of rules (I know, I know) than the randoms I'd play when I used to test standard extensively in anticipation of the next PTQ.

Forbiddian

12-04-2008, 05:00 AM

People with the big tech in PTQ constructed formats tend to keep it to themselves as a rule. The general impression I have gotten from legacy since I started getting more into it seems to be people trying to keep tech to themselves, but more often than not, they crack and get excited and share it at one point or another.

There really aren't many big tournaments for Legacy. The best thing you can really hope for is an 1800 rating (useless) and your creation in the Decks to Beat list or maybe a quotation in someone's signature.

I don't think it's because Legacy players are friendlier or something, I really think it's because there just aren't many big tournaments, so saving tech isn't a benefit. For me, anyway, I like the designing and the theory much more than I like playing, and I'm interested to find out if my creations can stand up to the rest of the format.

Shugyosha

12-04-2008, 05:30 AM

I like the article. Writers express their thoughts and you don't have to agree with them all the times.

Played the deck myself in a tournament and fast decks like Goyfsligh give you serious headches, so I would fix this in the sideboard with more spot removal maybe. against control this deck is a beast. Never had any problems to win against dedicated control decks due to the Raven's Crime/Loam mini-combo. I played a second Crime in the sideboard because this card performs well even without Loam.

I don't think its the best combo-control deck but its definately underplayed.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-04-2008, 07:53 AM

The offending paragraph and attitude isn't offending just because it's inaccurate. It's offensive because it continues this narrative that the Legacy format doesn't exist as such beyond assholes playing around a kitchen table, and that any schmuck can casually come in and break it. Throwing out an article claiming to have created one of the top decks in the format despite the lack of play or tournament results, with little testing and a lackluster intro to the deck behind it enforces the idea that the Legacy metagame isn't anything to take seriously. And from someone that is, for whatever reason, considered to be an expert on the format makes it especially damaging.

If Anusien had written this crap attached to, "Here's a pet deck I've been working on, I think it could be really good", that would be one thing. But Christ, even Jack Mother Fucking Elgin has the goddamned common sense not to label his own pet decks as being "premier" when no one else is playing them.

I've spoken out against previous frivolous complaints because they were frivolous and they would have exactly this effect; deadening the criticism when it's actually relevant. It's relevant in this case though. Kevin should go back and edit his ego out of this article. It presents a negative stereotype of Legacy.

herbig

12-04-2008, 08:13 AM

I didn't intend much with the Demigod of Revenge deck but it became, I think, premier combo-control deck in Legacy.

Shouldn't there also be a "the" in there somewhere as well? Come on now, if you're going to piss the whole community off you might as well have the decency of correct English grammar. I'm outrage.

Anusien

12-04-2008, 10:30 AM

I can't believe I didn't stop reading right there. You might as well have said, "I woke with a start, covered in sweat. Peering out my window, I could see the dawn breaking and the dew drops glistened on the lawn. Nestled between two blades of grass, I saw a dumb fucking cliché." Anyway, the rest of the article is a really solid primer.
Wow. I figured that Princess Bride reference was tragically obvious. You know, "Fencing. Fighting. Torture. Bad Men. Beautifulest ladies. True love." I did go for the book version of the quote rather than the movie version, so that's what might be tripping you up.

But you know what? It's a cult classic. I'm still not letting you off the hook for that.

P.S., Bardo <3.
<3 <3 <3

No Aggro-Loam testing? It seems like that matchup would be really bad for you because they're playing a deck that can do a lot of what your deck can do, except it's faster and hits harder in a relevant time frame (and can disrupt you along the way).
Aggro Loam has this awkward problem where you both have about the same Loam engine capabilities, but you have trumps in Counterbalance and Demigod and Shackles. Like, sometimes they go turn 2 Loam turn 3 Devastating Dreams, but that isn't often. I feel like it's slightly ahead, but each game is so random that it's hard to tell. Then again I've been massively comfortable against Aggro Loam with just Counterbalance and Force of Will.

Actually, I'm suspicious of the general lack of mention of Loam decks, and the relatively light of mention of control decks like Standstill. In fact, while we're on the subject, that list of test decks looks slightly outdated...not unlike what I used to test against when I last played Legacy seriously - a year ago. The more things change, the more they stay the same, eh?
Welll, I figured these were the most important. Like, blah blah blah Aggro Loam or UWb Landstill or whatever, but if I omitted any of these decks in the matchup section, things would be bad. The rest are just sort of semi-relevant, and the article was already 5000 words.

Stronghold is nice, but you know what's really retarded with Intuition if you're looking for creature recycling? Genesis. They give you a 4/4 beatstick, or they give you an unlimited creature recursion engine that doesn't eat a draw step.
...They give you Genesis, and then you have a crappy creature in hand. Plus, Stronghold keeps going after they Tormod's Crypt away your Life from the Loam.

Furthermore, I don't buy the argument that you'd win enough after sideboarding to swing a significant number of matches in your favor. If you lose game one, you have to win two more games, whereas they only need to win one. With that kind of math, I'd really want to see "post-board is exceedingly favorable" to "post-board is a total blowout," ESPECIALLY if the first game is so close.
That's because, for the most part, we didn't talk about the other matchups. Let me give you a dozen pages on how versus Fish decks or whatever small aggro decks I barely sideboard at all and just go "lol can you deal with a Pernicious Deed? How about Shackles recursion? GG" I covered the matchups that require sideboard space (Ichorid aside, which I'm not convinced is all that great, so I'm now running Extirpate instead of Yixlid Jailor).

P.S., Why does every article thread with a new deck (not just mine) have a comment on this refrain: "I don't believe you. There's no big finish/big finish was a fluke. I don't think you've done enough testing/I don't believe your testing. I can easily beat that deck with 0 change to mine. I'm going to ignore this deck and continue playing my pet deck."

Aside: Pretty sure actually caring what you people think is -EV. Not only does it not seem to affect how well my articles are received in the general public, but you people will criticize articles no matter what. Compared to where I was six months ago or more, I've done significant amounts of change in style and content in order to try and make you people happy. And yet it doesn't seem to matter to anyone in terms of feedback received or nasty criticism given. Just food for thought; if you want people to care what you think it's possible you need to change the way you give your feedback.

Edit: Oh my god, I totally forgot.
*scoops to Herbig* What a massive beat. :P

undone

12-04-2008, 11:09 AM

Dont hate the player, hate the deck.

It seems bad just so bad because it loses to so many cards. From not having a good landstill or aggroloam matchup, to having a mediocer combo matchup.

That's because, for the most part, we didn't talk about the other matchups. Let me give you a dozen pages on how versus Fish decks or whatever small aggro decks I barely sideboard at all and just go "lol can you deal with a Pernicious Deed? How about Shackles recursion? GG" I covered the matchups that require sideboard space (Ichorid aside, which I'm not convinced is all that great, so I'm now running Extirpate instead of Yixlid Jailor).

"Lol can you beat needles" Honestly I dont believe you tested against good thresh decks good thresh pilots or thresh decks tuned for this. I am betting you tested against threshold designed to beat aggro and combo (See red tempo and black tempo thresh decks) but ones tailored to beat aggro and control (See black CT thresh, White CT thresh and BW counter top thresh) Probably have a better game then you give credit for here.

Because after all every deck beats threshold 80/20 thats why it never top 8s it only rips the best card off the top by luck couldnt be those 10+ cantrips.

Saying "The counter top matchup is largely luck based" isnt true at all its simple numbers lets evaluate.

They have

4 CB
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
Ponder increases thier odds of T2 CB drasticaly by like 25%.

Now lets look at protection packages
you run 4 force
they run 4 force for daze

They have a better chance to counter your T2 balance (especialy with ponder)

This doesnt include thoughtseize or snare which destroy your CT backup plan.

You also fail to mention the fairly obvious problem your deck has with any deck running price of progress, most specificaly burn.

This deck MIGHT be tier 2 or 1.5 at best but the primer combo control deck it is not, both swans thresh and painters servant heck EVER SURVIVAL has more prominant combos then this. I dont see this deck being bigger then angel stompy or any stompy deck its ok but it definately isnt as consistent as threshold or as powerful as its the fear and land still varients.

Anusien

12-04-2008, 11:23 AM

It seems bad just so bad because it loses to so many cards. From not having a good landstill or aggroloam matchup, to having a mediocer combo matchup.
You've certainly never tested either of these matchups like I have, right? Like hell, just look at the cards. It has turn 4 Raven's Crime recursion, plus CounterTop + Force + Goyf. It's almost the complete list of cards combo decks hate to face.
And yeah, Force + CounterTop + my own Loam to keep up with theirs with Extirpate and Crypt sideboarded, certainly a walk in the park for Aggro Loam.

Because after all every deck beats threshold 80/20 thats why it never top 8s it only rips the best card off the top by luck couldnt be those 10+ cantrips.

Saying "The counter top matchup is largely luck based" isnt true at all its simple numbers lets evaluate.

They have

4 CB
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
Ponder increases thier odds of T2 CB drasticaly by like 25%.

Now lets look at protection packages
you run 4 force
they run 4 force for daze

They have a better chance to counter your T2 balance (especialy with ponder)
They have a slight edge in actually just getting to Counterbalance first and playing it. Sure, that's fine. But in the meantime, they have virtually irrelevant cards and I have Deeds and Shackles and Demigods. And yeah, you know what's awesome? Playing Intuition and then putting three Demigods on the table through Counterbalance.

You also fail to mention the fairly obvious problem your deck has with any deck running price of progress, most specificaly burn.
Sure, Price of Progress itself is a pain. It's not my favorite matchup, but I have maindeck Counterbalance and sideboarded Blue Elemental Blast (and Thoughtseize).

I dont see this deck being bigger then angel stompy or any stompy deck its ok but it definately isnt as consistent as threshold or as powerful as its the fear and land still varients.
So it's not as powerful as It's the Fear? They share about 50 cards or so in the maindeck, and It's the Fear has more recursion elements and such where I have more raw power in the form of Raven's Crime and Demigod of Revenge?
The problem, to me, with It's the Fear is that you take a slow concept (Loam Recursion board control decks) and makes it even slower with Eternal Witness and Etched Oracle.

undone

12-04-2008, 12:03 PM

They have a slight edge in actually just getting to Counterbalance first and playing it. Sure, that's fine. But in the meantime, they have virtually irrelevant cards and I have Deeds and Shackles and Demigods. And yeah, you know what's awesome? Playing Intuition and then putting three Demigods on the table through Counterbalance.

Its actualy not a slight edge so much as a huge one, made more distance by snares if ran.

1) under the assumption they get counterbalance your only answer is Deed/ee shackles does not answer goose.

2) Both deed and EE cant deal with needle/stifle.

I have more raw power in the form of Raven's Crime and Demigod of Revenge?

3) Ravens crime resolves 0 times though a counterbalance.

4) stifle + CT toping a force or swords, or daze or whatever deals with demigods.

5) you still seem unable to deal with relic...

6) How the heck can you beat team america they run 12 LD you arent likely to reach 3 land to fetch loam much less resolve it if you do.

Basicaly my problems with the deck come down to

1) Why arent you just dropping demigods and playing better creatures as these are nearly dead if you draw them.

2) Seems like your less flexable then landstill, and less consistent then threshold.

3) How is this better then its the fear or landstill?

Volt

12-04-2008, 12:16 PM

Wow! I didn't know Threshold players always started with Pithing Needle and Counterbalance and Top in play. Looks like it's time to go back to the drawing board, boys.

Anusien

12-04-2008, 12:33 PM

@undone: I'm glad that everyone else always gets the nuts and I get the worst. Try out the deck next time?

Forbiddian

12-04-2008, 01:05 PM

Chases. Escapes. Lies. Truths. Passion. Miracles. I didn't intend much with the Demigod of Revenge deck but it became, [a good] deck in Legacy because of the multiple avenues of both attack and defense.

Wow. I figured that Princess Bride reference was tragically obvious. You know, "Fencing. Fighting. Torture. Bad Men. Beautifulest ladies. True love."

Words in common with opening paragraph: 0.
Number of people who read the Princess Bride book: 1.
Number of people who read, "... multiple avenues of both attack and defense" in a Combo/Control deck and immediately thought, "No shit, srsly? Intuition Control has MULTIPLE options?": 1,029.

I'm not letting you off the hook, nobody would have gotten that reference. If you had thrown in words like "true love" or something to clue the reader in, then you'd have more of a case.

But even then, taking your hook from a children's book is pretty sad. Your primer is not a story, let alone a story about any of the words that you said. In TPB it made sense. Even now that I get you were trying to make a reference, it's just sad.

Unrelated words. Spurious logic. Obscure reference. Questionable writing.

Nightmare

12-04-2008, 01:10 PM

Unrelated words. Spurious logic. Obscure reference. Questionable writing.

I got the reference.

And to be clear, and perhaps help save a small amount of face, I did like the article, and the deck is interesting. I think the combination of Intuition and Demigod is pretty powerful, but the hoops you need to jump through to make it castable are iffy to me. Not saying it wouldn't work - I just haven't honestly put the time or effort into it that Kevin has, so I can't say. Nonetheless, with the exception of the hyperbole in the opener and the title, I found myself enjoying this article. It's obvious that he's excited about this deck, and it shows.

Anusien

12-04-2008, 01:30 PM

The Grandson: Has it got any sports in it?
Grandpa: Are you kidding? Fencing, fighting, torture, revenge, giants, monsters, chases, escapes, true love, miracles...
The Grandson: Doesn't sound too bad. I'll try to stay awake.
Grandpa: Oh, well, thank you very much, very nice of you. Your vote of confidence is overwhelming.

Has it got any sports in it?"
"Fencing. Fighting. Torture. Poison. True love. Hate. Revenge. Giants. Hunters. Bad men. Good men. Beautifulest ladies. Snakes. Spiders. Beasts of all natures and descriptions. Pain. Death. Brave men. Coward men. Strongest men. Chases. Escapes. Lies. Truths. Passion. Miracles."

Tarmogoyf. Counterbalance. Intuition. Life from the Loam. Pernicious Deed. Demigod of Revenge. Chases. Escapes. Lies. Truths. Passion. Miracles.
Honestly, if you don't get obvious The Princess Bride references, why bother existing?

Forbiddian

12-04-2008, 01:36 PM

Oh, I didn't realize the full quotation. The section you quoted earlier had nothing in common with your reference, but now it makes more sense.

I apologize, I retract that part of my criticism.

The main part of my criticism was always that you said, "It's a combo control deck with MULTIPLE ways to both combo AND control!" Which is a no-shit-sherlock sandwich. But whatever. Time to go watch a bunch of children's movies so that I'm qualified to post here.

Brehn

12-04-2008, 02:20 PM

Step 1: Stop working those references in. Nobody cares anyway. Or has anybody ever complained "y dosn't ur article hav random references *whine* *whine*" You'll also notice an increase of free time.
Step 2: Use the time you've gained this way to proof-read your article so it doesn't contain such ridiculous statements.
Step 3: +EV

Thank you.

Jaiminho

12-04-2008, 03:02 PM

Honestly, if you don't get obvious The Princess Bride references, why bother existing?

Publishing articles with inside jokes makes no sense. You should write some jokes only you and your closest friends can understand. Then, you could show it to them and you would all laugh in unison for the joy of mankind.

frogboy

12-04-2008, 03:11 PM

Step 1: Stop working those references in. Nobody cares anyway.

Honestly, if you don't get obvious The Princess Bride references, why bother existing?

+1

Phoenix Ignition

12-04-2008, 04:22 PM

Maybe it's just me, but I have no idea how this deck is better than the normal aggro control decks out there. Lets look at creatures. This deck runs Goyf and demigods, with minimal counters to back either up. Right now, the largest beaters in legacy are Goyf, Tombstalker, and possibly Doran. These are 2 mana, 2 mana, and 3 mana respectively, and all as powerful if not more powerful than the Demigod.

The 5 mana set-up of getting out a Demigod is almost laughable, and haste is no way to get around it. Tombstalker comes out through land-hate much much earlier than Demigod does, meaning you'll probably get in 2-3 swings before the average Demigod gets in play.

Assuming every deck runs Goyfs (true story), lets just see him for what he is. A big dumb wall. Sure if your demigod trick doesn't work out you'll still get a chance to go goyf control, but you're lacking on control parts, and you're playing far too much for the late game, where recursions will actually matter. Goyf usually won't swing for the win when he's getting blocked by other big dumb goyfs.

The other point I'd love to mention is that drawing the Demigod is going to make your other demigods even worse, as you don't get to reanimate 2 of them anymore. Then when you intuition for the other 2 and they put 1 in your hand, you get to watch your 2 dead cards eat away your hand. Lets face it, 10 damage isn't all that much of a combo when it takes 8+ mana to set up. Couldn't you just rely on a Tombstalker swinging much sooner for that flying damage?

Lastly, when you get the demigod or 2 out, I have to imagine your life is low and that you probably need to chump with one off them just to stop from dying.

I just can't see how such a slow tempo, not very controlling deck would win against every matchup it goes against. "Premier" or not, I don't see this as a consistent competing deck, I just see it as another cool idea pitfall that won't last much longer than a tournament or two, when everyone notices how little meat the deck has and how it's so built around surprise.

Publishing an article on it might ruin the surprise a bit too.

Anusien

12-04-2008, 05:26 PM

Phoenix Ignition

12-04-2008, 05:43 PM

@Phoenix Ignition: If it's a deck that relies so much on surprise and doesn't actually compete, then prove it. Which one of my testing results are you disputing? Let's stop arguing over semantics and get down to details.

Rather than being offended by my comment, could you just respond to my specific examples? I'm not going to argue your testing results because testing results are so incredibly variable that the smallest things (like the crappyness of a shuffling system) can throw them off. How is running the 3 Demigods going to be better, unless you run into absolutely no land disruption or counters, than just running the slightly larger Tombstalker, who's drawback is irrelevant and comes out without any fuss? Trying to combo anything is less consistent than just playing solid cards because you don't need to set solid cards up to do well, they just do.

I'm not writing this to jump on the bandwagon (although that claim in your article was pretty damn terrible), I'm really just amazed that this is the deck that is being highlighted to new legacy players instead of an actual competing deck. I don't really care about people being misled as long as they join the format though, so who knows, maybe your article will do some good?

If you took offense to any of that then please don't even bother responding, I'm not trying to stoke the flame war that has almost broken out of this thread.

juventus

12-04-2008, 05:47 PM

Uhhm...whoa. I would like to think that part of the issue lies in the fact that legacy is notably more diverse than standard and extended have been in an excruciatingly long time and as a result a lot more issues fall into the category of conjecture.

...

Maybe all of this is just me because I consider most of the people on this site and the legacy format in general to be a better overall class of person and player than enthusiasts of Standard and [the more recent] Extended.

What I am getting at is that if you give some dipshit something simple to debate, chances are he will be more apt at it...

The point is that legacy has less professional tournaments, so it has less professional players, so it has worse players, it's really that simple (how do you think I have such a high rating in eternal?). If you think that legacy players are better at magic you are deeply mistaken. If you need an opinion on standard or extended or limited or whatever, you can read articles from players that are among the highest rated in the world and have multiple top 8's in tournaments that have won them thousands of dollars. There is simply nothing like that in legacy. There is no way to prove you know what you are talking about.

Mordel

12-04-2008, 06:11 PM

You mean, there are few varifiable ways to prove you know what you are talking about.

My qualm with the standard and extended scene is that there is very little to prove as far as kmost things are concerned because the pros are the people that make the decks that everyone plays. What the fuck is there to discuss or prove when everybody is playing a variant of Quick and Toast or NLB?

Yes, the legacy format's players are generally too far-flung to give quantifiable results in tangible tournaments, yes. Keep in mind that the whole proving yourself by playing actual cards was but a part of your grossly self-defamatory statement. Why would you even bother to have over two hundred posts if you seem to think so little of the format and the people that play it?

Anusien

12-04-2008, 06:12 PM

Rather than being offended by my comment, could you just respond to my specific examples?
Your comments are basically saying, "I don't believe you, explain it all to me." But I'll go through it. The real question is, "If I respond to your specific examples, will you believe me? Or will you argue with me?" Are you asking because you don't know, or because you're already convinced I'm wrong?

Maybe it's just me, but I have no idea how this deck is better than the normal aggro control decks out there. Lets look at creatures. This deck runs Goyf and demigods, with minimal counters to back either up. Right now, the largest beaters in legacy are Goyf, Tombstalker, and possibly Doran. These are 2 mana, 2 mana, and 3 mana respectively, and all as powerful if not more powerful than the Demigod.
Demigod comes in through Blood Moon (which is relevant). It has haste (which is super relevant) and the fact that they chain is super relevant. Tombstalker might be okay except that it doesn't accomplish the primary goal of coming down through Blood Moon. It also gets worse when you recur it through Stronghold, and doesn't do damage all at once. Dredging makes Demigod good in a way that it doesn't for Tombstalker. It's much harder for one StP to stop Demigod than Tombstalker.

The 5 mana set-up of getting out a Demigod is almost laughable, and haste is no way to get around it. Tombstalker comes out through land-hate much much earlier than Demigod does, meaning you'll probably get in 2-3 swings before the average Demigod gets in play.
Sure. But I have Edicts and Force to deal with Tombstalker. If you try to go all-in on a Tombstalker in many decks, you will eat Swords to Plowshares and just lose. The point isn't to have a speedy creature, it's "I only have three slots left to win the game, let's get the best possible creature there." Plus, I don't feed the graveyard much early and I have lighter black mana requirements, meaning I can't Turbo-Tombstalker.

Assuming every deck runs Goyfs (true story), lets just see him for what he is. A big dumb wall. Sure if your demigod trick doesn't work out you'll still get a chance to go goyf control, but you're lacking on control parts, and you're playing far too much for the late game, where recursions will actually matter. Goyf usually won't swing for the win when he's getting blocked by other big dumb goyfs.
Right. Goyf ground stalls are why I go to Demigod to win. I'm perfectly fine with Goyf being a blocker most of the time.
However, I'm not certain how Counterbalance/Top, Force of Will, Pernicious Deed, and then Raven's Crime/Tombstalker/Wasteland/Engineered Explosives/Vedalken Shackles RECURSION is considered lacking on control parts. Like, sure, I have few counters. But I have something like my lands and 7 creatures and 15 draw spells as non-control elements in the entire deck.

The other point I'd love to mention is that drawing the Demigod is going to make your other demigods even worse, as you don't get to reanimate 2 of them anymore. Then when you intuition for the other 2 and they put 1 in your hand, you get to watch your 2 dead cards eat away your hand. Lets face it, 10 damage isn't all that much of a combo when it takes 8+ mana to set up. Couldn't you just rely on a Tombstalker swinging much sooner for that flying damage?
I don't often Intuition for Demigods. The vast majority of games are won by going for Intuition into Raven's Crime, devastating their hand, dredging Demigods and either drawing the third or Volrath's Strongholding it to the top and winning that way. Some smaller number of games are won by either setting up a single Tarmogoyf or Vedalken Shackles in this position and riding it to victory. I think I win more games by just putting one Demigod on the table and attacking than I do by EOT Intuition for 3x Demigod, untap and bash for 15.
Here's the thing: Tombstalker won't be doing that damage early. It's not like I'm never tapping mana on turns 2-4. I'm doing things like Topping, Deeding, Edicting, Shacklesing. Demigod costs 5 mana, but that's okay because I don't need it before turn 5.

Lastly, when you get the demigod or 2 out, I have to imagine your life is low and that you probably need to chump with one off them just to stop from dying.
You'd imagine that, but you'd be wrong; most of the time when I go to Demigods the board is clear. As it turns out though, Demigod is a supreme chump blocker (what kills Demigod without dying?) I had one situation against Goblins where he was recurring Gempalm Incinerator with Wort and I was recurring Demigods with Volrath's Stronghold. I won that one. Tombstalker would have lost.

Plus, the goal is to never, ever miss a land drop (Loam helps a lot!) so it's not like 5 mana is a lot.

It's also not insignificant that Demigod of Revenge is a 5 mana spell to counter Force of Will via Counterbalance.

juventus

12-04-2008, 06:41 PM

You mean, there are few varifiable ways to prove you know what you are talking about.

My qualm with the standard and extended scene is that there is very little to prove as far as most things are concerned because the pros are the people that make the decks that everyone plays. What the fuck is there to discuss or prove when everybody is playing a variant of Quick and Toast or NLB?

Yes, the legacy format's players are generally too far-flung to give quantifiable results in tangible tournaments, yes. Keep in mind that the whole proving yourself by playing actual cards was but a part of your grossly self-defamatory statement. Why would you even bother to have over two hundred posts if you seem to think so little of the format and the people that play it?

I used to play legacy a lot, but that was mostly because it was a big thing in Rochester and because it was easier for me when I first started playing magic to play a deck that didn't "rotate out." I don't hate legacy, I just definitely prefer more competitive formats and I think that t2, extended, limited are just inherently more competitive formats because that's where all the real professional tournaments are.

Also, standard is much more wide open than you think. And you're saying that there is nothing to discuss in standard or extended which is laughable. Another thing to consider is if a format becomes more restricted as far as deck choices due to professionalism. Maybe after rigorous testing certain archetypes are just considered to be inferior to others, thereby making the format "more simple" as you put it.

I don't think you can safely assume that because a format has a wider range of decks it has a higher class of player.

Mordel

12-04-2008, 06:55 PM

I don't think you can safely assume that because a format has a wider range of decks it has a higher class of player.

I was heavily involved in type two for years. I can easily. People seem to think that the future league that r&d has plays a way smaller role than it really does, which is cute. A highly controlled and conformed format with people that play it as job instead of a game is obviously going to have less to explore for the average competitive player. I don't see how this could possibly be argued against...at all. I guess this is an example of why arguing a mostly subjective opinion is pointless.

This is dragging on and on though and doesn't belong on this thread at all.

You win?

Happy Gilmore

12-04-2008, 07:11 PM

Is Intuitioin demigod that much better than Intuition for Gigapede + wonder? Atleast it doesn't require Urborg.

It just occured to me that it would be a really tech sb option in alluren lol.

etrigan

12-04-2008, 07:25 PM

From the Article
Many of the games Demigod wins, Tarmogoyf plus careful play could probably win anyway.

Originally posted by Anusien
I don't often Intuition for Demigods. (...) I think I win more games by just putting one Demigod on the table and attacking than I do by EOT Intuition for 3x Demigod, untap and bash for 15.

Have you actually tested anything else in the Demigod slot? Can you not get there with Tarmogoyf and 3 more removal/counter spells? Can you not get there with Tarmogoyf, Gigapede/Morphling/Tombstalker and 1-2 more removal/counter spells?

If you dont actually need it most of the time, why do you need a card that you cant cast without Urborg or an opposing Blood Moon, does nothing to protect you and cant be pitched to Force of Will? And why do you need three of them?

Brehn

12-04-2008, 07:34 PM

Yep, this is the biggest flaw of the articles about the Demigod deck. You could do these changes:

-3 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
-3 Demigod of Revenge
-1 Shriekmaw/Raven's Crime
+1 Underground Sea
+1 Engineered Explosives
+2 Counterspell
+1 Eternal Witness
+1 Diabolic Edict
+1 Pernicious Deed

and you have ITF without the white splash. Yet none of the articles have talked about or even mentioned ITF (or did I miss something here?). The deck Anusien presents here is good, because ITF is good; and I believe him if he talks about having a good matchup against Deck XY, because I know ITF has a good matchup against Deck XY. Rather then present "Demigod Control" as a new archetype, which it isn't, Anusien should argue why ITF needs Demigods.

frogboy

12-04-2008, 07:58 PM

Tosh

12-04-2008, 08:18 PM

Because instead of trying to win going long with Counterbalance and opening yourself up to Grip and having to finesse through a Tarmogoyf win on the ground, you can just go ahead and kill your opponent with Intuition. And you actually get to play 24 lands.

Having played against frogboy with my ITF (I know it's a little different, but w/e) I can easily say that there is a big difference between Tarmogoyfs on the ground and Demigods in the air. One game just ended in 1 turn with Intuition -> Demigod fairly early and there wasn't a whole lot I could do about it.

In short, do not underestimate the evasion and explosiveness of Demigods.

etrigan

12-04-2008, 08:25 PM

Because instead of trying to win going long with Counterbalance and opening yourself up to Grip and having to finesse through a Tarmogoyf win on the ground, you can just go ahead and kill your opponent with Intuition. And you actually get to play 24 lands.

I have no problem with wanting more than just Tarmogoyfs, but is Demigod the BEST finisher you have available? Did you test anything else in the slot?

frogboy

12-04-2008, 08:30 PM

No, but Gigapede takes for fucking ever to kill the other guy and doesn't mitigate the whole 'ground stall' issue. Morphling is stupid mana intensive. etc.

etrigan

12-04-2008, 08:41 PM

No,

Okie dokie.

How can you successfully argue something if you have not explored the alternatives?

Forbiddian

12-04-2008, 08:50 PM

Okie dokie.

How can you successfully argue something if you have not explored the alternatives?

Gigapede takes for fucking ever to kill the other guy and doesn't mitigate the whole 'ground stall' issue. Morphling is stupid mana intensive. etc.

This.

Anusien

12-04-2008, 10:01 PM

Is Intuitioin demigod that much better than Intuition for Gigapede + wonder? Atleast it doesn't require Urborg.
Intuition for Gigapede + Wonder + Gigapede (I'm guessing) is like 5 mana per Gigapede and it isn't hasty. Versus, you know, five mana for just 15.

P.S., to everyone that bitches about Demigod's mana requirements, why is everyone so hot on Etched Oracle in ITF? Its mana requirements are actually worse: five mana in four colors. Possibly six if you expect Daze.

Did we test other creatures? No. I don't need to test other creatures in this slot. First off, one of the goals was to have a finisher playable through Blood Moon that was castable without it. That was the entire point of that slot. MattH and I went through just about all of Shadowmoor/Eventide and a good deal of Magic besides before we ended on Demigods. If you establish the requirement as: "Can be played through a devastating Blood Moon. Can be played without Blood Moon. Doesn't suck." you're literally just down to Demigod of Revenge and some other shitty cards (Dominus of Fealty was the only other card even in the same ballpark).
Plus, just about every other card you suggest has the benefit of not requiring Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth and the downside of not winning in like two turns.
And everyone that wants to find a way to cut Urborg has clearly never put Life from the Loam, Urborg and Raven's Crime together. It's the silliest, and if you draw the Urborg you can put Wasteland or something equally silly in the stack.

Yep, this is the biggest flaw of the articles about the Demigod deck. You could do these changes:

-3 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
-3 Demigod of Revenge
-1 Shriekmaw/Raven's Crime
+1 Underground Sea
+1 Engineered Explosives
+2 Counterspell
+1 Eternal Witness
+1 Diabolic Edict
+1 Pernicious Deed

and you have ITF without the white splash. Yet none of the articles have talked about or even mentioned ITF (or did I miss something here?). The deck Anusien presents here is good, because ITF is good; and I believe him if he talks about having a good matchup against Deck XY, because I know ITF has a good matchup against Deck XY. Rather then present "Demigod Control" as a new archetype, which it isn't, Anusien should argue why ITF needs Demigods.
Nope, I intentionally didn't mention ITF in the article. I wanted to write something that could stand on its own and do a good job of presenting the deck. It feels like it's a poor "In Depth on Demigod" article if it requires you to know all about ITF first.

I covered this slightly before, but I feel the difference between ITF and Demigod is the difference between BBS that kills with Ophidians and BBS that kills with Morphling. They both want to cast powerful counters, removal and card drawing spells until they survive. The first one slowly beats down over like 20 turns drawing cards and doing one and two points of damage. The second can switch gears and just win. There's a big difference between controlling the game for 20 turns and controlling it for 4.

More verbosely, the problem with ITF is that it has a ton of cards that become incredibly relevant after you've already set up. After I've already cast Loam, the last thing I want to do is try and put together a more expensive card advantage engine in the form of Oracle or Witness. I'd rather devote a minimum of slots to a combo and use the rest to not die. Inclusion of cards like Counterspell, Eternal Witness and Etched Oracle smack of this to me: they're too few to be consistent pre-Loam and too worthless post-Loam.

Plus, deep6er hates Raven's Crime and that's one of the best cards in the deck (Top, Counterbalance, Loam, then Raven's Crime I think).

Plus, while we came to similar conclusions, I really evolved this from Vorosh separately of ITF. ITF and Demigod try to do different things and I don't think it's fair, strategically, to call this ITF with Demigod, especially since Raven's Crime is one of the principal points of the deck. I think ITF would shudder to ever go to 0 cards in hand and go all in on some 5/4 dorks.

Obfuscate Freely

12-04-2008, 10:10 PM

You keep justifying your goofy, Timmy-riffic win condition by talking about Blood Moon. When are you going to address the fact that nobody fucking plays that card?

AngryTroll

12-04-2008, 10:13 PM

I really enjoyed the article. I've been following the deck in every article, watched Frogboy play it to the Top 4 of that tournament, and it's been on my build list since then.

Everyone should chill out. Seriously. Wah, no one on the East Coast plays this (besides Anusian), it can't be good.

As far as the Star City Articles go, this was one of the better one ("premier" or not). Well written, thorough, talking about a list that is actually:
1) interesting
2) developed
3) tested (not thoroughly enough to be THE NEWEST BESTEST DECK EVAR), but with more testing than most lists
4) Covered new material, not just "This is Aggro Loam. Here's what it does."
Out of all the Star City Articles I have seen recently, this was probably the best of them.

I enjoyed the read, and I agree that the deck deserves more attention than it gets.

Also, Intuition for Demigods = Awesome
Intuition for LftL, Urborg, and Raven's Crime= nuts
I think those two things alone (especially the second one) make this better than ITF.

Anusien

12-04-2008, 10:18 PM

You keep justifying your goofy, Timmy-riffic win condition by talking about Blood Moon. When are you going to address the fact that nobody fucking plays that card?
Intuition for Demigods is very Johnny.

Deckcheck reveals me a ton of Blood Moon decks. Many of them are in Europe. Many of them also represented at Worlds 2007. You're right though, they'll magically not reappear this year at Worlds when the metagame is just as ripe for them.

Deep6er

12-04-2008, 10:47 PM

Do you know why I hate Raven's Crime? If you have a deck with Counterbalance, why spend more time and mana to do Raven's Crime when you can just as effectively (with less mana) use Counterbalance and Sensei's Divining Top to lock them out? Plus, Raven's Crime doesn't stop topdecks.

Etched Oracle is there as a method of gaining Card Advantage, not to be a beater. You don't need any extra beaters, you already have Tarmogoyf. Demigod's awful when you draw him, and as a three of, you're guaranteed to draw him occasionally.

You are right about one thing, I would hate to go to zero cards and go "all-in" on some 5/4 dorks. That's because they're bad. Why do that when I can stay at a comfortable two to five cards in hand and beat in with Tarmogoyf. Because I have more recursion than you, I don't have to worry about ground stalls quite so much.

Every single time I look at your deck, I wonder why you would ever weaken It's the Fear to add in gimmicky cards like Demigod. It just doesn't make sense. If you wanted to beat Dragon Stompy it's easy, just play Nevinyrral's Disk. That doesn't require you to play shitty creatures like Demigod.

There you go. I didn't even need to write an article for that one.

Hanni

12-04-2008, 10:53 PM

While Intuition -> Demigod for "15, Brah" is nice, it just seems too complicated to even bother with, when the deck can just as easily replace Demigod with Tombstalker.

For Demigod to be good, you must first have Urborg and 4 other lands in play, which means you probably need to use the first Intuition to grab a Loam pile. Demigod is rather lackluster when you cast it without putting 2 other ones in the graveyard, so you're more than likely going to need to cast a second Intuition for Demigod x3. Tombstalker is strong without Urborg and without Intuition, which makes him much less dependant and a much stronger stand alone threat. Tombstalker is not as devastating as Demigod if you've got everything set up, but it's also not a dead draw if you topdeck it.

If you want a strong win condition that you can fit into Intuition piles, Gigapede is the guy for you. You don't even need to Intuition for 3 of him; you can squeeze him into any Intuition pile. Plus the guy keeps coming back on his own if for whatever reason he gets answered, whereas you'd be reliant on Stronghold otherwise. Yea sure, he can get chump blocked, which can be problematic if the ground game is stalled... but you're the control deck, you should more often than not be keeping the table clear.

Also, I really dislike the synergy between Pernicious Deed and Counterbalance. Yea, I know, it's a 3cc spell for Counterbalance, and it wipes away other Counterbalances (typically) out of Counterbalance range. But it still blows up your own Counterbalance, which sucks when the opponent does manage to slip something through and you don't wanna remove your CounterTop lock. I'd definitely agree that Deed in the sideboard would be a very good idea, but I'd much rather run Damnation maindeck.

Just my opinion on the deck, though. Otherwise, I definitely agree with Intuition/Loam, Raven's Crime, CounterTop, and so on.

Do you know why I hate Raven's Crime? If you have a deck with Counterbalance, why spend more time and mana to do Raven's Crime when you can just as effectively (with less mana) use Counterbalance and Sensei's Divining Top to lock them out? Plus, Raven's Crime doesn't stop topdecks

Yea, but you can't fit Counterbalance into Intuition piles with Loam. I'd much rather grab Loam/Crime/X than CB/CB/CB. Alot of decks in the meta these days like to keep a full stock of cards throughout the game, where Raven's Crime is fantastic (basically rapes most blue based decks). Once it's topdeck mode, sure, the card is no longer relevant... but it did it's job, and the deck has answers to topdecks.

Obfuscate Freely

12-04-2008, 11:04 PM

Why are you designing a deck for Worlds? Will you or your readers be playing there?

Assuming that you have even the slightest pretension of preparing for a real-life Legacy tournament, you should be looking forward to Chicago, which will also be more relevant to the average StarCity reader. However, based on my experiences playing in actual Legacy tournaments (both in the Northeast and elsewhere), as well as the worldwide Top 8 information gathered here on The Source, I see very little evidence to suggest that Dragon Stompy is going to see any serious play in the Windy City, or in any other upcoming Legacy event.

You say that the "entire point" of playing Demigod is to win through Blood Moon, but Moon effects are, at best, a minor metagame concern right now. How can you still think it's worth it to bastardize your deck in fear of the card?

Anusien

12-04-2008, 11:40 PM

For Demigod to be good, you must first have Urborg and 4 other lands in play

If you want a strong win condition that you can fit into Intuition piles, Gigapede is the guy for you.
How much do you think Gigapede costs?

P.S., why is Tombstalker awesome on its own (assuming you can cast it) as a 5/5 Flyer and Demigod sucks as a 5/4 Flyer with Haste? It's not like I can Tombstalker on turn 3 anyway, I don't put enough cards into the graveyard.

@deep6er:
If I always had Counterbalance + Sensei's Divining Top and the opponent never had Krosan Grip, I wouldn't bother with Raven's Crime.

I know that Oracle is for card advantage. But if you already have Academy Ruins or Volrath's Stronghold (and theoretically, you've already Intuitioned for Loam), why would you want more card advantage? Why not just win? If you can't win after drawing 3 cards a turn without going to extra card drawing engines, something is wrong here.

P.S., I like drawing Demigod. It's kinda nice knowing you never have to win Tarmogoyf wars, and it becomes really nice when you dredge one.

And yeah, Deep6er is right on one aspect. You probably certainly can win the long, drawn out fight on the board through ground stalls by recurring Goyfs and Pernicious Deeds. But why bother? The whole reason I play Counterbalance is because I just win a bunch without having to do any work (and because it's really good). I might be able to win with Ophidians and manlands... but Morphling is nicer.

P.S., how does Magus of the Moon sound in the blue control mirror? Seems like it would do a number on ITF, Landstill, etc.

frogboy

12-04-2008, 11:43 PM

You can't really complain about "oh man, you'll draw Demigod at some point" (particularly since it's still a fine creature on it's own) and then turn around and say "and you're going to have to Intuition for Urborg" when you play the same amount of copies plus have all this other manipulation.

Do you know why I hate Raven's Crime? If you have a deck with Counterbalance, why spend more time and mana to do Raven's Crime when you can just as effectively (with less mana) use Counterbalance and Sensei's Divining Top to lock them out? Plus, Raven's Crime doesn't stop topdecks.

For one thing, Crime just requires you to resolve Intuition, as opposed to finding CB and Top. For another, they're not mutually exclusive. Lastly, the card straight up rapes the other guy in the mirror, and avoids the Krosan Grip trump they may or may not be holding.

Deed is main because then you don't get blown out by the lock as often and because you can just kill their board and then lock them out.

Gigapede sucks because, again, he takes forever to kill the other guy, as opposed to Demigod, which lets you actually race aggro decks in the midgame.

You say that the "entire point" of playing Demigod is to win through Blood Moon, but Moon effects are, at best, a minor metagame concern right now.

I actually wanted to play the deck because I didn't like how vulnerable other Counterbalance decks are to Krosan Grip going long.

P.S., how does Magus of the Moon sound in the blue control mirror? Seems like it would do a number on ITF, Landstill, etc.

Probably worth testing.

P.S., I like drawing Demigod. It's kinda nice knowing you never have to win Tarmogoyf wars, and it becomes really nice when you dredge one.

people who think that Intuitioning for Demigods is awesome are going to have their minds totally and completely fucking blown away when they dredge one while having another in their hand. just saying.

AngryTroll

12-04-2008, 11:46 PM

I actually wanted to play the deck because I didn't like how vulnerable other Counterbalance decks are to Krosan Grip going long.

Now, I want to play this deck because you have Life from the Loam, Raven's Crime, Intuition, Deed, Counterbalance, Top, and DEMIGOD RAWR.

It's all the good cards from ITF, with a more solid midgame and win condition.

Deep6er

12-04-2008, 11:51 PM

You know that Counterbalance can counter Krosan Grip, right?

You also know that if I always had Intuition resolve, I'd probably be fine anyway. Counterbalance and Top are multiples. Raven's Crime and Life from the Loam are singletons. That means, that you can answer Krosan Grip by playing another one, and with the reasonably large amount of threes that It's the Fear plays, I can reliably counter opposing sweepers like Deed.

Do you know why I don't "just win"? It's because sometimes you can't. Sometimes you need to draw yourself out of a situation. Big, dumb, dorks don't always get there. It's the Fear is designed to make use of it's singletons at all points of the game. The one exception is Etched Oracle (and if my opponent is playing Threshold, it's unlikely that I'll just need to throw this guy out there on turn four, by the way). However, you have multiple cards (the second/third of Urborg/Demigod) that are terrible to draw. Plus, for every Demigod drawn, it lessens the ability to go "fifteen, brah" (which sounds fucking retarded by the way).

You know why you bother? Because it doesn't cost you cards to continue with your gameplan. You don't have to add in shitty creatures just because you're afraid of playing against your opponent. Stop being a lazy ass and realize that "doing the work" is better for you.

Also, Magus sounds terrible. The removal that they have isn't going anywhere else, plus you don't have a way to drop him on turn one. That lessens his impact considerably.

frogboy

12-04-2008, 11:51 PM

Well, I mean, the real reason I wanted to play the deck was "oh man Intuition for Demigod is totally sweet" but I sort of figured that wasn't a good enough reason for this thread. I probably would've played it anyway because attacking for fifteen is very satisfying, but seriously, if you build your end game to have an emphasis on Counterbalance, you're going to be extremely vulnerable to Grip. You're a lot less vulnerable when you can just up and kill your opponent.

You know that Counterbalance can counter Krosan Grip, right?

lol does this really ever happen?

edit: I should probably clarify. I'm not actually convinced this is the best Counterbalance deck, because I only ever actually got in for fifteen once* and spent most of my Intuitions doing other things to skullfuck my opponents. With that said, Demigod was in fact a reasonable man when I drew him, and I'm pretty sure that Demigods are relevant against aggro decks. Raven's Crime is completely absurd, and the ability to go tutor up Mind Twist is totally worth the fact that you occasionally draw it. Once you draw the first Demigod, the second and third ones are fine. Redundant Urborgs obviously suck, but, like, Wastelands, Tops, Brainstorms, etc. The main fear with Grip is that they'll blow out your Counterbalance and then untap and burn you out or play their own or do something equally unfair even if it's as stupid as put out a board and have permission for your sweeper. Demigod helps you blank that plan.

*technically, twice; Tosh Crypted me in response to the trigger. I feel compelled to note that he still got killed by the last Demigod.

Deep6er

12-04-2008, 11:54 PM

Ask my opponents. I've done it quite a few times.

frogboy

12-05-2008, 12:02 AM

Ask my opponents. I've done it quite a few times.

Are they just playing unbelievably badly or something? Even if you're just spinning a three and they never test spell you, they're still even money to pick the right time, and if you ever want to actually use it to counter a spell they can just kold it then.

Brehn

12-05-2008, 12:36 AM

Nope, I intentionally didn't mention ITF in the article. I wanted to write something that could stand on its own and do a good job of presenting the deck.
How can you do a good job presenting a deck if you don't mention its well-established name?

It feels like it's a poor "In Depth on Demigod" article if it requires you to know all about ITF first.

It also feels like it's a poor "In Depth on Demigod" article if you pretend to not know ITF. That's what you're doing.
And if you wrote an introduction to ITF, the article wouldn't even require to know anything about ITF first. OHWAIT. You did write an introduction to ITF. But only under the premise that Demigod has to be played. Bad idea. Apparently (http://www.deckcheck.net/list.php?type=The+Fear&format=Legacy), this deck can win without Demigods.

Deckcheck reveals me a ton of Blood Moon decks. Many of them are in Europe. Many of them also represented at Worlds 2007. You're right though, they'll magically not reappear this year at Worlds when the metagame is just as ripe for them.

Deckcheck reveals me 180 decks that play Blood Moon somewhere. That's less than 5% of all decks listed there. If you're looking for Blood Moon maindeck (so you can't Hydroblast it), there are 85 decks. Only 23 them are not Dragon Stompy. Have you noticed the popularity of Dragon Stompy decreasing signficantly?

I covered this slightly before, but I feel the difference between ITF and Demigod is the difference between BBS that kills with Ophidians and BBS that kills with Morphling.

This is the stuff you should be writing in your article!

Article:
"Look at this deck. It's just ITF with some changes, but I call it 'Demigod' because that's the only difference to standard ITF lists. (I also call Team America 'Sinkhole'... wait, I never said that). I spend the rest of the time talking about how to play ITF and what its matchups are like."
-> you've written a primer for an unproved version of ITF. Who wants to read that? In a primer you start with the standard build and later you tell your reader about how to adjust to a Blood Moon-heavy metagame.

Feedback Thread:
"Demigod is good because (...)list of things(...)
Raven's Crime is needed because (...)list of things(...)
bla bla bla ITF bla bla bla ITF bla
This deck is bettern than ITF because (...)list of things(...)"

I don't agree with all points you've made here. But still: Glue all of your posts in this thread together, do some editing and voilà - this is how your article should have looked like.

EDIT:

And yes, the blue mana count is a bit low, but there aren't many things that can be done about it; you have about 2 possible slots to pull from before you start physically gutting the deck. Yes, it was probably worth mentioning in the article that you sometimes have issues.

Nope, I intentionally didn't mention ITF in the article.

Stop ruining your articles on purpose plz.

Deep6er

12-05-2008, 12:55 AM

Are they just playing unbelievably badly or something? Even if you're just spinning a three and they never test spell you, they're still even money to pick the right time, and if you ever want to actually use it to counter a spell they can just kold it then.

"Test spelling" a Counterbalance guarantees a two for one. Sure, you Gripped the Counterbalance, but the amount of mana you spent (because you have to play a spell that I actually want to counter, not something like Brainstorm), is substantial.

What the fuck does "even money to pick the right time" mean? With multiple threes, I can keep threes on top throughout my turn. Especially if I board in Krosan Grip (which would mean even more threes in the deck). Not everyone walks themselves into guaranteed two for ones. Maybe it's just you.

Phoenix Ignition

12-05-2008, 01:00 AM

How much do you think Gigapede costs?

2 green, 3 colorless in opposed to 5 black. You're joking yourself if you think it's hard to get the 2 green.

P.S., why is Tombstalker awesome on its own (assuming you can cast it) as a 5/5 Flyer and Demigod sucks as a 5/4 Flyer with Haste? It's not like I can Tombstalker on turn 3 anyway, I don't put enough cards into the graveyard.

Because Tombstalker doesn't require more than 2 lands in play, and can be played much quicker than the Demigod, especially through land hate. If you really think magus is such a problem just trade out your crappy Urborgs for 3 swamps and fetch for them, you'll be sitting pretty waiting to cast your tombstalker.

Demigod sucks because you absolutely cannot cast him before turn 5, and even later if you run into even 1 of the million wastelands that everyone is playing. Playing him without getting any of his friends is definitely not better than Tombstalker, since the haste is negated by how many extra turns it took you to put the demigod into play.

frogboy

12-05-2008, 02:50 AM

What the fuck does "even money to pick the right time" mean? With multiple threes, I can keep threes on top throughout my turn.

Like, at some point during your turn, there has to be a non-three on top of your library, or else you'll just draw all of them. At that point, each of you is trying to figure out what level the other person is thinking on.

"Test spelling" a Counterbalance guarantees a two for one.

This is true, but given that most of your cards are blanks with Counterbalance in play, it's not particularly relevant, especially in the context of setting up for one big turn. Plus, if you two for one them, and they kill you, you don't get a prize for being up on cards.

edit:

You're joking yourself if you think it's hard to get the 2 green.

I would actually guess that if you're playing against someone who's actively trying to use mana denial, that getting to four + Urborg is easier than getting to three and Trop + Trop. Three basic swamps is terrible.

morgan_coke

12-05-2008, 05:10 AM

Are you guys really debating whether Demigod or Tarmogoyf is a better kill condition or a better creature?

Because from a kill condition standpoint, Demigod beats Tarmy with a wet biscuit and makes him like it.

The creature argument takes into account stuff like blocking and how early it can be played, which is a different question altogether.

It's like the argument here is ITF shell with better quick kill ability or ITF shell with more versatile creature.

Honestly though, I think if you want to make an ITF shell with a quick kill ability you'd be better off putting in some kind of independent combo kill mechanism. Like painter/grindstone or something and just playing control until you get it online and win. I'm sure there's a better option than painter/gridnstone for an instant combo kill here, that's just the first thing that popped into my head.

URABAHN

12-05-2008, 08:54 AM

How much do you think Gigapede costs?

P.S., why is Tombstalker awesome on its own (assuming you can cast it) as a 5/5 Flyer and Demigod sucks as a 5/4 Flyer with Haste? It's not like I can Tombstalker on turn 3 anyway, I don't put enough cards into the graveyard.

@deep6er:
If I always had Counterbalance + Sensei's Divining Top and the opponent never had Krosan Grip, I wouldn't bother with Raven's Crime.

I know that Oracle is for card advantage. But if you already have Academy Ruins or Volrath's Stronghold (and theoretically, you've already Intuitioned for Loam), why would you want more card advantage? Why not just win? If you can't win after drawing 3 cards a turn without going to extra card drawing engines, something is wrong here.

P.S., I like drawing Demigod. It's kinda nice knowing you never have to win Tarmogoyf wars, and it becomes really nice when you dredge one.

And yeah, Deep6er is right on one aspect. You probably certainly can win the long, drawn out fight on the board through ground stalls by recurring Goyfs and Pernicious Deeds. But why bother? The whole reason I play Counterbalance is because I just win a bunch without having to do any work (and because it's really good). I might be able to win with Ophidians and manlands... but Morphling is nicer.

P.S., how does Magus of the Moon sound in the blue control mirror? Seems like it would do a number on ITF, Landstill, etc.

Kevin, a 5/5 Flier for :b::b: is pretty good in this format, did you notice the Top 8 of the TMLO 4? I'm certain you can fill your graveyard with enough cards to cast Tombstalker at some point in your matches. It also doesn't cost :b::b::b::b::b: and become terrible when you draw it before you can cast it. I'm not sure what you're getting at by saying you like drawing Demigod because

It's kinda nice knowing you never have to win Tarmogoyf wars

What does that even mean? And how does drawing one of your Demigods help in that department?

What surprises me more is your analysis of card advantage

why would you want more card advantage? Why not just win? If you can't win after drawing 3 cards a turn without going to extra card drawing engines, something is wrong here.

I'm 100% certain that decks that draw 3 extra cards a turn are going to win many more games than decks that do not draw 3 extra cards a turn. I'm not sure why those decks that win need to go "to extra card drawing engines".

For me, the article tries to pump up a deck that isn't very good. If the Demigod deck was testing well and generating some buzz with online players, why didn't it make any impact in Connecticut? Wouldn't that have been an awesome time to unleash the beast? Did anyone actually play it at the TMLO? The article reminds me of an older one written by the same author about a Loam Confinement deck and how it didn't perform well at a recent tournament because of poor card choices. That deck didn't perform well because it wasn't very good to begin with. For those of you who think Nightmare, Jack and the other nay-sayers are being too critical of Unlocking Legacy and this author in particular (http://www.starcitygames.com/pages/articlefinder.php?keyword=Kevin+Binswanger), read the articles and tell us we're wrong.

kl0wn

12-05-2008, 09:06 AM

Now, I don't play this format (yet, hence the lurking) so take this with a grain of salt:

If your strong point is being able to drop your win condition through Blood Moon (ie: it's actually an enabler) and Blood Moon screws people hard, why do you not rework the deck and mana base and simply run Blood Moon in the main?

I would think that running a card that simultaneously screws the other guy whilst fixing your manas (Blood Moon) would be better than running stuff that just fixes your manas (Urborg).

Granted, it would cut your access to much of the cool things, but it would also streamline and focus the deck.

Just wondering whether you'd given that any thought.

Anusien

12-05-2008, 10:26 AM

First, in answer to Obsucate Freely, whose question got lost somewhere:
Yes, I know at least a few of my readers will be playing in the teams section at Worlds. Also, I know Blood Moon decks are a concern in certain metagames (for instance, mine), and that makes it a popular choice. I would also be happy to play it in metagames where there is no Blood Moon, since I think it is better than many competing strategies.

If your strong point is being able to drop your win condition through Blood Moon (ie: it's actually an enabler) and Blood Moon screws people hard, why do you not rework the deck and mana base and simply run Blood Moon in the main?

I would think that running a card that simultaneously screws the other guy whilst fixing your manas (Blood Moon) would be better than running stuff that just fixes your manas (Urborg).
I had, but not in a while so thanks. At one point the deck was five color with Collective Restraint, and that was terrible. I still had this idea to splash Magus of the Moon. The problem is that Magus is really bad if you have to tutor it up and the opponent sees it coming, and there simply aren't 4 maindeck slots available. 4 Magus of the Moon 1 Volcanic Island is a reasonable sideboard package, but I don't have the slots, don't know if I need 5 slots worth of sideboard against those decks, and most importantly I haven't really tested that matchup as much as I'd like because it's not that common locally.

I'm 100% certain that decks that draw 3 extra cards a turn are going to win many more games than decks that do not draw 3 extra cards a turn. I'm not sure why those decks that win need to go "to extra card drawing engines".
It helps more to see my train of thought if you realize Loam = drawing 3 cards a turn. And this is exactly my point; if I cast Life from the Loam every turn, I shouldn't need to bother with other cards; I should just be able to win.

For me, the article tries to pump up a deck that isn't very good. If the Demigod deck was testing well and generating some buzz with online players, why didn't it make any impact in Connecticut? Wouldn't that have been an awesome time to unleash the beast? Did anyone actually play it at the TMLO?
To the best of my knowledge, no one that hasn't seen the deck first-hand respected it. That's one of the important reasons for the article: to get the deck out there and make it a known entity that can see some play. And if you're going to tell me not making a plane trip up to Connecticut makes an article less credible, don't bother: it's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Kevin, a 5/5 Flier for is pretty good in this format, did you notice the Top 8 of the TMLO 4? I'm certain you can fill your graveyard with enough cards to cast Tombstalker at some point in your matches. It also doesn't cost and become terrible when you draw it before you can cast it.
Sure, I CAN cast Tombstalker. But guess when: generally around the same time that I have 5 mana.
To all the people suggesting Tombstalker (and fuck there are a lot of you): test the deck. You cannot cast Tombstalker early in the deck; you simply do not fill the graveyard fast enough. I can cast Tombstalker about the same time that I can cast Demigod; if the two are now the same speed, Demigod is a thousand times better on the stats.

I'm not sure what you're getting at by saying you like drawing Demigod because
What does that even mean? And how does drawing one of your Demigods help in that department?
It flies and beats for 10-15? Seems like an easy way to not have to fuck around on the ground for an hour and a half like Dave wants. Board control doesn't have to mean slow.

@Brehn: I'm not an expert in ITF. ITF doesn't run Raven's Crime, and this deck abuses Raven's Crime harder than it does Demigod of Revenge. They look similar on paper, but because Raven's Crime encourages you to dump your hand to negate theirs, they play in radically different ways. And if it takes three pages before someone goes "This is actually ITF", then it strongly suggests that you're wrong. If in a few months people move on from ITF to whatever, then this stops being a good introductory article to Demigod. And it's not like you have to know anything about ITF to understand this deck.
So yeah, when ITF magically starts running all the cards Dave hates, maybe I'll start comparing this to ITF. Until then, it needs to stand on its own.

Hanni

12-05-2008, 11:29 AM

Sure, I CAN cast Tombstalker. But guess when: generally around the same time that I have 5 mana.
To all the people suggesting Tombstalker (and fuck there are a lot of you): test the deck. You cannot cast Tombstalker early in the deck; you simply do not fill the graveyard fast enough. I can cast Tombstalker about the same time that I can cast Demigod; if the two are now the same speed, Demigod is a thousand times better on the stats.

You don't just need 5 mana, you need 5 mana including an Urborg. There is a big difference between needing BB and BBBBB. If you're popping fetchlands, casting Brainstorms, so on and so forth, you should have at least 4 cards in you're graveyard in a relevant timeframe. The ability to not tap completely out to cast Tombstalker means you have mana open to spin Top, Counterspell something, or whatever.

My point was simply that it requires alot of different things to happen in order for Demigod to actually be worth it, whereas Tombstalker is just more relevant more often.

It's basically a comparison between stability and explosiveness, and which concept is better for the deck overall. Over the course of many games of testing, I think you would find Tombstalker doing more damage, over the long run, simply because it's going to consistently come down sooner and consistently come down more often.

Anusien

12-05-2008, 11:46 AM

You don't just need 5 mana, you need 5 mana including an Urborg. There is a big difference between needing BB and BBBBB. If you're popping fetchlands, casting Brainstorms, so on and so forth, you should have at least 4 cards in you're graveyard in a relevant timeframe. The ability to not tap completely out to cast Tombstalker means you have mana open to spin Top, Counterspell something, or whatever.

My point was simply that it requires alot of different things to happen in order for Demigod to actually be worth it, whereas Tombstalker is just more relevant more often.

It's basically a comparison between stability and explosiveness, and which concept is better for the deck overall. Over the course of many games of testing, I think you would find Tombstalker doing more damage, over the long run, simply because it's going to consistently come down sooner and consistently come down more often.
You've never dredged a Tombstalker when the first one was in your hand, have you? That's 5-10 points of hasty, uncounterable damage.

It's not just a question of which comes down first. Having reach in the form of hasty creatures can be significant. Demigods far often are going to connect the first time in places where Tombstalker wouldn't because the opponent didn't leave StP mana up because there wasn't anything to Swords. Plus, Demigod is far better to recur with Volrath's Stronghold because it's cheaper after the first use. And it counters Counterbalance as a 5.

And no, Demigod can't be Counterbalanced himself. The trigger goes on the stack and the Counterbalance triggers goes on top of it, so if it is countered via Counterbalance, the trigger can't have resolved yet.

Tombstalker is a ho-hum, solid but unspectacular beater. Sometimes Demigod sucks, and sometimes he just wins. You dramatically under-estimate free wins from uncounterable Demigods, hasty damage, and chaining together Demigods. Like seriously.

It's actually not unreasonable to not hit 4 cards in the graveyard until I cast Intuition for Loam. And once I've done that, I'd much rather have Demigod.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-05-2008, 11:59 AM

hi-val

12-05-2008, 12:03 PM

One theoretical reason why Raven's Crime is good (I say theoretical because I haven't played it enough to get this situation to come up) is that you can effectively nullify opposing Standstills with it. I was testing some games vs. Rich Shay's Dreadstill the other day and that deck really loves getting that enchantment to resolve. If Intuition EOT meant Raven's Crime, Loam and Attractive Card #3, it'd laugh at Standstills. Cbal with Top counters Crime all day long but I figure if that's out, you're probably Intuitioning for something else at that point.

The one appeal I see of Tombstalker over Demigod is that you can cast it and keep more mana up during your turn and theirs to do stuff, like fight Top Wars or just annoy people with Top in general.

Anusien

12-05-2008, 12:08 PM

The question of whether or not ITF or ITF with Demigod sucks more, or whether they both suck, or whether one is fantastic and the other sucks wet noodles, while no doubt fascinating, probably belongs more in the ITF thread or in a separate thread discussing ITF with Demigod (sidenote: I'm not accusing anyone of plagiarism, I'm just saying for a half dozen card difference, I'm not using another name, especially in light of Kevin's complete inability to provide an interesting name for said deck).

What I'm interested in in this thread is the actual article, and primarily why the acknowledged erroneous statement that ITF with Demigod was a "premier" anything in Legacy, when at best, Anusien, you want to say "Dark horse" here, has not been fixed. You've acknowledged that you're presenting erroneous data to your readers. Please ask someone to fix it.

And for my money, Magus of the Moon sounds terrible in this deck.
I don't have the ability to edit articles after they went up or I would have given more props to frogboy and MattH for helping me develop the deck and get it out there. What's more, the only change I would make would be to correct the grammar Herbig pointed out. I'm not particularly interested in discussing semantics, so if you have nothing else to say about the article or the content, please don't bother.

That said, I use "Demigod" to refer to the deck because it's the only one I know of that runs Demigod. If you'd like a catchy name we can call it "Jack Elgin Sucks a Turd", "Starlight Breaker" (this is the name of every Japanese deck ever, btw), or we can go back to calling it Anusien's New Age Landstill, like I wanted to so many months ago. Or heck, since we call Vorosh Vorosh, this can be "Fungal Shambler" or "Bound and Determined". I'd also suggest as possible names: "It's the Terror", "Your Mother Swims Out to Meet Troop Ships" or "Orange". Actually, scratch that. We should call the deck "Sinterklaas" because the Dutch Santa Claus is a freaking pimp, with a ring, a staff and a pope hat.

...
I think I've expressed my disdain for that entire line of thought. It's irrelevant what things get called, and I'm sick of this thread being taken over by semantics.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-05-2008, 12:11 PM

You care if your article is grammatically accurate (although, based on experience and testimony, this is a lie), but not if it's factually accurate or actually gives anyone useful information.

*SNIP*

Tell me why people take you seriously, again? I'm honestly left scrabbling for answers.

Verbal warning for flaming
-TOOL

Anusien

12-05-2008, 12:18 PM

You care if your article is grammatically accurate (although, based on experience and testimony, this is a lie), but not if it's factually accurate or actually gives anyone useful information.

itt; The last vestige of hope anyone had that Anusien wasn't a giant douchebag dies in a fire.

Tell me why people take you seriously, again? I'm honestly left scrabbling for answers.
Probably because the deck ("It's the 42 Orange Starlight Breaker Sinterklaas Troop Ships") is awesome and a lot of people have enjoyed reading about it? It has won me a ton of packs and frogboy got some dual lands with it.

...based on testimony? Have I been interviewed and said I don't care if my article is grammatically accurate? Because if so, I claim waterboarding.

SilverGreen

12-05-2008, 01:57 PM

Dittos from me, too. This thread reminds me of why the Source annoys me at times.

This thread reminds me of why people dont like the Source.

I like the Source. But here we really need tons of criticism to walk trough lots of poisoned insufflated egos and survive. It really annoys me and I don't like it at times.

Forbiddian

12-05-2008, 02:12 PM

What I really question is this:

ITF is yelling for blood, "This deck should just be called ITF because it's the same deck!"

And DG is like, "This runs all the cards that I hate and is everything that ITF is not."

It's a 10 card change (or something like that), and every single card change, from Wasteland to Raven's Crime to Demigod, DG basically disowned as being a terrible decision.

If anything, I think it's intellectually dishonest to call this deck ITF, since DG clearly wants nothing to do with it. Whether this deck supersedes ITF as the premier... whatever you want to call it, or if this deck sucks shit, the credit or blame should go to Anusien and the other designers, as he/they did something radically different.

So, they should get to name the deck. I think that 3Dicks.dec is a better name, but whatever.

Apex

12-05-2008, 05:47 PM

First of all, I think alot of you are getting too worked up about this. It's just an article, and mostly, it's based on someone else's opinion.

I personally take alot information I get with a grain of salt. Maybe it's because I have to constantly sift through large volumes of research articles each claiming their work to be "revolutionary for the medical field", that I'm now desensitized to claims like this. I find this article no different. So take what Anusien said with a grain of salt, and it's fine. If you block out the first paragraph, ignore some of the matchup percentages, then it's actually not that bad of an article. I mean, I remember how not long ago, people were complaining about the lack of articles on newer stuff from Legacy.

I'm personally not going to bash/praise it until I get a chance to test it out, but I'm very skeptical of some of the claims made (based on experiences running Intuition-based rock ITF-esque decks).

Bardo

12-05-2008, 09:13 PM

First of all, I think alot of you are getting too worked up about this. It's just an article, and mostly, it's based on someone else's opinion.

God damn it! This is the Internet where everything is more important than anything that has ever happened in human history.

Print by movable type? (Lolcatz pwn Johannes Gutenberg.) Discovery of the value "zero?" Discounting the geocentric model of the universe? Germ theory? Continental Drift? General Relativity? Watson & Crick? (4chan would have a word with you.)

These all pale to everything that has ever been posted on the Internet. Rightly so.

frogboy

12-05-2008, 09:35 PM

God damn it! This is the Internet where everything is more important than anything that has ever happened in human history.

Print by movable type? (Lolcatz pwn Johannes Gutenberg.) Discovery of the value "zero?" Discounting the geocentric model of the universe? Germ theory? Continental Drift? General Relativity? Watson & Crick? (4chan would have a word with you.)

These all pale to everything that has ever been posted on the Internet. Rightly so.

One might even say that the Internet is serious business.

If one were so inclined, yes; one might say that. Serious fucking business, indeed. - Bardo

Blitzbold

12-06-2008, 03:02 AM

To be honest - I quite like the deck. I don't like the small amount of blue cards, though, and I'd be quite happy to rise that number in some way. Space also is a luxury in this deck. The same problems occur when trying to vary ITF for different critters.

Demigods naturally come as a 3-of, Goyf is the best creature to run, Shriekmaw is great recurrable removal and so on. The mini-engine of Loam + Raven's Crime + Wasteland is something I really like about the deck, so there isn't that much one is able to cut when looking for more space. One can argue to cut on the lands, though, but this might lead to new problems like, for example, being forced to recur Urborg first when cutting them down.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-06-2008, 02:38 PM

Again; Saying "X deck is really good" is subjective, and is recognized as subjective. Everyone knows to take someone saying their pet deck is amazing with a grain of salt. For what it's worth, I think both ITF and Demigod-ITF-SparklyRainbowsWhateverTheFuck are terrible.

What's not subjective is the idea that it's the premier combo-control deck in Legacy. This is demonstrably false. I'm rather alarmed and frankly, disappointed, even in (name withheld to placate Bardo), that the spread of factually inaccurate information is being shrugged aside. I know no one's a professional journalist here, but come on.

Forbiddian

12-06-2008, 05:12 PM

What's not subjective is the idea that it's the premier combo-control deck in Legacy. This is demonstrably false. I'm rather alarmed and frankly, disappointed, even in (name withheld to placate Bardo), that the spread of factually inaccurate information is being shrugged aside. I know no one's a professional journalist here, but come on.

How is it being shrugged aside? There's 6 pages of bitching about it.

jbmulder

12-06-2008, 10:19 PM

One might even say that the Internet is serious business.

If one were so inclined, yes; one might say that. Serious fucking business, indeed. - Bardo

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/1773/270911970db35fdd4cafu9.jpg

I enjoyed the article though. Nice idea, and if it doesn't turn out to be the next big thing, it's ok.

herbig

12-07-2008, 12:56 AM

Tell me why people take you seriously, again? I'm honestly left scrabbling for answers.

I know how you feel. There aren't enough Zs in the stack to fully express my disgust.

aTn

12-08-2008, 06:17 PM

The idea of the deck is interesting, but why not start a thread here (and give the deck a bit of tournament play) before (or instead of) dedicating an "Unlocking Legacy" article to it ?

Constructive criticism-suggestion (I think):

Taking out the preachy adjectives like "premier" would help everyone here not to spontaneously get in bitching mode (EDIT: Myself included).

I think an analysis of the deck + playtest and tournament results would have a better impact than a sales pitch.

You thinking its good, and online excitement don't translate into it being the best control/combo deck in the format.

It's comments like these that undermine your credibility as a writer, and piss off the people who actually have a clue about the format.

Nightmare, thank you for writing that - I agree 1000%.

EDIT: Toned down my post a bit.

Jaiminho

12-08-2008, 06:52 PM

aTn

12-08-2008, 07:30 PM

It does already exist. (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11440)

I've seen variants at local tournaments - I just didn't know the exact decklist and I thought Anusien's decklist was new.

In that case, change the "start a thread" expression for "contribute to an existing thread".

Forbiddian

12-09-2008, 12:10 AM

I've seen variants at local tournaments - I just didn't know the exact decklist and I thought Anusien's decklist was new.

In that case, change the "start a thread" expression for "contribute to an existing thread".

He did create that thread. Well, Anusien and Frogboy worked together to make the deck. I don't get what you want him to do.

If you don't want to read a primer about a deck, don't read an article that is advertised as a primer for that deck. But certainly don't read it and then post in the thread discussing the primer complaining that you didn't want to read the article advertised as a primer for the deck. That's just silly.

aTn

12-09-2008, 10:25 AM

He did create that thread. Well, Anusien and Frogboy worked together to make the deck. I don't get what you want him to do.

If you don't want to read a primer about a deck, don't read an article that is advertised as a primer for that deck. But certainly don't read it and then post in the thread discussing the primer complaining that you didn't want to read the article advertised as a primer for the deck. That's just silly.

Frankly using the "don't read it if you don't like it" argument to justify a poor choice of subject matter, poor analysis and the preachy tone of the article is not a good idea... If you disagree, then I'd be inclined to say that you have found the universal argument to justify just about anything (including mediocrity).

ATN said: why not start a thread (EDIT: Or contribute to a thread) here (and give the deck a bit of tournament play) before (or instead of) dedicating an "Unlocking Legacy" article to it ?

My point was concerning the choice of subject matter for an "Unlocking Legacy" article. To be more precise, it was about the relevance of dedicating such an article to a primer about a deck with about no important tournament results (and which is sold as a "premier deck").

Why not talk about Team America - a deck which has started putting good results at big tournaments around the globe and which is generally accepted has a good new deck ? Why not do a general article talking about the pros and cons of different control decks in Legacy: Landstill (various builds), ITF, MUC, etc. ? Why not do a general article on the different combo decks in Legacy (those which are relevant today in the meta) and their strengths/weaknesses ? Etc.

Anusien

12-09-2008, 11:20 AM

My point was concerning the choice of subject matter for an "Unlocking Legacy" article. To be more precise, it was about the relevance of dedicating such an article to a primer about a deck with about no important tournament results (and which is sold as a "premier deck").
A primer on a deck everybody already knows and understands seems incredibly silly. It seems like a better use of everybody's time if I try to bring something new to the column whenever possible.

I think an analysis of the deck + playtest and tournament results would have a better impact than a sales pitch.
How is that not what I did?

I've seen variants at local tournaments - I just didn't know the exact decklist and I thought Anusien's decklist was new.
How similar were those decks? I'd love to know what ideas locals are having success with; please go ahead and post in the Demigod thread if you're interested in discussing the deck further. Although mono-B or straight UB decks that just try to play like an Accelerated Blue deck without any of the Loam elements or board control elements are not really what we're looking for.

What do you think the purpose of Unlocking Legacy is?

undone

12-09-2008, 12:15 PM

A primer on a deck everybody already knows and understands seems incredibly silly. It seems like a better use of everybody's time if I try to bring something new to the column whenever possible.

How is that not what I did?

How similar were those decks? I'd love to know what ideas locals are having success with; please go ahead and post in the Demigod thread if you're interested in discussing the deck further. Although mono-B or straight UB decks that just try to play like an Accelerated Blue deck without any of the Loam elements or board control elements are not really what we're looking for.

What do you think the purpose of Unlocking Legacy is?

Not every one knows about team america, this would have been a great chance to inform them. Team america is far more up and comming than this deck, ITF is a better deck in the Intuition control department, and painters has the patent on "Primer combo control deck" in the format, with swans a distant 2nd.

The problem is, you tryied to talk the deck up way too far, and in reality it doesnt deserve its praise.

aTn

12-09-2008, 12:22 PM

What do you think the purpose of Unlocking Legacy is?

Since Legacy gets generally one article slot on SCG compared to the high numbers for Limited and Contructed, I understand why people get picky about that column.

From my point of view, I'd like to see articles on the following topics (this list is not exhaustive):

1. General meta analysis done with enough detail and rigor to please Legacy adepts and to inform players from other formats;

2. General archetype analysis to inform new players - with talk of recent developments and successful variants (to please adepts);

3. Talk of new succesfull decks (i.e. the innovation and success factors should both be met). Bringing something new is good, but you have to give priority to Good new decks (where the term "good" is quantified by relevant tournament results).

I like reading texts proposing new ideas which haven't yet left the realm of playtesting (i.e. that haven't seen a lot of tournament play) - but I would prefer if these articles were written by Legacy innovators who have a good reputation for sizing a meta and creating good decks. Heck, all articles for Constructed and Limited are (mostly) written by good players.

EDIT: I'm not saying Anusien is a bad player, but he hasn't (yet) the reputation as a deck builder, Legacy player or meta analyst to warrant him a slot as a writer (that being said in light of the fact that there's only one column dedicated to Legacy).