[Deck] UW Tempo

[RexFTW]

There is no meddling mage because he is so bad in the aggro match up. He cant profitably block any creature but lackey!

[Illissius]

Nothing sounds good. That card is awful. It can't even carry Equipment.

What I meant is if there ends up being an actual Land Tax deck, that might be cause for confusion. But if that's your biggest problem then you don't have much of a problem.

[Tacosnape]

I'm gonna be honest, I've only read the first 2 pages and the last 3ish of this thread, but this deck has always interested me.

I always wondered why Meddling Mage has not been included in the list, I don't even see it on the sideboards. Seems like he could be pretty good in it. Is there a specific reason for him not being included? Thanks in advance.

There's no Mage because 97% of Legacy players can't play him correctly and think he's awful in several matchups.

[troopatroop]

On a side note, is anyone else aware that this list looks a lot like Wayfarer White Weenie from way back during the 1.5/early Legacy days? That's not an accusation of plagiarism. For one thing, this list seems to be a vast improvement on those old lists. I just really missed seeing Wayfarer up there winning tournaments.

It's close to it. I remember playing against Alix Hatfield in syracuse with him playing that deck. I was playing the Team Albany U/W Scepter deck and got demolished, I'd never forget it. It's the Wayfarer -> Wasteland thing that this deck borrows, and I'm also glad to see it still winning.

[RexFTW]

There's no Mage because 97% of Legacy players can't play him correctly and think he's awful in several matchups.

Ill test him out taco. What do you recommend naming in each of the DTB matchups?

[Pastorofmuppets]

Has anyone considered wall of tears in this deck instead of knight of the white orchid?

Pros:
Blue (force)
blocks zoo creatures profitably
out of bolt range
insane tempo swings
hilarious with mother of runes!

Cons:
first strike + jitte gives people fits
not as good at blocking silvergill adepts or piledrivers.

If I wanted to run something anti-synergistic with Jitte, I'd run Deft Duelist.

[RexFTW]

duelist seems bad vs zoo???

[FoulQ]

Has anyone considered wall of tears in this deck instead of knight of the white orchid?

Pros:
Blue (force)
blocks zoo creatures profitably
out of bolt range
insane tempo swings
hilarious with mother of runes!

Cons:
first strike + jitte gives people fits
not as good at blocking silvergill adepts or piledrivers.

In a vacuum this card is interesting. However, I think you are forgetting the philosophy behind the deck that only comes from playtesting it.

Wall of whatever can't attack. This is a major problem. UW Wayfarer Fish Tempo Land Ignition is a unique deck because it is a control deck, but it can pretty easily switch roles because of its high amount of aggressively-costed beaters. Not to mention the synergy with wayfarer and particularly fathom seer which makes this card sick sometimes, and like you mentioned, the jitte thing.

[whienot]

Appropriate naming with Meddling Mage has more to do with game state than having a list against the DTBs.

Sometimes you'll want to take out their removal, others you may name their threat.

Taco locked me out of a game once by Extirpating my Goyfs and naming Phyrexian Dreadnought with Meddling Mage. With his hand full of countermagic, I was s.o.l.

[badjuju]

Ill test him out taco. What do you recommend naming in each of the DTB matchups?

I think you're reinforcing the stereotype. :rolleyes:

Also, +1 for Land Hax.

[HAVE HEART]

There is no meddling mage because he is so bad in the aggro match up. He cant profitably block any creature but lackey!

Wait, what?

[pi4meterftw]

There's no Mage because 97% of Legacy players can't play him correctly and think he's awful in several matchups.

If mage was good, we would have realized it. Doesn't the fact that you thought of it almost immediately imply to you that we thought of it and dismissed it? In fact, even if you're not willing to have this minimum level of faith in our not being braindead, I think there are still remnants of evidence in our old thread suggesting we've thought about it and dismissed it. Here's why:

Removal is diverse: Mage used to be able to keep out THE lone removal spell when people came with just 4 snuff out, just 4 smother, or w/e. Even then it was kind of bad because people also came with lightning bolt AND fire ice. Also, it only rarely stop swords, since we run it too.

It was good against ANT, but that was about it. It just ate removal all day, and good lightning rods cost W; if it costs 2, it definitely needs to replace itself. (See knight, for instance) or it needs to be broken and not burnable. (See, for instance, grunt)

Court hussar was much better because it at least replaced itself before biting the dust. And court hussar is only a runner-up to our list right now, since spell pierce has shown itself to be reasonable.

Today, mage eats all kinds of removal. Path to exile is here, zoo is much bigger than it was before, team america and sui black variants are almost nowhere to be found...

What would you cut? And why would you cut anything? I dunno, whenever Matt and I pull lists off the internet, unless there are obvious strict improvements, we don't change the lists because we assume that the creators knew something we don't. But it seems like you're not willing to extend us that courtesy, so try the mage and see how it goes. Unless your meta is like 100% TES you'll be sorry you wasted your time.

[HAVE HEART]

Today, mage eats all kinds of removal. Path to exile is here, zoo is much bigger than it was before, team america and sui black variants are almost nowhere to be found...

It is not even that. If a person lands a Meddling Mage, then he/she is hesitant to attack/block with it. The only creature that is hesitant to attack in the entire list is Mother of Runes, as Weathered Wayfarer makes a great attacker/blocker after he has done his job. Other than Mother and Serra Avenger (who are opposite in this respect), all the creatures do something, THEN are able to attack and/or block. Meddling Mage does something, but for it to still have an impact on the game, it cannot die, which makes attacking/blocking with it difficult.

[AcidFiend]

I've personally always hated NoGoyf (the name) as 'No' can also stand for Natural Order.

+1 to Land Hax -> leagues better.

[Pastorofmuppets]

Now, if we had more 187's in this deck I'd say that Reveillark as a one-of might be tech.
Meekstone seems like a good idea in a Goyftastic meta (Goyftastic being my word), but it's not stopping much else. Merfolk can easily play around it.
Mistmeadow Skulk might be worth a look-see, as would anything with Shadow that's marginally efficient. Also, Auriok Champion might help you out.

[Forbiddian]

Incidentally, I talked to Aaron Wayne (the guy piloting NoGoyf/Land Hax at the last tournament).

He pretty much just picked it up, though, and so some mistakes were inevitable. He was apparently not splitting Grunt triggers the entire night as well as making a few other mistakes consistently. He said something about thinking Cumulative Upkeep was exponential, which would make Grunt very hard to use. (I think he thought it took 2, then 4, then 8 cards, requiring all from the same yard).

He sounds like an extremely good pilot other than some unfamiliarity with the deck (and a nice guy). I wouldn't recommend just picking up a deck and rolling with it if you're an average pilot (although it seems to be working for him, he's now in the lead in Star City Games points).



I talked to him about posting a tournament report/his thoughts. He said he'd never written one before, but maybe I can talk him into saying a few words.

As a semi-spoiler, on the swiss, he beat: Natural Order Bant (2-0), Countertop (2-0), Survival (2-0), ANT (2-1), Imperial Painter (2-0), and drew against Merfolk (ID) and Aggro Loam (1-1).

Also, the Too Much Information is out, so it can be confirmed he was the only person piloting it at Dallas. NoGoyf's combined tournament record in SCG 5ks is 11-0-4 on the Swiss, and 1-2-0 in top 8 play. It has only seen play twice and has two top 8s. Swiss games it's 23-4 and top 8 games it's 4-4. I think that's pretty good. We're all waiting on a larger sample size, but I think it's fair to assume that so far NoGoyf has risen to my high expectations for it.

[RexFTW]

To the creators:
What is the best option for dealing with EE or chalice @ 1?

[Forbiddian]

1) Counter it/don't walk into it (it's easy to tell the decks that have EE).
2) Be on the play and just cast any 1cc, counter it on the draw, and generally board to avoid 1cc against decks you think will have it.

Those two cards are definitely I'd guess you'd say "problematic," but the decks that run them generally don't have many other scare cards.

Basically if you end up eating a 2:1, 3:1 or even 4:1, you can still win the game against those decks (and certainly have a high matchup percentage because they'll only open with a Chalice @ 1 like 30% of the time, and you have to be on the draw really to care).

[RexFTW]

The only other "problematic" card that I see is progenitus via natural order or show and tell. Meekstone is probably the best answer! Or meddling mage.

[Vacrix]

The only other "problematic" card that I see is progenitus via natural order or show and tell. Meekstone is probably the best answer! Or meddling mage.

Wow. Meekstone.. Thats a dam good idea. The biggest creatures are Grunt and Avenger but you only run 2 Grunt and they don't usually last more than 3 turns anyway while avenger doesn't even tap so it avoids meekstone entirely. Grunt is really the only disynergy. It would improve matchups like zoo where everything but kird ape is like a 3/3 nactl, 4/5 goyfs, 6/6 KoTR's, etc. It would also be great against merfolk and elves because they play lots of lords. It would probably be weak against goblins as they play far fewer lords. It does answer Prog. like RexFTW mentioned, which is pretty sick, as it also answers reanimator creatures that don't have vigilance (most builds I have seen run only 1 or 2 vigilance creatures those being Sphinx and Akroma). Worth testing?

I don't like meddling mage as an answer for combo anymore. Its too easy to hate and can block nothing in the format short of lackey without you losing him. Runed halo is far better and can answer Tendrils against ANT, etc.

[Forbiddian]

Meekstone is completely dead in a ton of matchups.

Ichorid, ANT, Landstill, the mirror, Goblins, Elves, Enchantress.... That makes it a sideboard card.



But even when it's not dead, it's not even good. For instance: Zoo it doesn't counter Nacatls and Goyfs, it just turns them into Lightning Bolts and Fireblasts when it's working optimally. And for Nacatl, we'd probably have to decide not to waste them or else they could just untap with a 2/2 Nacatl and then reswing. One goal is to color screw them. If we succeed with that, they get their 2/2 beaters back. Doesn't seem good since we have to use a card just to put them in that position.

There's no way in hell I'd board it in against Zoo. I'd rather have Blessed Wine. It only turns Goyf into Fireblast, Nacatl into something between a Lightning Bolt and an unaffected Nacatl, doesn't affect Kird Ape, Lavamancer, or Qasali Pridemage (which could also be sacced to kill Meekstone).



Maybe I'm missing something, but my first reaction is: Holy sweet jesus that card is shit.

[RexFTW]

The idea with meekstone is to let them tap down then play it. Block with mother or something first then drop a meekstone as a surprise tactic!

Seems good vs thresh where it stops everything they have or vs merfolk once they have dropped several lords.

[Moonlight]

At first: I LOVE this decklist..

But.. I pretty hard got owned by BGw Loam.. was it me or is it truely that nasty?
Also, I've got problems with boarding stuff out. Usaly I know what to throw in.. but the worse part for me (has always been and will always be.....) boarding out.
Any 'basic' about that with this list?

Ruining their non-basics is fine.. screwing their fetch might be awesome, so maybe stifle to think about?
And last but not least: sower of temptation side..? With Mother ánd countermagic backup, sower should seal the deal with a vew turns, stealing a goyf/tombstalker/'nought/regenerated angel/*insert random fatty*..

[pi4meterftw]

The idea with meekstone is to let them tap down then play it. Block with mother or something first then drop a meekstone as a surprise tactic!

Seems good vs thresh where it stops everything they have or vs merfolk once they have dropped several lords.

I have a pet peeve: when people list the effect of two cards side by side and pretend they have synergy. Mother stops you from taking the damage, and then meekstone keeps the creature tapped. If you didn't have mother, then the creature would be tapped (presumably, although not really cause meekstone sucks) and if you didn't have the meekstone then you get to not take the damage. I don't see how the sum of effects is worse than the effect of the sum.

The other peeve we have is people making suggestions without studying the deck. We're not asking you to invest a year of magic playing into the deck like we did, but unless you sit on it for a few weeks, maybe even months, you're not going to hit anything worth thinking about, unless you do so randomly, but then we won't be reading the posts so it won't matter if you do. I mean we read them now, but if I see another few suggestions of this sort I'm just going to start ignoring them. We've been optimizing this list for years. Even if you were as good or even better at building decks, you're not going to catch up in less than a year, and it might take you longer since we put both of our heads to it and we're good at what we do.

What we do encourage is posting "horror" stories where you lost even though we reported like a 60% matchup. You should keep in mind that even 90% matchups by definition will be lost 10% of the time. I'm surprised that BGW loam "Trashed" you though. But I can't tell you what you did wrong unless you post more details. Can't you just win because we're nogoyf, and then on top of that, they even play a strategy that is land hungry? This is obviously addressed at the last post. Also addressed at the last post is: please read the thread before asking questions, I posted a HUGE list for sideboarding, and if you follow it exactly you won't get screwed over. If you use it as a guideline and are highly knowledgeable about the list, then even better.

[Cyrus]

Wind Zendikon u
(C)
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Land
Enchanted Land is a 2/2 Blue Elemental Creature with flying. It's still a land.
Whenever enchanted land is put into a graveyard, return it to it's owner's hand.
46/145

Way to reuse Wasteland. Useful?

[Nihil Credo]

It is my hope that the quality of the discussion in this thread proceeds to match its new location.


Wanna guess if I am happy? 'Cause the answer is, I'M NOT. My patience for this thread and its visitors is officially OVER, and should have been LONG ago.

From now on, this is Sunshine-And-Ponies Zone: EVERY single goddamn comment that is

1) ANYTHING LESS than impossibly polite and respectful. I'm talking diplomatic-dinner-at-Buckingham-Palace-polite

or

2) that in ANY WAY impugns another poster's penis size, mother's profession, intelligence, personality, or skill at Magic

or

3) that gives off even the SLIGHTEST vibe of sarcasm, cynicism, or derision

or

4) that attempts to answer in kind to a post of the 1, 2, or 3 type, instead of using the REPORT POST button

gets you, at a MINIMUM, a FULL WARNING for EACH such post, with all that this entails for those of you who have already collected some. More egregious behaviour will directly get tempa- or perma-bans.

Furthermore, every time I or another staff member have to write in red in this thread, it gets locked for a WEEK.

Finally, the *same rules* apply to any PM you write about the deck or about people in this thread.

Now get on with your fucking life.

[Aggro_zombies]

Wind Zendikon u
(C)
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Land
Enchanted Land is a 2/2 Blue Elemental Creature with flying. It's still a land.
Whenever enchanted land is put into a graveyard, return it to it's owner's hand.
46/145

Way to reuse Wasteland. Useful?
Considering how often this deck bounces its lands, probably not. It really needs the Genju text (return the enchantment) to get around that.

However, even if it returned both itself and the land, I can't see this deck efficiently Wastelocking anybody. In most cases, it seems better to just find another Wasteland with Wayfarer since you thin your deck that way while using the deck's (barely) dominant color to do so. Leaving the Wayfarer untapped by using the Aura seems weak since Wayfarer is such a bad attacker, and you're not really down a card in the same way by finding another Wasteland as you are by intentionally exploding the Aura when you sacrifice Wasteland.

[4eak]

I'm not much a fan of Wind Zendikon either. I'd rather splash green for Loam to wastelock (splashing for a 3rd color is possible). With green, perhaps picking up Knight of the Reliquary to compliment Wayfarer might be useful (I won't suggest the anti-namesake; although it tested fine).

If I wanted to concentrate on the Wastelock without adding green, going to the 4th Wasteland (which is what I've chosen to do in my build) seems like a good idea. A singleton Rishadan Port could be decent, especially as Wayfarer can tutor it up nicely. Obviously, Port isn't so amazing when you are sitting at the 1-land softlock position. However, going into the mid-game, there are situations where Port can be powerful.




peace,
4eak

[Aggro_zombies]

If I wanted to concentrate on the Wastelock without adding green, going to the 4th Wasteland (which is what I've chosen to do in my build) seems like a good idea. A singleton Rishadan Port could be decent, especially as Wayfarer can tutor it up nicely. Obviously, Port isn't so amazing when you are sitting at the 1-land softlock position. However, going into the mid-game, there are situations where Port can be powerful.
Did you drop a spell for the fourth Wasteland? How stable was your mana with four colorless producers?

[4eak]

Did you drop a spell for the fourth Wasteland? How stable was your mana with four colorless producers?

More stable, imho. I run 1-extra land.

-2 Spell Pierce
+1 Daze
+1 Wasteland

While I'm a huge fan of spell pierce, I don't think pierce is as strong as plain Daze/Wasteland in the main. Daze is exceedingly useful in this deck beyond its synergy with wasteland, as it obviously has synergy with Wayfarer (the money-maker). I think spell pierce would make a very strong sideboard card for several matches though.




peace,
4eak

[Forbiddian]

More stable, imho. I run 1-extra land.

-2 Spell Pierce
+1 Daze
+1 Wasteland

While I'm a huge fan of spell pierce, I don't think pierce is as strong as plain Daze/Wasteland in the main. Daze is exceedingly useful in this deck beyond its synergy with wasteland, as it obviously has synergy with Wayfarer (the money-maker). I think spell pierce would make a very strong sideboard card for several matches though.




peace,
4eak

One thing I noticed is that Wasteland-only hands are generally mulligans, and even like Wasteland, Fetchland isn't necessarily more keepable than Fetchland-only. Fourth Wasteland allows a lot more crippling mana denial plays, but it won't dramatically increase the consistency like adding an extra colored source.

I loved having four Wastelands, though. Particularly in the Zoo MU, you don't have much time to Wayfarer, but a Wasteland or two drawn can cripple them.


I don't believe in any sort of minimum number of blues required, but simply the fact that a spell is blue is actually a pretty strong selling point. Obviously I'm wary about any cuts to blue cards and always on the lookout for anything playable that's blue, but WL might be strong enough to get over that hump, especially in the right metagame.

[RexFTW]

I agree. Needs more blue!

[pi4meterftw]

I'm not much a fan of Wind Zendikon either. I'd rather splash green for Loam to wastelock (splashing for a 3rd color is possible). With green, perhaps picking up Knight of the Reliquary to compliment Wayfarer might be useful (I won't suggest the anti-namesake; although it tested fine).

If I wanted to concentrate on the Wastelock without adding green, going to the 4th Wasteland (which is what I've chosen to do in my build) seems like a good idea. A singleton Rishadan Port could be decent, especially as Wayfarer can tutor it up nicely. Obviously, Port isn't so amazing when you are sitting at the 1-land softlock position. However, going into the mid-game, there are situations where Port can be powerful.




peace,
4eak

Hm, I think the punishment for running an extra goyf is definitely existent, but subtle. Afterall, the reason it's bad is because you run 19 lands instead of 17, and it'll take many games just to get a "feel" for that difference.

Port is a huge drop down from waste. I like that it taps basics; I even own one so I might try it out, but it doesn't:

permit stack tricks with wayfarer and knight
go 1:1; it goes 2:1
get rid of their land; they can still tap in response every time
fill graveyards: grunt. Similarly, it can't be recycled via grunt.

I doubt the deck even has room for one more wasteland, but it definitely doesn't have room for a wasteland and then also a port, so I think how good it is is really an academic exercise cause it won't fit into the list.

Last we spoke, Matt was planning to take this deck to the Duel for Duals in LA. I'm a student in the Pasadena area, so I may go as well. Depends on if my homework starts to rape by then or not. But in any case, it sounds like we'll probably have a representative.

Matt and I had already considered the last daze over spell pierce. (It's a pretty obvious thing to think about.) I think Matt is sold on spell pierce, and I'm kind of unsure which is better. Spell pierce is definitely far better than spell snare, but there are also cards like disrupt, which are almost good enough, and at least wouldn't burn out the way spell pierce does. But disrupt seems to be far inferior to daze. The deck is no longer a budget deck: we're not running the 4th wasteland for other reasons.

Spell pierce is a lot better than it looks. Often times your opponent goes: AHHA! I've played around daze, now my stuff resolves, right?

Obviously, none of the above suggestions enjoy this advantage. The U payment can actually sometimes be turned into legitimately U, instead of what it usually means for a counterspell: U every turn.

Like say we play mother of runes. Guess what they'll be doing next turn?

Or say we have jitte in hand. They'll obviously cast a burn spell/removal. (Or if they're tapped out, gg.)

The only reason I'm looking on spell pierce with a sliver of doubt is because twice in the semifinals, and a few times in testing I've died with a hand full of conditional countermagic. Spell pierce is absolutely abysmal in the topdeck war. But with the recent rise of belcher, the unrelenting existence of other storm decks, and random combo popping up one way or another, I guess the occasional topdeck loss is one I'll have to take. I really can't imagine it happening often, since usually:

By the lategame, you've fetched about 3 times.
You've wayfarered 2-3 times.
You've played grunt and put the spells back into your library
You've cast a KOTWO.

You're typically down to about 35 cards left, 5 of which are land, 2 are vials about, and then about 6 are countermagic, and 3 are wayfarer/knight. It's almost preposterous to go 3 turns without topdecking some gas, and in a topdeck war you typically have that amount of time or so. In short, I'm not too worried about it. At this point all changes Matt and I come up with will be minute. I think a lot of people are trying to enact huge changes because they don't really want to play NoGoyf proper; it's quite possible that you can make a huge change and end up with a good deck also. I mean if you change 20 of our cards, you can probably become fish. If you change 60 of our cards, you can become anything. But we're more or less focusing in on small issues like:

Is 2 thorn better in the sideboard, or is 1 thorn 1 ethersworn superior?

Is 2 spell pierce better, or is 1 daze 1 spell pierce better? (Or something else.)

[RexFTW]

Is 2 thorn better in the sideboard, or is 1 thorn 1 ethersworn superior?

I was thinking the same thing. Ethersworn + mom seems good.

[Azania]

Well I have been playing the deck for quite a bit, I love it, but dislike the name, I prefer to call it 'Denial' since we pretty deny everything almost even their creatures doing combat damage to us. I have a few to many people confusing the name with 'Natural Order Goyf' and they were not my opponents (I would wish, I also happen to play Epic Elves with NO so go figure ><).

What I learned about late game is that the last thing I always want the draw is the last few fetchlands left in the deck. I usually have by then already gotten the plains and islands. And thus not helping. And not always in a position to fetch them with wayfairer either. Other then that late game we do kinda have the advantage. And normally always wins.

From the new set I have seen 0 good cards for this deck, that enchant land is not good my eyes, and usually just a waste of space. We have enough creatures and a walking land that goes back to our hands after it dies is not great either, it only makes it easier for the opponent to get rid of the useless enchantment should he ever want it which I really doubt.

[RexFTW]

Has anyone considered this guy?


Descendant of Kiyomaro :1::w::w: (3)
Creature — Human Soldier (2/3)

As long as you have more cards in hand than each opponent, Descendant of Kiyomaro gets +1/+2 and has "Whenever this creature deals combat damage, you gain 3 life."


We always have more cards in hand than they do especially mid/late game. Seems like he makes the game un-winnable for some decks.

[Forbiddian]

Yes, I believe descendent was listed in the old guide and just not mentioned here.


1WW for a 3/5 Lifelink is awesome against the Zoo, Goyf Sligh, and Burn archetype, but against some decks, we don't always have more cards in hand. For instance, Landstill, Combo, Goblins, or we don't care about a 3/5 lifelink for 3 anyway (landstill, combo, ichorid, aggro loam... I mean, there are a ton in both categories, I'm not going to list every one).

It's only going to be good when both 1WW for 3/5 Lifelink is really good, AND we can consistently stay above their hand count in that MU. There really aren't many decks that fall into the union.

It's one of those cards that makes flashy wins, but also sits dead in your hand. NoGoyf is really about card flexibility. You can use for all your cards in any scenario. Also, at least in the near future, the meta seems supersaturated with combo, so there won't be an aggro explosion justifying running something like this.

[paK0]

I think the Descendant could replace a number of Tenders in the sb. Both of them adress similar matchups. The main issue I see with this is the 3cc. You just don't hit 3 mana on turn 3 consistently.

And part of why Tender shines is because he gives you opponent trouble starting turn 1. Maybe I test 1 in the board the next time I go to a tournament.

[RexFTW]

It's only going to be good when both 1WW for 3/5 Lifelink is really good, AND we can consistently stay above their hand count in that MU. There really aren't many decks that fall into the union.

I think you are right here. It seems backbreaking vs zoo though.

[pi4meterftw]

We'd much rather play kitchen finks at the exact same cost.

But then we wouldn't play that.

[Forbiddian]

Oh yeah, Finks is better than that, I forgot about that justification.

But anyway, BFT is used for Ichorid as well (or even primarily). Check the thread that Maveric78f is dominating on sideboard plans.

The card would have to be ridiculously strong against Zoo in order to justify its inclusion over a far more flexible card like BFT. And it's hard for any spell that costs 1WW in such a fast MU to make up that much difference (there are a number of situations where BFT might get cast and Descendant couldn't even see play).

[4eak]

@ Forbiddian



One thing I noticed is that Wasteland-only hands are generally mulligans, and even like Wasteland, Fetchland isn't necessarily more keepable than Fetchland-only. Fourth Wasteland allows a lot more crippling mana denial plays, but it won't dramatically increase the consistency like adding an extra colored source.

With regards to -2 Spell pierce, +1 Daze, +1 Wasteland:

To be crystal clear, there is an increase in wasteland-only opening hands, but the increase would have been automatic mulligans regardless (as it would have been Spell pierce and no land in those cases). As I didn't remove any colored land, there would only be improvement.

I agree that colorless land does not improve the mana-base nearly as much as colored mana. Although, the odds of casting Aether Vial, Grunt, Seer, Hardcast Dazes (they will happen), Jitte and equipcosts are all improved.

I look at Wasteland's improvement on the mana-curve as being completely secondary just as you. The uncounterable (excepting Stifle), mana-less LD and tempo it buys is the standalone reason. In this deck though, additional Wastelands are considerably stronger, not just because you want to see those 2-wastes in the first couple turns against Zoo, but because you can chain-them together very effectively with Wayfarer. I'll admit there are diminishing returns to the value of the last wasteland in this Wayfarer chain though. The other important addition is the increase in synergy (value added beyond the sum of the individual parts) with Daze. I look at Wayfarer, Daze, and Wasteland as a trinity in this deck, each card improves the other.


I don't believe in any sort of minimum number of blues required, but simply the fact that a spell is blue is actually a pretty strong selling point. Obviously I'm wary about any cuts to blue cards and always on the lookout for anything playable that's blue, but WL might be strong enough to get over that hump, especially in the right metagame.

I agree. You need a solid blue-count. Although, in my suggestion, I've only lowered the blue count by 1. If "blue is a strong selling point", then we should reconsider cards running 1-2 of cards like Deft Dualist and Meddling Mage (I see that it has been discussed), simply because they are blue. Perhaps even Ponder could find a home.


@ pi4meterftw


Hm, I think the punishment for running an extra goyf is definitely existent, but subtle. Afterall, the reason it's bad is because you run 19 lands instead of 17, and it'll take many games just to get a "feel" for that difference.

I think it is substantially more difficult to "feel" the differences between 1 or 2 land cards. Even in the most simple of decks, it (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=409226&postcount=29) isn't very easy to tell.

Let's rephrase "punishment" to "cost". And, I agree, there are costs to playing a 3rd color, fairly small costs in a format with duals and fetches, which are further curbed by the use of Wayfarer and Vial; there are also very real benefits. Tempo Thresh, for example, runs 3 colors on 17-18 land, and it doesn't have the benefit of Wayfarer or Vial (we can remedy the cantrip issue in this deck if that is necessary).

We have not identified whether or not playing Goyf in this deck is suboptimal. Personally, I'd be happy to see that doesn't belong (I really don't like Goyf, even if I will admit his supremacy), but I'm very slow (for good reason) to dismiss cards like Goyf, Vial, Brainstorm, etc. in this format. Goyf has proven a worthy splash in many archetypes, and I think it is the first topic that every aggro-control archetype not running Goyf must talk about.

In my experience (which isn't as impressive as yours with this deck), Goyf plays nicely into the gameplan of this Wayfarer deck, which is all about ground control. As this isn't a budget deck anymore, I would appreciate an explanation of why Goyf has no home here.

I've seen the phrase "there's no room" several times. I'm very unconvinced by that argument. So, I'll pre-emptively answer that response. Here is a suggestion (perhaps someone might offer a more optimal substitution):

-1 Tundra
-1 Umezawa's Jitte
-2 Knight of the White Orchid
-2 Jotun Grunt
+4 Goyf
+1 Tropical Island
+1 Savannah

We need to address Goyf's inertia in the format; we need to test him into oblivion before we can safely remove him from a non-budget, non-tribal aggro-control deck (I'm struggling to think of an exception). He isn't a passing suggestion or a quirk; he is the staple. Why not play Goyf?



Port is a huge drop down from waste.

I agree. I only suggested Port as a singleton for that reason -- multiples suck, unless you have some game winning 4 and 5 mana plays. If Wayfarer wasn't in the deck, then a singleton would be out. I'd only consider port in the case that you stay purely U/W and wished to emphasize the wastelock any further than running the full playset of Wastelands. (CoW was terrible in testing)

The ability to answers basics is important (answering the answer to your wastelock). Yes, they can tap in response, but as porting is usually done in their upkeep, only instants can be played with that mana. The most dangerous cards against this deck are not instants though, imho. In this light, port does seem to buy tempo against the most dangerous card in many cases. Also, besides forcing the potency of your wastelands, Port is an excellent card at softlocking until the 3rd land.

I'm not saying Port is the correct choice; in fact, in my brief testing, I didn't prefer it. I am open to the possibility (for now) that it could have a place.

Speaking of singletons in a deck with better-than-Crop-rotation-on-a-stick, I know it was briefly discussed, but I was hoping for a fleshed out answer: Why not play a Tabernacle in the side? I can think of several matchups where it would be devastating (making some matchups stronger by a very sizable margin, even if they were already somewhat in your favor).


At this point all changes Matt and I come up with will be minute. I think a lot of people are trying to enact huge changes because they don't really want to play NoGoyf proper; it's quite possible that you can make a huge change and end up with a good deck also. I mean if you change 20 of our cards, you can probably become fish. If you change 60 of our cards, you can become anything. But we're more or less focusing in on small issues

This is a loaded paragraph. I'm trying my best to be delicate (Sunshine and Ponies polite even).

I can see what you prefer to think about, and I understand that you wish to to come up with only small changes. I know you've tested this particular deck and like it the way it is. You consider "NoGoyf proper" to be the exact list you have. Take pride in what you've created (it is a good deck which is enjoyable to play). However, it would be a mistake to assume that the deck is above macroevolution.

The deck is still relatively new (even if the ideas aren't new to you), and it hasn't gone under the same sort of scrutiny or testing which we might expect crystallized decks have undergone (Tempo Thresh is a good example of a deck optimized to the point of crystalllization). Claiming optimality within a handful of cards is very difficult to justify; such a claim requires the work of many, many people over an extended period of time to justify. It is certainly possible that the deck has room to evolve in larger shifts than 1 or 2 cards. You could be right in the end; perhaps the deck is pretty much crystallized, but that I don't think you can justify the claim at this point.

By satisfactorily answering questions like "Why not play Goyf?", you bring others that much closer to agreeing with your above language. Beyond fully answering those sorts of questions: testing, time, and a lot of player consensus is the other half of the crystallization equation.

As to "what makes NoGoyf to be NoGoyf", ironically, it isn't the fact that it doesn't play Tarmogoyf (as the creation of the deck seemed based upon budget and "originality" concerns -- which I do appreciate). The lack of Goyf in a fish deck is remarkable, but so far not justified or necessarily optimal. I think Weathered Wayfarer is the central idea of the deck. Wayfarer's contribution is what really sets the deck apart from everything else. No matter how the deck might evolve, it would always include (and revolve around to some extent) Wayfarer. I can't say the same is necessarily true for the other creatures choices.





peace,
4eak

[Phoenix Ignition]

-1 Tundra
-1 Umezawa's Jitte
-2 Knight of the White Orchid
-2 Jotun Grunt
+4 Goyf
+1 Tropical Island
+1 Savannah

We need to address Goyf's inertia in the format; we need to test him into oblivion before we can safely remove him from a non-budget, non-tribal aggro-control deck (I'm struggling to think of an exception). He isn't a passing suggestion or a quirk; he is the staple. Why not play Goyf?


I agree goyf is quite good in here. The first *problems* I see are the triple color base and removing Jotun Grunt Wasteland chaining. I say *problems* because I believe these are both negligible.

The first problem is in my experience (feel free to flame me here creators :wink:) is not a problem. Yes, it makes you a bit less mulligan-safe and can be hurt more by opposing land destruction strategies, but overall having the green giant on your team is a plus. They've said before that a goyf in White color would be an easy add in, so the main problem is the green. Since that time we've (see what I did there?:wink:) gone from 2 vials to a more respectable 3 vials, easing the mana on the creatures. Wayfarer shines when you don't have many lands, so if the opponent is giving you a hard time he should be able to fetch you any color you need.

Now the second and actually relevant problem is the loss of Grunt. This guy is good for more than one reason, and is going to be the hardest thing to cut because Aggro-loam/ land strategies going around, as well as the random decks that he is just golden against like Ichorid. Goyf and grunt don't play nice together, and it's pretty necessary to decide which of the two you will play. Also there are some pretty solid cards in this deck that don't get the boot for goyf, so to fit him in it will be necessary to cut ones that have questionable synergy.

So those are the main 2 problems with adding goyf or cutting Grunt, but I don't think this deck should ever lose the 3rd Jitte. At one point it even played 4, just because all of these tiny creatures really do need a God-stick to carry with them in order to lock the game. So if I were to enact the swap in of goyf I would do:

-1 Tundra
-2 Knight
-2 Grunt
-1 Serra (4 is good, but if we're putting in 4 Goyfs and switching to 3 colors I feel the extra colored mana is necessary, so the addition of a land in a creature's place is called for)

So the slops of this configuration are lack of First Strike dude, who is cute with a Jitte but merely okay on his own, lack of maindeck grave hate, which is actually pretty good, and 3 color manabase which in my experience hasn't been a huge problem, since half the games I don't even need to get a green source. The benefits are you get a 4/5 two drop which people are overly fearful of and stop at any and all costs, which gives your other guys the go ahead, and obviously an amazing top deck.

So regardless of others responses I am overall not against the idea of adding in goyf to Nogoyf, even though confusion in the name would be gigantic.

[Forbiddian]

Goyf is smaller in this deck than you'd expect (he's about -1/-1 from what you'd normally see, since we contribute nothing to his size), he doesn't do anything other than being a body (no evasion, no second ability, so he's only good when the opponent has no creatures out, and he doesn't even have that much offensive power, which is completely the opposite of this deck's tempo/card/flexibility package), and he would require an entirely new color.

I know people stick Goyf into everything, but we run 17 land, not 20, we require WW UU not 1W and 1U, and we're not already screwed by non-basic hate.



It's a totally open and shut case. Goyf adds nothing we want and would cost the deck at the very least the Dragon Stompy matchup, and probably a lot more (like Tropical Island = Mana production of current regular Island -- and Regular Island is probably the worst card in the deck).

[Sevryn]

Firstly, I haven't sleeved this deck, I've just read this thread. With that said:

I think that if a third color was splashed, it should not be green and definitely not for Tarmogoyf. This is not because of the current name of no-goyf, but rather because goyf fills a role that this deck does not appear to need: big dumb beater. Drawing a goyf is drawing one less control element, and this deck (from what I can tell) wins based on the synergy of its combined control elements. Because of all of the overlapping synergies, the more control elements you draw the better your game will go, as your options widen and each one provides its own kind of card advantage.

With that little prelude, I think that people actually testing this deck should test a small black splash for Dark Confidant. He provides REAL card advantage, not just tempo like Mother of Runes or conditional lands like Wayfarer. And I'm not saying this to bash Mom or Wayfarer, they are at the core of a unique angle at generating advantage throughout the game. However, this doesn't mean that there is no place for drawing an extra card every turn, and I think that Bob would fit well in the deck due to its low curve and ability to consistently charge up a jitte.

[pi4meterftw]

Firstly, I haven't sleeved this deck, I've just read this thread. With that said:

I think that if a third color was splashed, it should not be green and definitely not for Tarmogoyf. This is not because of the current name of no-goyf, but rather because goyf fills a role that this deck does not appear to need: big dumb beater. Drawing a goyf is drawing one less control element, and this deck (from what I can tell) wins based on the synergy of its combined control elements. Because of all of the overlapping synergies, the more control elements you draw the better your game will go, as your options widen and each one provides its own kind of card advantage.

With that little prelude, I think that people actually testing this deck should test a small black splash for Dark Confidant. He provides REAL card advantage, not just tempo like Mother of Runes or conditional lands like Wayfarer. And I'm not saying this to bash Mom or Wayfarer, they are at the core of a unique angle at generating advantage throughout the game. However, this doesn't mean that there is no place for drawing an extra card every turn, and I think that Bob would fit well in the deck due to its low curve and ability to consistently charge up a jitte.

The life loss with confidant is actually pretty significant. We run a low land count, and we have plenty of 2cc, and FOW. DC would find its way into our list if it were white or blue, but we're not splashing a color unless the card is really good, because splashing a color means going to 19 lands and enjoying much less consistency (We'd need WWUUX, which is impossible in 2 lands, and not trivial with 3 lands.) instead of WWUU which is inconvenient at 2 lands, and trivial with 3. A 3/4 (sometimes 4/5, sometimes 2/3 but almost never deviant from this since we'll always have instant, land, and either we'll have creature or they'll have creature or sorcery, but not usually a creature and a sorcery, and very occasionally an artifact but certainly not 3 of these.) for 1G won't make the cut. It'd have to carry the weight of more than 1.5 cards, since 4 slots demands 2 dual lands. On top of that, it costs consistency, hence "more than."

a 1G for a 6/7 would do this, and maybe a 5/6, but not for even a consistent 4/5, which goyf cannot usually achieve when our deck purposefully has no sorceries and no artifacts with sac abilities.

Goyf on the opposing side usually caps out at 4/5, but that's because the players who play goyf come prepared with sorceries and then cast them to pump their own goyfs.

You also talk about wayfarer as if the fact that it "only gets lands" is a problem, but I remind you that wasteland is good, and also that any removal spell targetting wayfarer does not gain tempo, unlike dark confidant. Wayfarer is a must-remove, and then at best they break even tempo and we gain 1 life. But what would be terrible is if we fetch a crappy underground sea or something, and then proceed to get tempod on top of that.

[pi4meterftw]

@4eak:

Cutting grunts is bad. You didn't claim to optimize though, so I trust that you understood this, and simply did not know what to cut. Not knowing what to cut among many choices is not an excuse for not making the cut, but if you read my above post, I'm proving that there are not cuts to choose from. Even the worst card is at least 2/3 as good as goyf, where the numerics are defined to mean whether goyf+2 lands or the 6 worst business would be superior.

Deft dualist and meddling mage (the latter of which we tested for like 2-3 months) are pretty bad. Meddling mage is only the denial effect or (exclusively) the 2/2 body in most cases, and it might even not be a denial effect if you guess wrong, or even worse it might be a 2/2 body that you think you have to protect. With mother it might be a bit better now though, and Matt did advocate running spell pierce specifically because sometimes we lose to bombs like shackles. But then the trouble becomes that MM is just the denial effect (although now guaranteed essentially by mom.) I'm not sure we would pay UW to keep their crap off the table preemptively. We would probably pay UW for that and a 2/2, but we'd almost never get to use the 2/2 body.

If this deck goes and macroevolves, it doesn't have to become a terrible deck, but it will by definition not be nogoyf. It's just a definition, and all I'm saying is we've tested long enough and stabilized long enough that we're pretty confident in what kind of a list we want to assume this label. You may not end up with a horrible list if you change to "goyf nogoyf." Or even dark confidant nogoyf. Goyf would fill a pretty nice roll, a 3/4 could keep us from getting raped while we search wastelands and make it gg. Too bad it isn't on color.

[Phoenix Ignition]

I retract my Goyf seems good statement. Playtesting shows he isn't. 4 Wastelands are necessary if you don't run Grunt, and to splash for the 3rd color and need 4 Wastelands is putting too many lands in the deck.

Don't get me wrong, goyf is huge, he's awesome at making a goyf blocking wall where the Serras just fly over, and he would be ridiculously good if he was white or blue for this deck, but the mana can't handle it if we take out grunt.

Splashing for bob seems good at first but this deck has a slower clock than most and would kill itself as fast as it kills the opponent.

I can definitely see removing the Knights and Spell Pierce for a set of something good, but I still can't find it.

[Sevryn]

I retract my Goyf seems good statement. Playtesting shows he isn't. 4 Wastelands are necessary if you don't run Grunt, and to splash for the 3rd color and need 4 Wastelands is putting too many lands in the deck.

Don't get me wrong, goyf is huge, he's awesome at making a goyf blocking wall where the Serras just fly over, and he would be ridiculously good if he was white or blue for this deck, but the mana can't handle it if we take out grunt.

Splashing for bob seems good at first but this deck has a slower clock than most and would kill itself as fast as it kills the opponent.

I can definitely see removing the Knights and Spell Pierce for a set of something good, but I still can't find it.

Well, if Goyf is in mainly as a wall, why not try an actual wall? Wall of Denial is on-color. I'm not saying Wall of Denial is good, I'm just trying to help brainstorm. On the downside, it can never attack; on the upside, it is shroudy and bigger than everything except dreadnought.

[Jak]

Well, if Goyf is in mainly as a wall, why not try an actual wall? Wall of Denial is on-color. I'm not saying Wall of Denial is good, I'm just trying to help brainstorm. On the downside, it can never attack; on the upside, it is shroudy and bigger than everything except dreadnought.

No. People call Goyf a wall only because it is a wall early. It stops initial creature rushes. However, later in the game once you stabilized against aggro, you need that win condition. Wall of Denial just stalls, doesn't kill a creature when it blocks, and can't attack.

[RexFTW]

I think the matchup analysis in the OP is correct. I have tested the counterbalance, goblin, zoo matchups and they are about as advertised!

However, some rogue strategies can catch this deck off guard. For example elf combo!!??!!

[RexFTW]

Has anyone considered the vintage powerhouse Mystic Remora for the board? Seems like an incredibly strong play following a vial against decks that play more than 20 spells. (IE threshold, dredge, counterbalance, combo... pretty much anything except goblins?)

It is also considered one of the strongest anti-combo cards in vintage because it draws you into force of will.

[Anusien]

If the main reason you want Jotun Grunt is to keep chaining Wastelands, why not just run a Dust Bowl?

[wolfstorm]

Mystic remora is hard to keep up in legacy.. you don't have all the moxen/mana crypt/sol ring to help pay for it.

[RexFTW]

Mystic remora is hard to keep up in legacy.. you don't have all the moxen/mana crypt/sol ring to help pay for it.

This is true, but if your are vialing your guys for free you can spend all your mana on remora.

[Forbiddian]

If the main reason you want Jotun Grunt is to keep chaining Wastelands, why not just run a Dust Bowl?

Because that's not the main reason we run Grunt.

What gave you that idea? It's a 4/4 body (survives burn, big enough to kill almost anything in the format -- almost always bigger than Goyf even), ruins the enemy graveyard/goyf, puts the best cards we want back in the deck during a long game, etc.

And I'd run Crucible before Dust Bowl. Dust Bowl forces you to tap out. One big strength is you land lock your opponent while developing your board.

[pi4meterftw]

I looked up remora (see I'm not as hard-headed as you guys sometimes seem to think) and I noticed that it only applies to noncreatures. In vintage, this is not much of a restriction, but in legacy it seems to make it pretty bad. I can only imagine this being good against a deck with no creatures, and even then only if we have a vial, and only if we have enough pressure to make them play spells. It seems like it tries to be standstill, but I think standstill is better.

[Phoenix Ignition]

If the main reason you want Jotun Grunt is to keep chaining Wastelands, why not just run a Dust Bowl?

You don't really get 4 mana against people, and if you do the game is probably far enough in that you have better things to do with your mana than kill a land a turn, like switching Jitte around or playing more dudes. And Fathom Seer keeps you off 4 lands pretty well too, so Dust Bowl isn't that great.

Grunt is big and drops opposing goyfs, but Cumkeep is horrible, as some games you really just need a creature to stare down an opposing creature (random example, I had Serra Avenger + Jotun Grunt against an opponent who had 7 life and spent all his resources NO-> progenitus. He couldn't attack and I could drop his life by 3 a turn, he top decks a sword after he drops to 4 life and I wait 3 turns of upkeeps without hitting a relevant creature, at which point Jotun dies and I take 10 twice). Jotun is good at recycling cards, and a great card against a certain few decks, but in my opinion this deck doesn't have a fast enough clock to enjoy a ball-lightningesque creature like him. Removing the graveyard is great in several matchups though, so right now I'm not sure he isn't necessary. If you don't use him you definitely need 4 Wastelands though.

[Forbiddian]

It should be noted that with Aether Vial, you can nullify the "wait out grunt" strategy, since you don't play him until you need either to eat his yard, kill an attacker, or Ball Lightning for 8-12. Either way, you only use him when he's going to be very effective.

I really can't imagine the deck without Grunt. He's quite central to the "aggro mode" that the deck can put on, he's critical against Zoo and Aggro Loam (in that he owns them hard and they can't remove him easily), and he's very important in ANY MU where the opponent has Tarmogoyf.

Oh, and I forgot any deck with Loam, Crucible, etc. etc. He's not really bad in any MU that I can think of, he just does different things, so it's hard to pin his exact role down. In some MUs, he's yard hate, in others he's a 4/4 blocker. In others, he's a Ball Lighting on crack (which allows us a deceptively fast clock). In others, he prevents you from decking.

[pi4meterftw]

It should be noted that if indeed grunt turns out to be a ball lightning, then we can take advantage of that. Suppose he hits for 8 and your opponent uses 2 fetchlands, and we cash in once with a serra avenger before he finds a swords or something. If he's control (which he almost certainly has to be or else grunt would've hit for 12 because we'd wait for it) then he has to kill pretty much all of our "cantrip creatures" now. If he's running thoughtseize, then we just blanked a bunch of stuff. If we cashed in for 12 with grunt, then now he's at 3, and he has to spend a spot removal or come up with a blocker, with which he can't attack, per creature we play. And then each of our creatures draws us cards or lands. (Or they're avenger, and then can't even be answered by most blockers.)

You'd be a fool to not trade a card for 12 life against our deck. It might even be a stupid play for some decks to not trade a card for 8 life. But this is ONLY the aggro aspect of grunt. It's quite a multifunctional creature.

[RexFTW]

A single COP: Green may be better than meek stone in the board vs Progenitus?

[RexFTW]

To the creators:

This deck can be very tricky to play. please give me an analysis of your best play for the following hand. Assume it is turn 1 vs an unknown opponent and we go first:

Plains
Windswept Heath
Mom
Spell Pierce
Daze
Aether Vial
Serra Avenger

This is a very tricky hand.

Turn 1 vial allows turn 2 mom with pierce cover followed by vialed avenger turn 3. Do you use the plains to play the vial or fetch a tundra to activate daze in this case (but be vulnerable to waste)?

Or do you simply play Heath then say go keeping spell pierce mana up incase the opponent drops manabond, vial etc? This also gives you the option to daze a lackey or nacatl.

Consider the same hand, only with brainstorm instead of avenger:
Plains
Windswept Heath
Mom
Spell Pierce
Daze
Aether Vial
Brainstorm

How does this change your play?

[nitewolf9]

The play there seems certainly to fetch for a blue source and land vial with daze up. If your opponent plays a creature on the first turn, or simply just makes a land drop, you lost a significant amount of tempo by leading with fetch, go. I would most certainly make that play every time unless I knew my opponent was playing fast combo. If your opponent wastes your land they fall way behind.

Whoever plays this deck alot can chime in, but that's my take on things and I like making random posts.

[pi4meterftw]

The play there seems certainly to fetch for a blue source and land vial with daze up. If your opponent plays a creature on the first turn, or simply just makes a land drop, you lost a significant amount of tempo by leading with fetch, go. I would most certainly make that play every time unless I knew my opponent was playing fast combo. If your opponent wastes your land they fall way behind.

Whoever plays this deck alot can chime in, but that's my take on things and I like making random posts.

Agreed.

[Forbiddian]

To the creators:

This deck can be very tricky to play. please give me an analysis of your best play for the following hand. Assume it is turn 1 vs an unknown opponent and we go first:

Plains
Windswept Heath
Mom
Spell Pierce
Daze
Aether Vial
Serra Avenger

You're either way too smart for this game, or just way overthinking it. The hand is an obvious keep, it's among the best possible six card hands you could have in a variety of matchups. I'd be very confident with that keep against every deck I can think of except Belcher (no Force, but what are you gonna do?). The best play is to do the obvious: Heath --> Tundra --> Vial.

This puts you way ahead in the tempo category, and you can spend the rest of the game dicking around, trying to get in a sweet play with Daze and Spell Pierce as he won't be able to stop the Angel+Mom combination.

If he Forces the Vial, you definitely daze back in this situation (pending his discard... if he discards like a High Tide maybe). But in general, if he has a bomb, he'd save the Force to protect it and you'll get SP up for the rest of the game.




Or do you simply play Heath then say go keeping spell pierce mana up incase the opponent drops manabond, vial etc? This also gives you the option to daze a lackey or nacatl.

This is terrible, you can still Daze anything they might play turn 1. The minor vulnerability to Wasteland is a bad reason to chicken out of getting a Vial (which can immediately deliver game-winning creatures). Even if they waste you, it doesn't matter. You still have Vial down and a second land, so you'll live.



Consider the same hand, only with brainstorm instead of avenger:
Plains
Windswept Heath
Mom
Spell Pierce
Daze
Aether Vial
Brainstorm

How does this change your play?

Other than the fact that this hand is much worse, it wouldn't change my play at all. It's still an extremely good hand without any glaring weaknesses, so it's a keep. You'll want to get the Vial down immediately and then be able to develop your board with Spell Pierce backup.



And in general, Wasteland is not a scare card in this situation. You already have a Vial out. It would take a desperate opponent and a monster read for him to use his turn 1 from the draw to waste you sitting pretty with Aether Vial and Tundra. The person with Vial will A) not be mana screwed and B) have a big tempo advantage. Whenever I have Vial out, I'm desperately looking to Wasteland my opponent.

And even then at best it's like a 3:1 and only until you draw an out. In the meantime, you're still developing the board, and still hitting at least your next land drop, so you're not even going to miss Daze/Spell Pierce at least for a few more turns.

You still have what? 16 outs left in the deck (any non-plains, colored land or Knight of the White Orchid or Weathered Wayfarer) to activate Daze and Spell Pierce. Oh, and Force.

[arebennian]

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/deck/369

Deck is currently the deck of the day.
They called in U/W Tempo!

[F3lix]

I've been playing toying with this deck for the past few days here are my thoughts:

-4 Fathom Seer seems like 2-4 too many. Let me say first that he has had his moments, like saving me from a lethal PoP and giving me an extra mana while drawing 2. But most of the time he is a 3cc sorcery to nets me 1 card. I don't know yet how I would replace him.

-Vial is one of those cards you really want to play 4 of or none at all. Starting with 1 is always good, but when you draw it after turn 3 or so, it's usually a dead card. I know BS can toss it back in, but still.

-I think Spell Snare would be better than Spell Pierce here. Again, Pierce had won me games that Snare wouldn't have, but Snare stops the biggest threats, namely Goyf (I know grunt can help, but they always play 2x as many goyfs as we do grunts), Counterbalance(which if resolved we usually lose without a vial on board), and lastly Qasali Pridemage if only because you said it best in the OP, Jitte IS the glue the holds this pile together. Even a hymn can outright destroy us if it hits a land.

[Forbiddian]

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/deck/369

Deck is currently the deck of the day.
They called in U/W Tempo!

That's pretty tight, Aaron Wayne just linked me to that shit and I came here to post the link.

I think I got outvoted on the deck name, though.

[Sevryn]

That's pretty tight, Aaron Wayne just linked me to that shit and I came here to post the link.

I think I got outvoted on the deck name, though.

U/W Tempo is pretty damn descriptive. It's like calling Breakfast Survival/Shapeshifter instead, or calling Team America B/U/G Disruption. It's less flavorful but more descriptive. You can still have a flavor name in addition to U/W Tempo, is what I'm trying to get at. Land Hax is pretty cute, IMO.

[Forbiddian]

U/W Tempo is pretty damn descriptive. It's like calling Breakfast Survival/Shapeshifter instead, or calling Team America B/U/G Disruption. It's less flavorful but more descriptive. You can still have a flavor name in addition to U/W Tempo, is what I'm trying to get at. Land Hax is pretty cute, IMO.

Well, yeah, except it's like calling UW Landstill "UW Tempo."

I dunno, I don't really see anything in the deck that adds tempo (other than Aether Vial and then maybe Knight of the White Orchid) and a ton of things that drop or at least try to drop tempo for card advantage:

Weathered Wayfarer, Fathom Seer, Daze, and then in a less direct way Mother of Runes, Umezawa's Jitte....

[pi4meterftw]

U/W Tempo is pretty damn descriptive. It's like calling Breakfast Survival/Shapeshifter instead, or calling Team America B/U/G Disruption. It's less flavorful but more descriptive. You can still have a flavor name in addition to U/W Tempo, is what I'm trying to get at. Land Hax is pretty cute, IMO.

UW tempo isn't too terrible, but the worst part is that we already attached a name to it, I told them what the name was, and they failed to transcribe it correctly. Oh well, I guess I've seen worse like when I tell my students the answer to their homework and somehow they still screw it up.

[Forbiddian]

There's this card from the new set:


Originally Posted by Salvation
Stoneforge Mystic 1W
Creature - Kor Artificer (rare)

When Stoneforge Mystic Enters the Battlefield, you may search your library for an equipment card, reveal it, and put it into your hand. If you do, shuffle your library.
1W, tap: Put an Equipment card from your hand onto the battlefield.

1/2


Obviously it costs 1W more to get a Jitte out on the table (1W to cast this, then 4 for the Jiquip), but I might pay 1W to get a free 1/2.

Also with Vial, the extra cost is basically meaningless, and he does provide some flexibility in that you can leave 2 untapped all the way to your opponent's endstep and then still be able to Jiquip with counter protection or with fewer than 4 land. Obviously they see the Jiquip coming so they can prepare, but I think this is worth me testing.

[Moonlight]

I think you should not weaken your creaturebase with another 1/2 little-one..
Turoring jitte is nice, vialing it in and equip jitte at once a turn later is a nice trick offcourse.. but I dont think its good enough.. He has to tap to throw the equipment in play too.. suxy imo..

Ive tested Jace Beleren in a few games now (tested alot last 2 weeks with the deck) and she is awesome!
Fathom seer wins you topdeck-war's.. but she does it even better..

3 mana is not to much of a big deal and she generates such a CA..
Im playing 3 seer / 1 jace now, might go 2/2..
Anyone tried her in the list yet?

[badjuju]

Jace is a guy.

[whienot]

Jace doesn't carry a Jitte, doesn't aid Knight of the White Orchid or Wayfarer, or randomly "counter" a Wasteland.

I'll leave the full analysis to Forbiddian and pi4meterftw, but I would call it a no-go.

[Moonlight]

Hm, I would hate my parents if they would have named me Jace lol..
But ok, guy then :laugh:

Ive read in this threat that they didnt test it that much because it was to expensive on that moment..?

[pi4meterftw]

In the planeswalker build we also didn't play jace. It's much worse than fathom seer. With seer you're guaranteed 2 cards and a creature in play. With jace, you're only guaranteed 1 card, and that's only if you hedge your bets and pretty much doom yourself against any aggro deck to only get one card out of it. The free 1/3 of fathom seer relative to jace isn't just a +1 card. It's also immensely more tempo-oriented, or I should say much less tempo-costing.

Imagine your opponent has even just a kird ape, or heck a dark confidant. Or if he's aggro, that he just has one more creature than you do.

If you play fathom seer, you draw 2 cards and you neutralize the board position. You may also get an additional +1 if he tries to remove it, but everybody knows about this deck now so I don't suspect that this will continue to happen.

If you play jace you either:
Draw a card, it dies. 1UU for 2-3 life, 1:1 on cards.
Both players draw a card, it sticks around but to what benefit?

Against most decks, nogoyf is trying to trade down. This renders jace's first ability is not merely neutral, but actually actively terrible. We're the ones who have the capability of drawing an extra wasteland every turn with wayfarer, playing the fathom seer and flipping it, KOTWO etc.

Also, another important point is jace is almost an entire +1 average on tarmogoyf. Right now we keep him from 2/3-4/5, 3/4ish on average. That's where: they can't attack into grunt at 3/4, at 2/3 they probably shouldn't even attack into vial, and at 4/5 we can take it like 2-3 times and it's okay.

I mean it's a continuum effect, but I'm just pointing out the differences at each level:

At 2/3, tarmogoyf stays home
At 3/4, it attacks, but grunt eats it
At 4/5, we take it until we find swords/mom/jitte/grunt, and with grunt we need to take it again, or else we double block.

Imagine being 1 category higher every time.

EDIT: By the way, we'll call the deck Land Hax from now on. Might take some getting used to, though. Thanks to IBA.

The 1W guy is looking okay. He might make the list, but he's a small thing from being an obvious inclusion. If he were blue, got +0/+1, or +1/+0 we'd play him. Maybe if equipment starts to get rampant, we could play 1x manriki gusari or something.

[RexFTW]

Maybe if equipment starts to get rampant, we could play 1x manriki gusari or something.

Everyone knows jitte is the best equipment ever printed. This is probably the only "best of" you can say in magic where nobody will argue.

[Forbiddian]

Everyone knows jitte is the best equipment ever printed. This is probably the only "best of" you can say in magic where nobody will argue.

Uh, ok... nobody said it wasn't the best (and only you bothered to point out that it was the best).

But anyway, there might be other stuff being run now that there's an efficient equipment tutor.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

So is this thread getting renamed to Land Hax, or what?

[FieryBalrog]

Ive tested Jace Beleren in a few games now (tested alot last 2 weeks with the deck) and she is awesome!
Fathom seer wins you topdeck-war's.. but she does it even better..

3 mana is not to much of a big deal and she generates such a CA..
Im playing 3 seer / 1 jace now, might go 2/2..
Anyone tried her in the list yet?

You mean the old Jace? A bit slow for the deck and hard to defend...


Everyone knows jitte is the best equipment ever printed. This is probably the only "best of" you can say in magic where nobody will argue.

Skullclamp.

[RexFTW]

Skullclamp.


Skullclamp isn't equipment, its a banned combo draw engine :)

[Citrus-God]

There's this card from the new set:


Originally Posted by Salvation
Stoneforge Mystic 1W
Creature - Kor Artificer (rare)

When Stoneforge Mystic Enters the Battlefield, you may search your library for an equipment card, reveal it, and put it into your hand. If you do, shuffle your library.
1W, tap: Put an Equipment card from your hand onto the battlefield.

1/2


Obviously it costs 1W more to get a Jitte out on the table (1W to cast this, then 4 for the Jiquip), but I might pay 1W to get a free 1/2.

Also with Vial, the extra cost is basically meaningless, and he does provide some flexibility in that you can leave 2 untapped all the way to your opponent's endstep and then still be able to Jiquip with counter protection or with fewer than 4 land. Obviously they see the Jiquip coming so they can prepare, but I think this is worth me testing.

That card makes Jitte uncounterable and untouchable against cards like FoW and Spell Snare. So that 2nd ability is an obvious "I like." I like it's also a two drop as well. Works within the mana constriction of the deck. You could also run cards like SoFI or SoLS as well at this point.

[Forbiddian]

That card makes Jitte uncounterable and untouchable against cards like FoW and Spell Snare. So that 2nd ability is an obvious "I like." I like it's also a two drop as well. Works within the mana constriction of the deck. You could also run cards like SoFI or SoLS as well at this point.

Yeah, I'm not certain it will go in NoGoyf, but I already preordered some. My gut is telling me the price is going to go way up on these guys.

It might not, and I might not play them in NoGoyf at all, but they're selling for like $5-$10 a playset, and Stoneforge Mystic looks a hell of a lot better than a $2 rare to me, so I don't want to get stuck shelling out $20 a playset if this proves to be really good.

[HAVE HEART]

Yeah, I'm not certain it will go in NoGoyf, but I already preordered some. My gut is telling me the price is going to go way up on these guys.

It might not, and I might not play them in NoGoyf at all, but they're selling for like $5-$10 a playset, and Stoneforge Mystic looks a hell of a lot better than a $2 rare to me, so I don't want to get stuck shelling out $20 a playset if this proves to be really good.

I doubt it will see much increase in value, seeing as not that many decks rely heavily on equipment to win, but this is definitely a good card to playtest in one of the flexible slots. The only problem that I see is that it might not help the poor matchups enough to warrant its inclusion.

[pi4meterftw]

I doubt it will see much increase in value, seeing as not that many decks rely heavily on equipment to win, but this is definitely a good card to playtest in one of the flexible slots. The only problem that I see is that it might not help the poor matchups enough to warrant its inclusion.

But we're not looking to improve poor matchups. Let's say anything below 60% is a poor matchup. It is true that matchups below 60% tend to experience greater improvements given changes that help those matchups, because there are more situations in which they can help. However, we're just as happy to take a 1% increase in our match win percentage from beating goblins 10% more of the time as we are to beat zoo 10% more of the time. (assuming they are about equally distributed.)

In fact, given roughly equal match win expected value increases, we'd much rather widely vary our win distribution across individual decks. This is because it increases the variance in our deck's performance. As good as this deck is, it's not expected value 1st place at every tournament. Therefore, we're looking to "get lucky," so to speak. To end up on the right side of the distribution. We want the variance to increase so that this coveted point on the distribution is only a few fractions of a deviation out.

In layman speak, these ideas are approximated by:
we'd rather have 100% vs 70% of the meta, 0% vs 30% than 70% against the meta.

[HAVE HEART]

But we're not looking to improve poor matchups. Let's say anything below 60% is a poor matchup. It is true that matchups below 60% tend to experience greater improvements given changes that help those matchups, because there are more situations in which they can help. However, we're just as happy to take a 1% increase in our match win percentage from beating goblins 10% more of the time as we are to beat zoo 10% more of the time. (assuming they are about equally distributed.)

In fact, given roughly equal match win expected value increases, we'd much rather widely vary our win distribution across individual decks. This is because it increases the variance in our deck's performance. As good as this deck is, it's not expected value 1st place at every tournament. Therefore, we're looking to "get lucky," so to speak. To end up on the right side of the distribution. We want the variance to increase so that this coveted point on the distribution is only a few fractions of a deviation out.

It is impossible to increase percentages in one matchup without sacrificing percentages in another. This is where interpreting a metagame helps in making card-choices for a particular deck. For example, if one is not expecting any Dredge decks (Loam included), then running graveyard-hate in the sideboard would be wasting slots. It would definitely be nice if there were normally-distributed metagames, but there unfortunately are not any. There has to be a cutoff point where the increase in matchup percentages are unprofitable compared to the decreases incurred from making these changes (roughly diminishing returns).

I totally understand the argument; having a 100% matchup percentage against 50% of the field (and 0% against the other half) compared to a 50% matchup percentage against 100% of the field. Yet, it feels as if there is definitely a cutoff, which makes its present felt in all sideboards. Why run hate for a combo deck (if combo is that deck's bad matchup), if instead that person can just run eight Wrath of God (to combat further a presumed good aggro matchup)? Although, maybe there is something to that argument: people are focusing too much on shoring up poor matchups when there would be more value in just reinforcing good matchups. It would be an interesting thought to explore in some depth.

[Draener]

Have you guys considered Kor sky fisher? It let's you enable more wayfarer shenanagins if your ahead on land, or replay a knight of the white orchard, or save a grunt who has gotten too heafty of an upkeep cost. In addition, it allows for some combat tricks with vial to save anything targeted with removal. I, however, have no idea as to what you would remove.

[whienot]

It looks like Skyfisher would compete with Serra Avenger for deck space, which it doesn't do effectively. While it looks to have its applications, Skyfisher is borderline "danger of cool things."

[RexFTW]

I won 2 tournaments this weekend using this deck :) !!

Played against all the major archetypes except zoo and fish. Only match loss was to ANT.

[Forbiddian]

I won 2 tournaments this weekend using this deck :) !!

Played against all the major archetypes except zoo and fish. Only match loss was to ANT.

GG, feel free to post a tournament report, I like seeing how people do with this deck.

[RexFTW]

Here is a very brief tournament report.


R1 vs Red Goblins
Game 1 - I keep hand vial creatures tundra daze. Play vial. He plays vial. I forget to daze. (First round, not paying attention yet!) lose to his vial after he wastes my tundra.
G2- draw 3x forge tender vial jitte land. Think lol i cant lose. He scoops on turn 3.
G3- very close. I have 3 serra avengers at one point. he has about 6 goblins then goes ringleader-chieftain chieftain and goes all in attack. I survive at 1 and win the next turn!

1-0

R2 vs Threshold
Game 1 - Goyf + Goyf + Goyf + fire = lose.
Game 2 - savage vial draw. Win easily
Game 3 - long game with a lot of wastelanding. Win as the round goes to time.

2-0

R3 - ANT
Game 1 - ANT does its thing. Turn 1 duress, Turn 2 win.
Game 2 - Thorn slows him down enough to get there
Game 3 - goes into a topdeck war, he infernal tutors for ad nausem with 4 mana on board, i have jitte with him very low on life. He finds mana before I find a dude.

2-1

R4 - ID into top 8

round of 8 vs STAX
Game 1 - He mulls to 5. Turn 1 city of traitors, mox, crucible discarding wasteland. pretty good 5 card hand lol. but i have force. Keep wasting him and eventually win the game.
Game 2 - He opens with turn 1 city, mox, discard waste, cruicible of worlds AGAIN lol. I have force again. fetch a plains on my turn and start playing dudes. He plays 3x chokes (wtf in stacks???) which i let resolve and just play off of wasteland and plains to win the game no problem.

Round of 4 - vs ANT
Game 1 - Double force, long game where i draw all blue spells but no threats. Win
Game 2 - mull to 5, lose to xantid swarm
Game 3 - force him to try and go off through a thorn when i tutor for a second thorn. he fails. Win

Finals vs Dream Halls combo
Game 1 - he plays show and tell turn 2 with a lotus petal in case of daze. I force, he forces back, I force back. I win.
Game 2 - mull to 5. Lose quickly.
Game 3 - Keep a hand of wayfarer, 2x brainstorm, force and fetches. His deck takes a dump on him and he cant draw the right cards. I beat down for about 10 with weathered wayfarer holding a grip of 7 counterspells.


Funniest moment of the day:
me: plays Jotun Grunts
opponent: plays Tarmogoyf
"is he good?"
"uhhh no, hes a 1/2 for 2 mana"
"I mean are you going to counter him?"

[RexFTW]

What do you guys think about this dude instead of forge tender?


Kor Firewalker :w::w:
Creature - Kor Soldier
Protection from red
Whenever a player casts a red spell, you may gain 1 life.
2/2

The 2/2 body makes him substantially better blocker/attacker (esp vs goblins) and the lifegain seems REAL good vs zoo. But he does not have the damage prevention ability or stop lackey on t1. Also not good vs ichorid.

I think I will also try +1 Chill -1 Tormods in the board


Chill :1::u:
Enchantment
Red spells cost 2 more to cast.

Combined with wayfarer schenanigains this may make red spells unplayable!

[colo]

Burreton Forge-Tender is significantly more versatile than Kor Firewalker. I don't think the latter will see much play in Legacy, as Silver Knight's first strike is a force to be reckoned with (combined with equipment), too.

[Holiday]

I like this new name a lot better.

Is there any potential for Sea Drake to be run in this deck?

[Schronkor]

Here is a very brief tournament report.


R1 vs Red Goblins
Game 1 - I keep hand vial creatures tundra daze. Play vial. He plays vial. I forget to daze. (First round, not paying attention yet!) lose to his vial after he wastes my tundra.
G2- draw 3x forge tender vial jitte land. Think lol i cant lose. He scoops on turn 3.
G3- very close. I have 3 serra avengers at one point. he has about 6 goblins then goes ringleader-chieftain chieftain and goes all in attack. I survive at 1 and win the next turn!

1-0

R2 vs Threshold
Game 1 - Goyf + Goyf + Goyf + fire = lose.
Game 2 - savage vial draw. Win easily
Game 3 - long game with a lot of wastelanding. Win as the round goes to time.

2-0

R3 - ANT
Game 1 - ANT does its thing. Turn 1 duress, Turn 2 win.
Game 2 - Thorn slows him down enough to get there
Game 3 - goes into a topdeck war, he infernal tutors for ad nausem with 4 mana on board, i have jitte with him very low on life. He finds mana before I find a dude.

2-1

R4 - ID into top 8

round of 8 vs STAX
Game 1 - He mulls to 5. Turn 1 city of traitors, mox, crucible discarding wasteland. pretty good 5 card hand lol. but i have force. Keep wasting him and eventually win the game.
Game 2 - He opens with turn 1 city, mox, discard waste, cruicible of worlds AGAIN lol. I have force again. fetch a plains on my turn and start playing dudes. He plays 3x chokes (wtf in stacks???) which i let resolve and just play off of wasteland and plains to win the game no problem.

Round of 4 - vs ANT
Game 1 - Double force, long game where i draw all blue spells but no threats. Win
Game 2 - mull to 5, lose to xantid swarm
Game 3 - force him to try and go off through a thorn when i tutor for a second thorn. he fails. Win

Finals vs Dream Halls combo
Game 1 - he plays show and tell turn 2 with a lotus petal in case of daze. I force, he forces back, I force back. I win.
Game 2 - mull to 5. Lose quickly.
Game 3 - Keep a hand of wayfarer, 2x brainstorm, force and fetches. His deck takes a dump on him and he cant draw the right cards. I beat down for about 10 with weathered wayfarer holding a grip of 7 counterspells.


Funniest moment of the day:
me: plays Jotun Grunts
opponent: plays Tarmogoyf
"is he good?"
"uhhh no, hes a 1/2 for 2 mana"
"I mean are you going to counter him?"

Would you mind posting your decklist?

[RexFTW]

Original posters list

// Lands
2 [MI] Plains (3)
1 [MI] Island (4)
4 [B] Tundra
4 [ON] Flooded Strand
3 [TE] Wasteland
3 [ON] Windswept Heath

// Creatures
4 [CHP] Serra Avenger
4 [UL] Mother of Runes
4 [ON] Weathered Wayfarer
2 [ALA] Knight of the White Orchid
2 [CS] Jotun Grunt
4 [TSP] Fathom Seer

// Spells
3 [NE] Daze
2 [ZEN] Spell Pierce
4 [IA] Brainstorm
4 [AL] Force of Will
3 [DS] AEther Vial
4 [IA] Swords to Plowshares
3 [BOK] Umezawa's Jitte

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [CS] Jotun Grunt
SB: 1 [SHM] Wheel of Sun and Moon
SB: 4 [LRW] Burrenton Forge-Tender
SB: 3 [WL] Aura of Silence
SB: 2 [ARE] Enlightened Tutor
SB: 1 [TSB] Tormod's Crypt
SB: 1 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 [LRW] Thorn of Amethyst

[Herudaio]

What do you guys think of serenity as a sideboard cards?

My current SB (Main same as in first post with 4 wastelands)

1 Jotun Grunt
4 Burrenton Forge-Tender
1 Tormod's Crypt
2 Relic of Progenitus
2 Enlightened Tutor
1 Ghostly Prison
2 Serenity
2 Thorn of Ametyst

[Moonlight]

Blowing up your own vial and jitte seems great! :P
why would you play serenity over Aura of Silence?

[Forbiddian]

Moonlight is spot on, with this addendum:

Serenity doesn't stop storm combo. Aura is actually very significant in that MU, and pushes us from like 60-65% sideboard games to like 75-80%.

Aura of Silence functions as at least two timewalks against them, and sometimes even a lot more. You generally need a lock element to stick beforehand, but with a reasonable chance of success, a Storm combo player can answer one piece of hate unless you can pressure them quickly.

I guess storm combo is much less popular than it was, but considering Serenity vs. Aura is about a wash against most decks, much worse in situations where you need vial/jitte, and on top of this, it takes away three very powerful board elements from a tier 1 matchup: Aura all the way.


I like Ghostly Prison a lot. I have been testing -1 BFT, +1 Ghostly Prison recently.



Incidentally, the board I'm running now:

3x Burrenton Forge-Tender
3x Aura of Silence
1x Jotun Grunt

2x Enlightened Tutor
1x Thorn of Amethyst
1x Ethersworn Canonist
1x Wheel of Sun and Moon
1x Relic of Progenitus
1x Tormod's Crypt
1x Propaganda/Ghostly Prison (GP is better, but I don't have copies of it).




The toolbox is getting quite ridiculous considering that two Enlightened Tutors alone power it out, but the variety is very important. If you break them down, but more 1-ofs provide resistance to answers and more flexibility with tutors.

4x BFT --> 3x BFT + 1x Ghostly Prison. The main decks they hate are Ichorid/Goblins, but Ghostly Prison splash hates some other decks as well. I'd rather have BFT at least in the Goblins MU, but people haven't been playing Goblins much recently.

2x Thorn --> 1x Thorn + 1x Ethersworn Canonist. Obviously both are still good against Storm combo. EC isn't quite as good vs. Storm combo, but she provides another possible target and it's still hard to win through either. Hurkyl's Recall is the only answer to that combination. She is particularly strong against Enchantress and Elves, where Thorn does nothing and EC is a shutdown.

2x Relic --> 1x Relic + 1x Wheel of Sun and Moon. More flexibility, mainly, and a way to shut Ichorid down completely. Anything they have in play can't proc bridges. Any flashback cards can't get to the yard. And you can still burn their bridges. Basically it's horrible for them, and is a much more powerful hate spell than Crypt or Relic, and when you go through the whole board plan, there aren't many decks that want two Relic that wouldn't be approximately equally served with Relic + Wheel.

Wheel of Sun and Moon can also target yourself against Solidarity and Painter's Grind.


It's not as tested as the OP build, so I won't edit that one in just yet, but this board's been pretty solid recently and I think I'll be running this for a bit.

[AcidFiend]

Why did the name go back to UW Tempo?

The thread name was changed at Forbiddian's request. - zilla

[FoulQ]

Smennen defined it as UW Tempo in his article, because that is what starcity has assigned the deck name. I noticed Bardo stickied his article that explains the 50 most popular decks in legacy. For people simply looking for the thread, UW Tempo is unfortunately the name the deck has been assigned, because that is the name used in Menendian's article. That's just my best guess.

[RexFTW]

Perimeter Captain:w:
0/4
Creature - Human Soldier
Defender
Whenever a creature you control with defender blocks, you may gain 2 life

Seems like quite a strong defensive 1 drop. With multiples could make your brain explode. 2 perimeter captains block a goblin lackey, gain 8 life. 3 captains block a goblin lackey, gain 16 life.

[Forbiddian]

For the curious: UW Tempo is the name that was given to it by: Rashad, Wizards.com, SCG.com, and Menendian. Basically the powers that be are calling it UW Tempo regardless of what I do.

"Land Hax" is much more creative name, and if I were as witty as IBA, there maybe wouldn't be this problem. But the powers that be want to call it UW Tempo, and that's perfectly fine as long as UW Tempo only has one name so people know what you're talking about when you discuss the deck.


I also take back what I said about it. I often find myself using the words "tempo" and "mana tempi" when describing the strategy that this deck uses.

UW Tempo uses Tempo very well. Not like other decks maybe use Tempo (i.e. to dump their hand before their opponent can), but UW Tempo can take advantage of a tempo gap between itself and its opponent. It usually uses the additional tempo to generate card advantage or card quality advantage. Wayfarer every turn/chain waste every turn/be able to move Jitte around are very powerful effects that can only be used if you're even or ahead on tempo. A lot of the spells have a parenthetical kicker cost where they do something at a lower cost, but then do something better if you can pay more.

UW Tempo also doesn't generate tempo the same way other decks do (by playing a lot of free spells and/or cheap land destruction to get ahead on the land count or by playing extremely cheap beaters that have a higher than 2:1 power to cost ratio and forcing an early end to the game). UW Tempo generates tempo by playing more flexible spells that can fit multiple roles with just one investment. Instead of paying mana for a draw spell, then paying to cast a removal spell, UW Tempo does both at the same time by playing a blocker that also draws cards. Then later when the deck goes on the offensive, it doesn't need to invest any mana on offense, it just beats down.

It almost never will win a game by outtempoing a fast deck, but Tempo is a big part of UW Tempo's game plan. The best descriptive title might be "UW Tempo Control" but that's confusing to people glancing over the decklist who wouldn't see that the deck is really a control deck at heart.



For the curious: I liked the name "NoGoyf." It was much, much funnier 12 months ago when the deck was first created and people were adding Goyf to everything. Goblins with Goyf, Spanish Inquisition with Goyf. Team America had just come out and revolutionized deck design by being yet another deck that plays all the most overplayed cards in Legacy, except this time it mashes them all together into one deck and admits it by even selecting a name that jokes about how it did exactly that -- and still ended up winning and being the best deck in Legacy for a time.

Also keep in mind the last time either of us had played Legacy (or even Magic) was 2004 when Tog was dominant and Mana Drain was legal. We didn't have any firsthand experience watching the decks succumb to Tarmogoyf. We just came in when everyone else seemed resigned to their fate that whatever they were running -4 lands, -4 spells, +4 Tropical Island +4 Goyf was going to be good, and it was just like a reflex to do that and to demand others do that. You'd see a deck suggested and people shorthand the argument (much like people say, "Win more" to substitute for a real argument), people would say, "There's no Goyf."

And then we stumbled upon a deck that not only won without Goyf, but also would be WORSE with Goyf. Although the crack about Goyf is no longer true (Goyf is still played a lot, but not more than other powerful spells). It basically boils down to: the name NoGoyf is basically an inside joke and the setup to the punchline is about a year late, and I stopped finding it funny 11 months ago anyway.

[overseer1234]

OK so First I like to say that I really like this deck (and the fact that it doesn't play goyf).

But I just can't help to think about the fact that scroll rack would be so freaking good in this deck since you will (imho) always have lands in your hand that you could use to filter through your decks, while using knight, and wayfarer and fetches to shuffle everything away if you don't need it. Giving the deck an engine similar to the old parfait deck. (see drake could also work in that concept now that I think about it, but you don't want vial at 3 so... maybe not so good)

My apologies if this has already been mentioned, but I don't really see a reason not to try it out...

[Herudaio]

About Serenity:
Actually I was more worried about Stax and Enchantress MU than Combo. Double Stirling Grove and actually thers no way to get through.
Stax is similar, if no early vial its hard to get past trini + chalice.
Serenity solves both. And in both MU I side out jittes so.

[RexFTW]

Against enchantress and stax aura of silence is AMAZING!

double sterling grove + moat + runed halo is what they need to lock you out... and note that they only play 1 moat and 2 runed halo. The pay :2: more for every spell they play is absolutely backbreaking since they want to play a lot of 1 mana enchants. Wasteland kills sanctuary shutting them out of any large mana production as well. (ps thorn and ethersworn are very good here also.)

Stax is well... stax. Make sure you keep crucible and stax offline and you will eventually win. Be ready for armageddons. If you get wayfarer/waste going you can lock them out with their own 3 sphere sometimes lol!

[HPB_Eggo]

This may or not be a terrible suggestion, but what do people think about Kor Skyfisher?

A couple things he can do fairly well, on his own...

1) Bounce lands to allow for Weathered Wayfarer to do his tricks.
2) Bounce Fathom Seer to draw more cards.
3) Bounce Jotun Grun to reset upkeep costs.
4) He's a 2/3 flier for two, which isn't bad, especially with Jitte.

With Vial he, of course, becomes really good, as you can bounce in response to removal and the like.

I haven't done more than a couple days worth of actual testing with the ordinary decklist for this, so I'm not sure how well Skyfisher fits as of yet. For the moment, I'm going to test a 3/3 split between Skyfisher and Avenger, removing Knight of the White Orchid entirely.

[pi4meterftw]

The deck is mostly developed. While you're technically free to try new things, we don't suggest it after only "a couple days worth of actual testing" or thinking. There might be changes in the future, but they will (for obvious reasons) be predominantly from those who have thought about the deck.

It doesn't look like you paused to do much thinking, since this suggestion has been brought up at least once before in this thread. The thread is only 18 pages, and you don't even have to read the whole thing. (Search)

[Sevryn]

Maybe this is only funny to me, but in my head I call this deck "LOL WUT(empo)." It makes me giggle. LOL WUT?

[Tinefol]

I've sleeved up the deck, the only changes I've made are in sb

1 Aura of Silence -> 1 Aura Flux (there's a garaunteed Enchantress in my area)
1 Thorn of Amethyst -> 1 Ethersworn Canonist (I have no second Thorn).

Played 4 rounds of swiss today. Things went rather horrible.

Round 1. Goblins. He goes first, he gets vial, then proceeds to cycle two incenerators to kill off my mom and wayfarer. I die some turns later to Chieftain + SiegeGang. One mom and Avenger couldn't hold that much of an army.
In the second game he gets two vials, I manage to get 3 moms, burrenton, fathom seer, but lack offensive power, having to hold on defense, while he brings out his lords. I then get Avenger, but he Matrons in Wort (with bloody Fear), which hits me for 5 in a turn. I try to race, but I'm one damage short when he finishes me with yet another Siege Gang off Vial.
Bummer, I seem to never get Jitte.

Round 2. Aluren. G1: I control his land drops with wayfarer->wasteland, later drop Avenger, but he manages to chain a few brainstorms into fetchlands/basics, stick through second Intution (first was Pierced) for Aluren, topdeck his 4th land in time, and when I double Force the Aluren, he double Forces back. And of course goes off with one card, I don't have an STP or anything :/
Game 2. I drop 2nd turn Canonist, which he bounces, then tries to therapy it. I daze, try to recast it, but he Forces. Should've dazed the bounce spell :/ Two turns later he casts Aluren. I Force, he Forces back and goes off.
Apparently he gets his lonely FoWs more often than I do get my 9 counters :/
We played a couple of games afterwards, which I all won.
I've never seen Jitte.

Round 3. Bye. Damn

Round 4. ProBant with C/B Top. I get vial in, and lock him on 2 lands game one, beating with Serra Avenger and double Wayfarer. Even though he assembled C/B Top - it has never done anything.
Game2, he apparently keeps one lander, and after two brainstorms fails to find a second. I daze his Hierarch and waste the land. Two Avengers quickly seal the game.
Where the hell are Jittes?!

Overrall, I'm very happy with the deck, Its so refreshing after a 1.5 years of playing Landstill.

[pi4meterftw]

Are you calling a 2-1 finish horrible?

It's not stellar, but we only claimed 65-70% win percentage, and 2-1 falls in that range. It's not the most abysmal thing ever.

[Tinefol]

I actually went 1-2. Won only against ProBant. And the most horrible thing is that I've never seen jitte :)

[RexFTW]

To Tinefol,
The deck is very difficult to play. Just putting it together and playing with no practice will probably yield sub standard results. It also seems like you had some poor luck. Keep at it! Goblins is a very favorable match up and alluren seems like it should be excellent as well after the board.

Good Luck
Rex

[Forbiddian]

Tinefol -- Good job with the sideboard changes. I'm not sure what was in your meta, but those aren't bad cards or anything. In fact I think I'm going to default run EC over one Thorn.

Pretty rough luck, though. Look forward to a few weeks from now: the new set gives us Stoneforge Mystic. I'm pretty optimistic it will let us run "4" Jittes so stuff like this is even rarer. I've tested it a few times and it's been rock solid. I might even run three copies of it.

[pi4meterftw]

I played plenty of jitteless games but the lists I played against that day could not stand up to mom+avenger, or grunt+avenger, or mom+ grunt. Mom+swords stops most decks for quite a while, and then you can play a fathom seer to turn the tempo into card advantage. The deck operates without jitte. You probably didn't have jitte and then something else happened, like matchups, luck, mistakes, etc.

[overseer1234]

Don't know if this has already been discussed, but why not try scroll rack.

Seems like you will have a lot of land in your hand most of the time through seer and wayfarer (with built in shuffle).

So has this been tested before?

[pi4meterftw]

OK so First I like to say that I really like this deck (and the fact that it doesn't play goyf).

But I just can't help to think about the fact that scroll rack would be so freaking good in this deck since you will (imho) always have lands in your hand that you could use to filter through your decks, while using knight, and wayfarer and fetches to shuffle everything away if you don't need it. Giving the deck an engine similar to the old parfait deck. (see drake could also work in that concept now that I think about it, but you don't want vial at 3 so... maybe not so good)

My apologies if this has already been mentioned, but I don't really see a reason not to try it out...

You already mentioned this before previously in the thread.

[overseer1234]

Yeah, and nobody gave a response to that either, so some (useful) feedback would be appreciated...

[Forbiddian]

Yeah, and nobody gave a response to that either, so some (useful) feedback would be appreciated...

It costs a million, does what Brainstorm does at card disadvantage, and is only decent if we're mana flooded as hell or have been Wayfarering for extra land for like 5+ turns (cause the first couple go to getting Wastelands). And even then it's only remotely useful if we don't have a Brainstorm and to a lesser extent a shuffle effect, since we'll just use Brainstorm first because it isn't terrible, and then if we don't have a Brainstorm scroll rack provides almost no advantage at all in the long run without a shuffle effect (which probably isn't going to be as simple as Wayfarer because Scroll Rack costs a million and forces us to play more land out.

So it's going to be a blank 75% of the time when we have no dead cards or only one dead card, and the 25% of the time when it's not a blank, it's going to be terrible and basically a Brainstorm that costs 3 and draws one fewer card.


Feel free to playtest it, though :D.

[jeanbathez]

@Forbiddian :
Hi, i'am new to this deck and saw it on ggslive and liked it very much, I'am so tired of playing goyfs, even if he wins lot of games ;-)

So now I'am trading for my missing cards fot this deck (a lot of people : in my shop didn't even know what wayfarer does ;-), so stuff like avenger , mother and wayfarer aren't in my binder.
May i ask which cards do you want to cut and how many Stoneforge Mystics do you wanna play, i'am not familar with this deck and atm Stoneforger are very cheap ?

[Wargoos]

May i ask which cards do you want to cut and how many Stoneforge Mystics do you wanna play, i'am not familar with this deck and atm Stoneforger are very cheap ?

I don't know if stoneforger can replace anything in this deck but I would heavily advise you to pick up a playset stoneforgers as long as they are cheap. The price for them is so down that it's always a good deal to pick some up - also I am pretty sure they will rise in the near future.

[Forbiddian]

I'm testing from 1-3 Stoneforgers.

Either chopping a Knight, a Jitte and a Knight, or a Jitte and both Knights. It's not as well tested as the other cards were before they got the thumbs up, but Jeff and I pretty much agree that she looks very strong in this deck.

Also, when/if Wizards prints better equipment, she'll see some play in Standard. I can't imagine they don't print any decent EQ in the next set or two, and even if no equipment gets printed it's hard for this card to get much cheaper than it is.

[jeanbathez]

@EaD and Forbiddian : Thanks, will try to get a playset.

[RexFTW]

I have been testing mystics instead of knights and they have been quite good. 5 Jittes seems good!

[Jeff Kruchkow]

It seems like if you are gonna run more than 2 Stoneforge you need at least 2 Jitte. Running 4 Mystic and 1 Jitte just seems terribad.

[Forbiddian]

It seems like if you are gonna run more than 2 Stoneforge you need at least 2 Jitte. Running 4 Mystic and 1 Jitte just seems terribad.

Nobody is doing that, don't worry.

[RexFTW]

So the other day I heard "Basilisk Collar is the new Jitte." I LOLed.

[Otter]

So the other day I heard "Basilisk Collar is the new Jitte." I LOLed.

It definitely isn't as broken as Jitte, but on the other hand, it's pretty much the first decent piece of equipment that we've seen since Clamp, Sword of FI/LS, Warhammer, and Jitte. That does at least make it worthy of some notice, I think.

[Forbiddian]

It definitely isn't as broken as Jitte, but on the other hand, it's pretty much the first decent piece of equipment that we've seen since Clamp, Sword of FI/LS, Warhammer, and Jitte. That does at least make it worthy of some notice, I think.

So yeah, if we ever need to run equipments #21-24, then Basilisk Collar is SOOOO on top of my list.

[RexFTW]

It is nowhere near as good as those others IMO. Those others make any creature, even a birds of paradise very scarry. if they are active, you are winning.
Basilisk collar only makes creatures that are already scary even scarier. Basilisk collar on a 1/* is not winning you the game, its merely stalling. That is a BIG difference.

In collar's defense though it does cost :1: to play instead of :3:... but it still costs :2: to equip. Stoneforger makes the others cost :w::1: + instant speed though.

[Otter]

So yeah, if we ever need to run equipments #21-24, then Basilisk Collar is SOOOO on top of my list.

It's significantly less of a tempo investment than the other equipments (besides Jitte). They're more powerful, but also cost a lot more tempo if the creature gets blown away when you equip. Collar is pretty cheap for something that's going to stop a Goyf in its tracks immediately or help keep you out of burn range. I'll readily admit that I haven't tested it and I'm not saying it should go in the deck, but it's at least a solid pair of abilities on a cheap equipment, which isn't something that has shown up before. No need to be a dick at the mention of it.

[Forbiddian]

it's at least a solid pair of abilities on a cheap equipment, which isn't something that has shown up before....

http://sales.starcitygames.com/cardscans/MAGBOK/umezawas_jitte.jpg


On a more serious note, you even pointed out how Basilisk Collar is worse than 20 other equipments. (You missed Empyrial Plate, which is better than Loxodon Warhammer and certainly better than BC) Anyway, so long as Jitte + one other equipment is superior, then this will never see play, cause nobody wants more than about 6 equipment.

No, it's not even close to Legacy-playable. It has to be at least better than SoFI before people consider it and SoLS doesn't even see any play.

Basilisk Collar is just awful, probably even worse than Loxodon Warhammer, which has seen exactly 0 plays anywhere. But yeah, obviously people are going to make fun of you for suggesting it was worth talking about. This whole conversation even started with Rex laughing at a guy for calling it "The new Jitte." Maybe that was a good hint that Basilisk Collar is horrible?

[Otter]

The "besides Jitte" was kinda intended to cover the entire post. You wanted to make a snide remark about equips #21-24, so I pointed out that it has some advantages over all of the other decent, non-Jitte equipments by not being as terribly slow. Since it's not better than Jitte, yes, it probably means that it just loses out to just playing more copies of Jitte. You win or something, whatever makes you happy.

[RexFTW]

Unban skullclamp please ;)

Plate seems like it has amazing synergy with fathom seer/wayfarer. 10/10 avenger would be the lols!

I think the deck should be called "U/W Jitte" because, lets just be honest, about 70% of the decks wins are on the shoulders of Jitte :).

[pi4meterftw]

This is false. If jitte were that important, we'd definitely run 4.

[RexFTW]

Didn't you hear? we are running 5 now. Stoneforger mystics count as jittes in my book :)

[pi4meterftw]

In that case, we're running 4. The current list we're testing is -1 knight, -1 jitte, +2 stoneforger.

[RexFTW]

Jitte seems like a card that you want to see in every matchup. Combo is probably where it is worst, but it is still good. It kills xantid swarm or bob, and attack + double pump + swords your own guy can be an awesome play against combo. It also keeps your ethersworn out of tinderwall/pyroclasm territory!

It is legendary... but thats what Brainstorm is for!

[pi4meterftw]

I think you're underestimating the deck. Although your comment about brainstorm is a true trend, it really just justifies running like 3 jittes, maybe 4 now if 2 of them are the hedged bets that are stoneforge mystics.

I dunno, maybe learning to win without jitte, or to recognize that it can be done takes a long time, but I don't actually mentally even record things like: oh I didn't draw jitte. Because to me that's not a meaningful piece of data, since it doesn't really change any statistics in my gameplay.

I have, in the past, noticed when things like: wow no jitte, no swords, no mom, no FOW happened, though.

[RexFTW]

This deck always hits landfall... too bad none of the landfall cards are good enough :P.

[Phoenix Ignition]

If you do the math, or even thought about it for a second: If you try going off with your Bayou still in the deck, over a third of the time, your ass is going to fizzle.
Out of curiosity I tested this theory, using a 52 card deck with 2 lands still in it (taiga + bayou), as well as a 52 card deck with 1 Bayou left in it. It's not nearly 1/3, it's actually closer to 1/2 that the belcher player will win. Your assumption was that he played double Bayou (I don't think any belcher list does), and in that scenario there is a ~37% chance of him winning. With a single Bayou left in the deck, there is a ~53% chance of him winning. With both a Bayou and a Taiga there is a (if I'm doing my math correctly) ~45% chance of him winning. Nearly a coin flip. This takes into account hitting no lands in the top 10, then hitting a taiga in the next 10 = win, and hitting a Bayou in the second 10 = lose unless the Taiga comes before the Bayou. Not 1/3 chances of winning, much closer to 50%.

Feel free to correct my math, I was using Hypergeometric Distributions and took a couple day break in the middle of the problem.

Sorry, sort of off topic in terms of deck design, but the question of the math was bugging me for a while and I wanted to clear that up, and it wouldn't hurt to see a break from people advising you to run non-jitte equipment (hah).

Rest of your post for reference:

I don't really see how that's even surprisingly lucky or anything. It's just what happens 1/3rd of the time when your win condition is only successful 2/3rds of the time. I didn't see a decklist, for sure he at least had the one Bayou in his deck (making it only a 2/3rds chance to kill), but he might even be running a second land, making it around 50% to make a kill.

Belcher is way more likely to fizzle than, like Ad Nauseum with 8 life left. Or Ichorid dredging and missing a second dredger. Though both of those happen all the time, even to the point of banality. There's a reason why combo doesn't win every game it plays: There's a chance (actually a good chance) that it fizzles and the other guy wins regardless of what crap he drew. If you somehow ignore the 1/3rd chance and call it "one of the luckiest things [you've] heard" about, then your assumptions about all of combos matchups have to be horribly inflated.

I'm confused as to why you think it's both 1/3 and 1/2 chance to kill though. You say both the wrong and the right answer.

EDIT: After reading your post a few times you might be right, but I'll leave this here for math reference anyway. I think you mean the belcher player loses 1/3 of the time, and that something happening 1/3 of the time is not that far from normal, in which case you would be right.

[Forbiddian]

Out of curiosity I tested this theory, using a 52 card deck with 2 lands still in it (taiga + bayou), as well as a 52 card deck with 1 Bayou left in it. It's not nearly 1/3, it's actually closer to 1/2 that the belcher player will win. Your assumption was that he played double Bayou (I don't think any belcher list does), and in that scenario there is a ~37% chance of him winning. With a single Bayou left in the deck, there is a ~53% chance of him winning. With both a Bayou and a Taiga there is a (if I'm doing my math correctly) ~45% chance of him winning. Nearly a coin flip. This takes into account hitting no lands in the top 10, then hitting a taiga in the next 10 = win, and hitting a Bayou in the second 10 = lose unless the Taiga comes before the Bayou. Not 1/3 chances of winning, much closer to 50%.

Feel free to correct my math, I was using Hypergeometric Distributions and took a couple day break in the middle of the problem.

Sorry, sort of off topic in terms of deck design, but the question of the math was bugging me for a while and I wanted to clear that up, and it wouldn't hurt to see a break from people advising you to run non-jitte equipment (hah).

Rest of your post for reference:


I'm confused as to why you think it's both 1/3 and 1/2 chance to kill though. You say both the wrong and the right answer.

EDIT: After reading your post a few times you might be right, but I'll leave this here for math reference anyway. I think you mean the belcher player loses 1/3 of the time, and that something happening 1/3 of the time is not that far from normal, in which case you would be right.

1/3rd chance to fizzel DOES = 2/3rds chance to kill. I think you just misread my post.

Although the Belcher player has a chance to go off again (which is almost guaranteed since Bayou or Taiga is on the bottom) and you're lower on life, you have a chance to stop him in between those two events.

But there's a big shortcut: just calculate the probability that Bayou is in the Top 20 or that Taiga is in the top 10 and that Taiga is not in front of Bayou but past the top 10. The problem took me about 5 minutes, you can see the solution in the Belcher thread. I think it's like ~40%ish to fizzle if you have both lands and like 35% if you have Bayou alone and 15% if you have Taiga alone. Something like that.

[RexFTW]

Heh. Does all of this mean the best play is to force land grant? It also keeps them from duressing you or playing Dark Rit. I guess it depends on what they reveal.

[Vacrix]

RexFTW
Heh. Does all of this mean the best play is to force land grant? It also keeps them from duressing you or playing Dark Rit. I guess it depends on what they reveal.

It depends. Against R/G belcher, they really dont want to be playing land grant against you because then they are essentially telling you what to counter. If you have force and they have land grant then you should win. Against GOOD combo players like Pact SI pilots, you really have to know how the deck plays. Don't lump all belcher decks into one category. Some of them are just play out your opening 7. I dont play that version cause its loses too hard to force, it can't recover from a fizz as easily, and it doesn't win as often on the first turn.

[Forbiddian]

It depends. Against R/G belcher, they really dont want to be playing land grant against you because then they are essentially telling you what to counter. If you have force and they have land grant then you should win. Against GOOD combo players like Pact SI pilots, you really have to know how the deck plays. Don't lump all belcher decks into one category. Some of them are just play out your opening 7. I dont play that version cause its loses too hard to force, it can't recover from a fizz as easily, and it doesn't win as often on the first turn.

^ This guy is genius on combo, so basically w/e he says.

Minus the following: Belcher refers exclusively to the R/G/(B) version now. SI pact has more or less turned into Ad Nauseum of some kind, but a lot of people still play a lot of RGB.

There are 136 search results for Legacy decks maindecking Belcher.
There are 9 that contain Belcher and Tendrils of Agony, three of those aren't SI Pact lists, and one was in the 2-man tournament. Meaning I guess 5 results?
The most recent SI Pact list to get listed on Deckcheck was in November of last year and it was the ONLY one in 2009. The next-most-recent result was over a year before that.

Obviously some people still play it (and Vacrix with it is still pretty scary even with 4 years of better cards printed for everyone else), but "Belcher" refers to Coinflip.dec. Unfortunately.

[Vacrix]

^ This guy is genius on combo, so basically w/e he says.
:D I wouldnt quite call myself a combo genius but I'm pretty dam good with Pact SI, and I can pick up most combo decks with ease. It really is a scary deck though if you know what you are doing. Expect to see me playing it at the Ohio GP in august.


Vacrix with it is still pretty scary even with 4 years of better cards printed for everyone else
Actually the version you saw at Artifex was Land Grant SI, which is REALLY old school and that deck is definitely outdated tech. I've been playtesting Pact SI on MWS and in proxy since Breathweapon proposed it in april 2008 but I only recently bought the deck and its been amazing. Can't wait to take it to a tournament.


The most recent SI Pact list to get listed on Deckcheck was in November of last year and it was the ONLY one in 2009. The next-most-recent result was over a year before that.
Which is beautiful news to my ears. It means the deck is still relatively under the radar for most legacy players and that makes it even more dangerous.



How have the enlightened tutors been working out in the SB? And how well does it answer reanimator? The matchup looks difficult as they run relatively the same amount of countermagic (though builds vary) and they just need to resolve 1 reanimation target to win. Grunt looks strong in the matchup but without it I'd imagine you'd have trouble. I played a few games on MWS against Reanimator and it was definitely not an even matchup for me. Thoughts?

[Forbiddian]

How have the enlightened tutors been working out in the SB? And how well does it answer reanimator? The matchup looks difficult as they run relatively the same amount of countermagic (though builds vary) and they just need to resolve 1 reanimation target to win. Grunt looks strong in the matchup but without it I'd imagine you'd have trouble. I played a few games on MWS against Reanimator and it was definitely not an even matchup for me. Thoughts?

Enlightened Tutor has been a ridiculous bomb. It can't be stopped by discard if you have W, and then you get a GG bomb. It's strongest against combo decks, but also very good against Ichorid and Reanimator, especially since we now have Wheel of Sun and Moon as another tutor option (which is GG against Ichorid instead of just like a Crypt or something, which they can sometimes play through).


Reanimator is about an even split if they're very good and playing the correct deck. You have a sub-500 game 1 and then game 2 and game 3 you're very favored.

If they're retarded and make mistakes or run the non-self-discard variants, then your odds to win go way up. It's easier to handle the Entomb/Buried versions/Intuition versions than the Show and Tell versions.


It's because you run a *lot* of yard hate. But the 8 cards that you board in aren't even the main gameplan against Reanimator. The main gameplan is to stall them with countermagic and then win with board pressure or before they can assemble the combo (twice).

You might have noticed this, but the big problem with reanimator is that resolving the combo doesn't instantly win against most decks. The opponent has many turns to assemble any number of possible outs. Even if the counterwall doesn't stop him from reanimating Iona, Serra Avenger + Mother of Runes is still a win, and then Swords answers his Ensnaring Bridge guy if he's alone, so he usually needs to reanimate two guys to buy the win.

You should usually win the games where you get Vial+Mom, and then you can also win by Wheel of Sun and Moon --> GG, or by yard hate requiring them to come up with double copies of their combo through your countermagic, and sometimes if they have to use Reanimate, you can win with just a couple of weenies.

[Vacrix]

Actually I also play reanimator, and my build runs Stifle to deal with Crypt and other grave hate that activates. The only thing I really hate to see is Wheel but then again I also run SnT. I think competent reanimator players will often try to get Inkwell into play against you as it is likely unblockable if you have a tundra or an Island in play, in which you have to find a way to bounce your island(s) fast if MoM + avenger is gonna save you. Then again, most reanimator players I've encountered are not competent, which is why they play reanimator and not something better.

Also, I heard talk of switching out Court Hussar for Aven Mimeomancer. I see the updated list dropped it for something else already, but have you considered Mirror Entity. It makes your little guys so beefy. The only problems I could see with it are having enough mana to activate it and the deck often plays off very few land. Thoughts?

[Forbiddian]

Yes, Inkwell is sometimes a good animate target. If you can only get one target, it's probably your best bet, but it doesn't support a second animate target, so you can't win the game off getting the "enemies can't attack" guy out.

You'll often lose the footrace with just a 7/11, especially if you had to use Reanimate to get it onto the board.

To be successful with Inkwell, you need to get it down on turn 1 or 2, but even committing a turn 1 Entomb to finding Inkwell can cost you the game if the reanimate effect is stalled for a turn or 2 with countermagic or sloppy draws, and then you're getting a 7/11 ground-bound on like turn 4 instead of a 7/7 flying that locks us off a color.


We've tested the matchup quite a lot. I don't think against decks running Stifle as countermeasures. Does that even work for you, though?

You: Exhume.
Them: Crypt you.
You: Stifle.
Them: Daze your Exhume.

Against Reanimator, I've always seen them tread the fine line between losing the game to Daze and losing the game to playing too slowly. If you have to wait for an extra mana to play around Crypt, it pretty much did its job.

Although given I haven't tested vs. Stifle builds, so I'm not sure. I am sure that against the regular builds that run around, you should be winning with UW Tempo, and then splitting or slightly losing to Show and Tell builds.

[RexFTW]

I played legacy reanimator for some time. The deck should have a creature to reanimate against each deck type. Inkwell is the target vs decks with maze of ith or slow control decks.

the other targets are:
Sphinx of the steel wind vs agro
Iona vs Combo
Blazing Archon(or iona) vs Dredge
Red akroma vs white control
White Akroma general target.

[Tinefol]

Played 4 rounds of swiss again. The gods of magic are definitely against me.

Round1. Crappy MonoU (no nonbasic lands) Illusions/Donate Combo
I mull 2 no landers to 5 game one, the game ended many turns later. All cards I've seen throughout the game are nearly 10 lands (FLOOD), 2 Serra Avengers (countered) FoW, Daze, Daze, Brainstorm. His deck contains ton of counters, so my lonely Force couldn't disrupt him.
Game 2 I beat with 3 creatures, and he can't draw into his combo.
Game 3. I mull to 6, keep two lander (fetch + wasteland) and get stuck on that forever. He easily comboes me out.

Round2. ANT
Game1. I keep him on one land with Wayfarer, and beat down with Avenger.
Game2. I get Canonist, Avenger, beat him down for a while, drop Thorn, he bounces Thorn EOT, when Pacts Canonist, but he can't go for IGG (I have double daze and Spell Pierce in grave) and short of lethal Storm

Round3. B/w Midrage (4 nonbasic lands).
Game1. My 7: 5 lands + daze + Jotun Grunt. My 6: No lands. My 5: 3 lands, Vial, FoW. I almost get to do something off topdecks, but he Vindicates my Avenger, Vindicates Jitte and beats in with double Demigod of Revenge. I never get anyting to pitch for that FoW
Game2. My 7: 1 Wasteland + spells. 6 cards hand has one land, wayfarer and vial, so I keep. Long story short, I get hymned twice, he casts plague on humans, I get flooded again, and my fathom seer draws into two lands as well.

Round4. Enchantress (guess what - 4 nonbasic lands).
Game 1. Mull two no landers into 5: 3 lands + vial + Spell Pierce. He get 4 enchantress effects, and just overwhelms me.
Game 2. I manage to cast Aura Flux + Aura of Silence, and he's locked.
Game 3. My 7: Wasteland + 6 spells. My 6: Wasteland + 5 spells. My 5: 3 lands, Avenger, Fathom Seer. I get flooded again, getting nearly 12 lands between my graveyard and battlefield. The most agonizing play was when he had only single enchantress on table, casted his only card from hand - Sigil of Empty Throne, I had FoW + 2 lands in hand. and morphed Fathom Seer on table. I unmorph, return two Tundras, draw into Plains and Tundra. And topdeck Arid Mesa after that. Bummer.

So this is how the deck felt playing like: you mull no landers to 5 and then get horribly flooded (yeah, running only 17 lands) :(

[Forbiddian]

Wow, that sucks :-(. Hopefully your luck will turn around. I think you're due for not getting screwed over.



A while back, Jeff and I did the mulligan battery + approximations. Against an unknown opponent, you should mulligan 20-25% of your hands over a long period of time (i.e. no ridiculously bad luck streak like this and correct mulligans). Against a known opponent, that number varies. In an extremely good MU like Tempo Thresh, you should mulligan around 15% of the time, and then against Belcher you should mulligan the bottom 30% on the draw.

It's safe to say that you got extremely unlucky with 10 mulligans in 10 games.

I'll note that you were 4-0 when you didn't have to mulligan 0-2 on one mulligan, and 0-4 on double mulligan. So mulligans explain most of what happened.


I wonder if you need to buy new sleeves or need to change the way that you shuffle. In my first tournament, I went 1-2-1 with 8 mulligans in 10 games (winning every non-mulligan game, losing every mulligan to 5, and then like 1-2 or 1-3 or something on mulligans to 6). Anyway, afterward, I got new sleeves and have only had two mulligans in 30ish games since. Although my sleeves were HORRIBLE -- like it was two or three distinctly different brands and they were all circa 2002. Some of them curved down and others curved up, so they were almost glued together. I'll also note that I didn't mulligan any game 1s, possibly because I pile shuffled before every game 1 very diligently (like 5+ times) and then for games 2 and 3 I just got lazy or forgot I had to do that.

Anyway, since then, the deck's been back to its dominant self. Low mulligans, extremely high win percentage.

I'm not saying that shuffling or sleeves caused it for sure, but it seemed like shuffling was a big factor in how my deck mulliganned, so you might want to look into changing how you shuffle.

[pi4meterftw]

Yeah the statistics I think turned out to <15% mulligans off land, though, which seems to be the only kind he's complaining about.

[_erbs_]

Hello,
I've played against this deck on MWS and was surprised on how it performed. Looking over the list i was shocked that the deck ran only 17 lands..., I guess this is the recent discussion aswell. For my taste 17 lands is kinda low even if you have a low curve.

How about making it to 18 lands ? I think Stoneforge Mystic would be a nice addition to this deck as it nets a 2 for 1 card advantage. Maybe this has been posted in the past but why is that stifle is not part of this deck, it's a great tempo card.

[Citrus-God]

Because you only want to use Land Destruction for so long. This deck only wants to use LD long enough for it to have superior board position over the opponent. In essence, it's more of a control/aggro deck then it is a aggro/control deck. It's not like Tempo Thresh where it goes, "Wasteland, Wasteland, Stifle-Win." It uses Wastelands to break the symmetry gradually rather than suddenly, like Tempo Thresh. It basically wants to make Turn 20 look like Turn 4-7 when it has board dominance. Tempo Thresh just wants to win when the opponent is crippled.

I'm not sure if there's a better way to describe it, but look at this decklist, http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=19954. It uses Wastelands and Vindicates for the exact reasons UW Tempo uses it's Wastelands and Wayfarers. Both of those decks don't run Stifle because both decks value redundancy and versatility, and Stifle only hits fetchlands and other silly triggers both decks don't particularly care about.

[pi4meterftw]

Hello,
I've played against this deck on MWS and was surprised on how it performed. Looking over the list i was shocked that the deck ran only 17 lands..., I guess this is the recent discussion aswell. For my taste 17 lands is kinda low even if you have a low curve.

How about making it to 18 lands ? I think Stoneforge Mystic would be a nice addition to this deck as it nets a 2 for 1 card advantage. Maybe this has been posted in the past but why is that stifle is not part of this deck, it's a great tempo card.
A big advantage of our deck is that we get to run few lands. This is because we also have 3 vials, 4 wayfarers, 2 KOTWO, as well as 4 brainstorm if you're absolutely panicking.

(It's not good to toss a BS to find a land, but it's usually better than taking a mulligan.)

We used to have 18 land, 2 vial, but decided that the acceleration of vial was much better, as well as peripheral things like combat tricks, avoiding CB, trinisphere, chalice, etc.

As such, this deck enjoys great consistency in the way of early game avoidance of mana screws, as well as late game not getting flooded, because by the late game you've usually drawn say 20 cards, so about 6 of them are lands, and you've typically fetched about 4 times. (Between fetches and wayfarer.) At 36 cards with 7 lands remaining, you could probably win a topdeck war without this deck being blue.

[gustha]

The biggest issue of this deck is that it doesn't have any MD disenchant effects, which is VERY annoying... Maybe i'm just playing the deck wrong, but while this deck has lots of syinergies, I don't really feel it has the inevitability I can have, say, with landstill or a random cb.deck...

[Forbiddian]

Maybe this has been posted in the past but why is that stifle is not part of this deck, it's a great tempo card.

The deck's not about netting tempo in that sense. You'll notice how every game we played, you were able to get to 4cc and resolve spells like Pernicious Deed. But really those spells didn't matter, because by the time you got them out, I had 5+ cards in hand and you had 2-3 cards in hand and a life disadvantage playing back out onto a blank board.

It's not about the mana screw, it's about holding the opponent in a supressed state until we have a dominating position. Stifle is not card advantage, and requires us to stay untapped. Also, it competes for 1-drops against Weathered Wayfarer, Aether Vial, and Mother of Runes, all are far better spells.



The biggest issue of this deck is that it doesn't have any MD disenchant effects, which is VERY annoying... Maybe i'm just playing the deck wrong, but while this deck has lots of syinergies, I don't really feel it has the inevitability I can have, say, with landstill or a random cb.deck...

Yeah, against those decks, you typically play the aggro role (and have an extremely good matchup -- especially since Bob/Predator left CB.dec it's so much easier to own them). Well, against like Bant CB, you play a modified control role, but you beat down when you can.

The relevant thing is that you have inevitability against the decks that you can't beat in the aggro role. Landstill is very unprepared to handle a deck of many small creatures getting incremental card advantage and then the leftover shells are beating them down. 3 damage a turn is a ton of damage when your opponent is drawing half to a full card more than you are per turn, some/most of your hand is blanked because it costs more than you can get on the table, and any bombs you have, you need to resolve through an opponent who has more active countermagic than you do.

As long as each side has fewer than 4 lands on the table, UW Tempo is drawing 1+ cards per turn more than the opposition (while having far fewer lands in the deck, so it's getting more business), and all of the business spells are active whereas the other side has spells that cost 4+ that can't be used.


Eventually, both players will get through the wastelock / land disruption, and in that sense Landstill "has inevitability," but usually by then Landstill is down by 3-4+ cards and starting to hurt for life.

UW Tempo doesn't execute the aggro plan the same way that other decks do, it's more about netting card advantage during a time when the opponent is crippled (sometimes they're even self-crippled, if they just have a slow hand or just don't draw 4 lands which happens).


It's tough to call inevitability when the "aggro" deck has more draw power and ends up with more cards in hand by the endgame. Typically it means, "If I can just survive until endgame, I win," but the "endgame" against Landstill is typically something like this:

UW Tempo: 2 creatures on the table, 3 lands in play, Vial, Jitte with 2 counters. 7 cards in hand.
Landstill: 8 life, 4 lands in play, 3 cards in hand.

[gustha]

I don't really understand a single word you said... or maybe you misunderstood my remark... I'm not saying I'm playing this deck wrongly against random cb decks (which should be easy if you have vial or if they don't have an early cb out) or against landstill. I have also remarks on your thoughts on landstill: I personally play 5-6 basics, so getting through the wastelock is pretty simple, and EE@1+EE@2 totally ruin UW tempo. Lifeloss is not that matter in a deck which abuses of life points to go to the midgame. But that's another question.

I was saying that maybe I'm playing the deck overall wrong. Landstill has lots of synergies but doesn't scoop to a resolved dreadnought or even progenitus, has difficult MU but doesn't get submerged by aggroloam and the like, etc. Again, it's probably me, but I'm not really happy with this deck, which has overall pretty few solutions for a control decks as, say, landstill or another cb.deck.

[pi4meterftw]

Matt's comments generalize almost flawlessly. If a deck has a trick that for some reason you can't deal with, then the goal is to win before such a problem can materialize.

For example, this deck loses if vedalken shackles with 4 islands backed by countermagic (to stop the jitte+our counters) and a decent number of removal spells (to prevent a rush strategy) and like >4 or 5 life. You simply avoid this situation by winning first, and then you just eat the loss whenever it happens; board in aura g2-3.

This deck also loses g1 if your opponent sticks a humility+ a moat. (But not to either independently.) What I'm stating is always the minimum condition that I would concede.

I dunno, it takes pretty ridiculous conditions to be fulfilled to concede. It even takes pretty ridiculous conditions to be in like a desperate position, so I don't know how you keep losing to enchantments and artifacts.

Maybe your metagame has a lot of shackles, humilities, moats, etc.

[Forbiddian]

Don't scoop to shackles alone if your opponent is on short life.

Cast Angel, cast mom, one other creature, and race them. If they steal mom, you get Angel back and beat them down. If they steal Angel, use Mom to dodge the blocker and win. I've won a couple of games like that, probably almost as many as I've lost to shackles. Unless Shackles is cast very early with other cards backing it up, the game's not over.

It also helps that you control the Jitte even if your opponent jacks the creature.




@gustha: I don't see why my statements were particularly confusing. I understood what you meant, and I was giving a specific example of how strict "inevitability" is not necessary to have a very high percentage matchup, even if your deck seems too slow to win under the aggro role.

You mentioned specifically Dreadnought and Progenitus, and implied that a strength of Landstill is that it doesn't scoop to either (I guess because singleton Humility ftw?). Just for reference, I've had Natural Order --> Progenitus resolve against me three times in tournament play. I've lost one of those games and won two of them. I'm also 2-0 against resolved Dreadnoughts in tournament play when I don't have an answer.

That's not unusual, either. In the last few days I've had Progenitus resolve five times against me on MWS and I won three of those games. The two losses were both to a turn 3 Progenitus when I didn't have any countermagic. There were a number more times when I faced an early Natural Order but came up with the countermagic to win the game.

Obviously there are no "answers" in this deck to Progenitus. We don't run WoG or Anarchy or Diabolic Edict or anything. The only option is to kill the opponent before he can kill you. This strategy is extremely effective if you've been working toward that goal throughout the game (weakening the opponent over time, etc.).

With Landstill, you never get that option. You have to come up with the answer because you can't win until the late-late-late game. Landstill therefore needs a specific answer to every conceivable spell that could come up, and so it packs a specific answer to every conceivable spell that could come up. Your question seems to be, "How come UW Tempo doesn't do the same?"

With UW Tempo, you can race some threats and win the game before other threats or answers become relevant. It's not always Rocky I, sometimes you can just Rocky III to their face. If you're not skilled enough as a pilot to identify those situations, then you should definitely play something simpler like Landstill.

[Teumie]

Hi, I just built this deck and played it yesterday for the first time ...
What a fun deck! Never knew that such 'silly' creatures (especially fathom seer was regarded with some 'weirdness'). Anyway, I played against tempo faeries and a control-loam deck.
Hard times for this deck (i.e. when I lost): against the faerie deck: a resolved bitterblossom with some backup spells was hard ...against the loam deck: tabernacle (the land) is killing ... ended up 4-3 against faerie tempo and 3-2 against the loam deck, which was surprising (both for me and the opponents!)
Any ideas on how to play against those?

Note that we did not play with sideboard, could someone indicate on what to take out against specific matchups (what to put in is clear, but what to take out is so hard if you do not know the deck very well (after only one evening of testing ...))

Regarding stoneforge mystic: you bring in 2 and take out 1 jitte and 1 knight? which means you still have a single knight ... isn't that a bit random?
Any other creatures to fill this single spot? (or another equipment/spell pierce?)

Thanks for this cool deck!

[pi4meterftw]

Hi, I just built this deck and played it yesterday for the first time ...
What a fun deck! Never knew that such 'silly' creatures (especially fathom seer was regarded with some 'weirdness'). Anyway, I played against tempo faeries and a control-loam deck.
Hard times for this deck (i.e. when I lost): against the faerie deck: a resolved bitterblossom with some backup spells was hard ...against the loam deck: tabernacle (the land) is killing ... ended up 4-3 against faerie tempo and 3-2 against the loam deck, which was surprising (both for me and the opponents!)
Any ideas on how to play against those?

Note that we did not play with sideboard, could someone indicate on what to take out against specific matchups (what to put in is clear, but what to take out is so hard if you do not know the deck very well (after only one evening of testing ...))

Regarding stoneforge mystic: you bring in 2 and take out 1 jitte and 1 knight? which means you still have a single knight ... isn't that a bit random?
Any other creatures to fill this single spot? (or another equipment/spell pierce?)

Thanks for this cool deck!

Why do you not like the number 1? 1 possesses some very admirable properties. Observe:

n*1=1*n=n for all n in N
1^(-1)=1
1^n=1 for all n in N
1 is the only number in N without a nontrivial prime factorization
1 is the best number of KOTWO, and any other card with diminishing returns

1 is not bad. I don't see why people associate 1 with words like "bad" or "random."

I would run 60 1 ofs if wizards printed enough cards to support this strategy. I only run 4x because there's not enough good cards to run 60 1x at the optimal level.

Also, a complete guide for sideboarding has already been posted.

[Xtreme]

I have built this deck also and appreciate the thorough analystic point of view as well, but I have to agree with previous posters that it isn't very fun to take part of the discussion on this thread because of the non-supportive answers

[stuckpixel]

Is having a singleton knight more valuable than say, having an 18th land or a third mystic?

I understand that it's a solid card - but unless there's a specific reason to run singletons, wouldn't consistency be more valuable?

[pi4meterftw]

The point of my post is that 1 of is not a bad thing that you have to do anything about. 1 is just another number of cards you can run. In fact, 1 is probably the best number for many cards. But in reality, you're going to draw 7 cards, and then some of them are going to be one thing, and some of them another. Then you'll draw a card every turn, and some cards will be something and some cards another. Is there a reason why this form of "consistency" is valuable? It doesn't win more games, all it does is it lets you play fewer card names.

When I was little, and people told me to run 4x, I assumed it was because it was too difficult to learn how to play a deck with 1x in it, because even then I couldn't come up with a reason to play 4x everything. But it also seems like people's attitude is like:

4x has a pupose
3x has a purpose
2x has a purpose
0x has a purpose

But 1x? random.

The only question should be "Is having the next knight better than the next whatever" rather than is having the next SINGLETON knight better. Singleton doesn't matter. It's still maximizing utility all the same. In fact, it's obvious the first knight is the best, then it is diminishing returns.

I dunno, I hope when you say "nonsupportive answers" you aren't referring to me shooting down a concept like this because I really just don't know what else to say. I understand that "1x is bad" is a common misconception, but this is really the best I can do to explain it.

I consider myself to have been reasonably helpful as long as questions demonstrated even a few minute's worth of thought. We never claimed the 247th version is perfect or whatever (although the last 200 versions have been this +/-like 6 cards, and the last 100 this +/-2 cards, if you want to say the number is 247.)

But we'd like to claim that in 2 years of reasonably frequent testing, that we're going to be the ones who eventually reach the perfect list, and not some random guy who thought about it for a little while even.

I would have the same respect and assumption about someone else who started the deck this much before I did. If you think about it, comparing your understanding of the deck to mine is like calling me clinically retarded, not because you're clinically retarded, but because you're probably not 20 times smarter than I am.

[stuckpixel]

Well, look at the math man.

4x - 1 in 15
3x - 1 in 20
2x - 1 in 30
1x - 1 in 60
0x - never

Of the options, it's pretty clear that having 1 in 60 is the most 'random' of the listed probabilities.

Singletons are not _always_ bad, and honestly anyone blindly stating that they are would be fools - but normally singleton cards are singletons because you have a way to tutor/search for them (toolbox), or because you absolutely never want to see more than one a game.

Knight is neither of those.

[pi4meterftw]

I agree that under your definition of random this is true. By why is this kind of "random" bad?

[stuckpixel]

I didn't say that it was. In cases of toolboxes or cards you only every want one of in a game period, it's fine.

Knight isn't that type of card, which is why I posed my question about whether a singleton of him was worth losing consistancy elsewhere.

[Vacrix]

I asked a while back about Mirror Entity. I'm guessing its been ruled out because you don't to move vial to 3 counters? Despite that fact, its seems really strong, especially since you can swing with your dudes, then vial in entity before damage and pump all your guys. THAT seems like a pretty good singleton.

[stuckpixel]

The thing with Mirror Entity is that he only gets 'good' when you have a bunch of free mana available. This deck isn't really designed to have an abundance of mana.

But yeah, if the deck could support him, I'd agree that he'd be a solid singleton - never want more than one, but can be game-changing when you draw him.

[gustha]

With Landstill, you never get that option. You have to come up with the answer because you can't win until the late-late-late game. Landstill therefore needs a specific answer to every conceivable spell that could come up, and so it packs a specific answer to every conceivable spell that could come up. Your question seems to be, "How come UW Tempo doesn't do the same?"

With UW Tempo, you can race some threats and win the game before other threats or answers become relevant. It's not always Rocky I, sometimes you can just Rocky III to their face. If you're not skilled enough as a pilot to identify those situations, then you should definitely play something simpler like Landstill.
Sorry but this reply is:
1) a bit silly: landstill is not "a simpler deck", though on this point we may diverge and in fact we do
2) a lot arrogant: this is a strategy topic. I mean, this deck is not self-evident or autopiloting. If I'm not skilled as a player and this could be true, maybe you should give me some insight on the strategy or on better ways to pilot it, since you claim to win so many game on MWS, instead of just saying "you can do it, if you can't you're a noob".

Now, it's true I didn't got in the pilosophy of the deck yet. Though, if I'm still testing the deck, this probably should mean I have some positive considerations on it. And true again, I'm very close-minded on landstill's views for a control deck. I'm then asking for better ways to play the deck, for the way I play it it's evidently not right. begginning with the use of wayfarer and fathom seer, card which I really don't uderstand besides having many synergies on paper. I'm not saying this deck is shit, I'm saying the deck is good but I can't get into the philosophy deeply because of my landstill experience, and I'm asking you and other guys to help me understand better, since you tested and tested. peace.

[Forbiddian]

The thing with Mirror Entity is that he only gets 'good' when you have a bunch of free mana available. This deck isn't really designed to have an abundance of mana.

But yeah, if the deck could support him, I'd agree that he'd be a solid singleton - never want more than one, but can be game-changing when you draw him.

He's terrible.

Too slow for combo (costs 3, does nothing until the next turn, still requires a tap-down, also it's tough to get enough creatures on the table to be fatal early, since at least Serra Avenger, Fathom Seer, and Jotun Grunt are very hard to cast early), requires too many creatures out to be good against control (if your board is Mom, Mirror Entity, Wayfarer, and you have four land out, what do you want to do and how would Mirror Entitiy be better than anything else in the deck? And that's basically an ideal situation for Mirror Entity, against control they might wipe your board and then you're playing a Frozen Shade), and not defensive against aggro/too costly on tempo (cast him, untap, then you can activate it, so you give up a full attack step trying to get it out).

If you want a beater like Mirror Entity, then there's this 1UW that turns your guys into 3/1 flyers that seems strictly better, but that card is still not as good as the rest of the spells in the deck.


Mirror Entity is basically a wannabe Jitte. You're trying to turn a small body into a big body, but Jitte does this a thousand times better than Mirror Entity or even the feather engine.

[stuckpixel]

He's terrible.

Mirror Entity is basically a wannabe Jitte. You're trying to turn a small body into a big body, but Jitte does this a thousand times better than Mirror Entity or even the feather engine.

The brief discussion of Mirror Entity took place in magical christmas land where nogoyf actually wanted to have a bunch of land out. I never said he was a good fit for the deck - in fact I said just the opposite, that the deck couldn't support him. Beyond that, the deck wouldn't want to play him even if it had the manabase.

What I was trying to convey, is that this is they _type_ of card that would be a singleton traditionally - bad in multiples, but if he shows up as a singleton, he can swing the game in the right conditions.

[Teumie]

I didn't mean random was bad, I didn't mean that the developers of this deck don't know what they are talking about, I only meant that 1 knight is RANDOM...
If I play a card, I normally play it on purpose, mostly because I want to play it, or I need it in my graveyard, or whatever reason. Just playing one card, which you cannot tutor results in 1 chance in 60 of drawing that card ... that's all I meant
Also, stating that the testers of this deck have tested it for 2 years is correct, but they CANNOT have been testing the new setup with stoneforge mystic and only 1 knight for 2 years ...

anyway, I'm a huge fan of the deck, but I really don't like the way some people react on posts.
Just because someone has not been on the source for 10 years does not mean he doesn't play magic (competitively) for 10 years.

[Forbiddian]

Sorry but this reply is:
1) a bit silly: landstill is not "a simpler deck", though on this point we may diverge and in fact we do
2) a lot arrogant: this is a strategy topic. I mean, this deck is not self-evident or autopiloting. If I'm not skilled as a player and this could be true, maybe you should give me some insight on the strategy or on better ways to pilot it, since you claim to win so many game on MWS, instead of just saying "you can do it, if you can't you're a noob".

Now, it's true I didn't got in the pilosophy of the deck yet. Though, if I'm still testing the deck, this probably should mean I have some positive considerations on it. And true again, I'm very close-minded on landstill's views for a control deck. I'm then asking for better ways to play the deck, for the way I play it it's evidently not right. begginning with the use of wayfarer and fathom seer, card which I really don't uderstand besides having many synergies on paper. I'm not saying this deck is shit, I'm saying the deck is good but I can't get into the philosophy deeply because of my landstill experience, and I'm asking you and other guys to help me understand better, since you tested and tested. peace.

Well, next week is Valentine's Day/PT SD, but I have a three day weekend. I dunno sometime next week or so, I'll try to release an annotated video series on youtube demonstrating how to play the deck, probably recorded MWS games that I talk over explaining situations and the correct plays to make. I've been kinda meaning to do it for a while.

[gustha]

Would be much appreciated, thanks :)

[stuckpixel]

Agreed. I believe I have a pretty solid grasp on how things work but hearing it from the actual designers would be awesome.

[Teumie]

indeed, just hope the other decks don't discover all UW Tempo's tech :o)
(I don't think there are a lot (even some?) of UW Tempo players around)

[jeanbathez]

Well, next week is Valentine's Day/PT SD, but I have a three day weekend. I dunno sometime next week or so, I'll try to release an annotated video series on youtube demonstrating how to play the deck, probably recorded MWS games that I talk over explaining situations and the correct plays to make. I've been kinda meaning to do it for a while.

That would be very interesting, thanks :-)

[Xtreme]

A video would certainly be supportive, thanks for that

[IsThisACatInAHat?]

I didn't mean random was bad, I didn't mean that the developers of this deck don't know what they are talking about, I only meant that 1 knight is RANDOM...
If I play a card, I normally play it on purpose, mostly because I want to play it, or I need it in my graveyard, or whatever reason. Just playing one card, which you cannot tutor results in 1 chance in 60 of drawing that card ... that's all I meant
Also, stating that the testers of this deck have tested it for 2 years is correct, but they CANNOT have been testing the new setup with stoneforge mystic and only 1 knight for 2 years ...

anyway, I'm a huge fan of the deck, but I really don't like the way some people react on posts.
Just because someone has not been on the source for 10 years does not mean he doesn't play magic (competitively) for 10 years.
Consider this: competing for the knight's slot are a handful of alternatives, all of which were suggested and addressed.

An 18th land sounds good because that's how much other mana-light decks run like TThresh. You already have 4 wayfarers, 4 brainstorms and 3 vials, all of which cost only 1 and either tutor for or replace mana. The 18th, then, would lead to higher incidence of mana flood and is thus undesirable.

Another Jitte or Mystic sounds good because you want to see one every game if possible. If they're interchangeable (i.e. Mystic finds Jitte and Jitte is Jitte), then the deck runs 4. Mystic will even find you a new one if the old one's gripped, but since it's legendary, 4 copies is already pushing it. It remains to be seen if 2/2 is the right split for these cards though, as the creators have mentioned.

A 4th Daze or 3rd Spell Pierce sounds good because either strengthens your counterspell suite. But Daze is dead late game and Spell Pierce probably is too and you've already got 5 between them. Both are worse when your opponent knows you have them (EV of opponent playing around it is almost definitely < EV of opponent running into it unexpectedly) and neither is a particularly useful topdeck.

Those are probably the most relevant options for Knight's slot, but then consider what you get from Knight: he's an extra body for Jitte, can be vialed in @2 like most of the rest of your threats and has his own land-tutoring ability. It's not that you especially want or need to see him or that it matters whether you do or not, but he's almost always relevant when he does come up and he's better than the alternatives. Maybe an extra one in the board like Parcher suggested would be nice, but just because he's a singleton doesn't make him "bad" or "random." After all, the difference between 0 and 1 is the largest % increase in incidence for any given card. None of the above is new information, it's all been mentioned by the deck's creators at great length earlier in this thread, but just because the same question was asked and answered yesterday doesn't mean the answer will change today.

[colo]

I sleeved the deck half a week ago after testing it online for in about 20 games, and took it to its first tournament in my hands today. I went 1-1-2, and will follow up with a short matchup report and a few impressions. I hope this is considered at least marginally useful, if you don't agree, please feel free to just skip this post's content.

We were 20+ people, due to many players dropping after round 3 the tournament didn't see a round #5 though. Considering rating as a measure for playskill, with ~1730 Eternal I'm at the lower end of the people who have a marginal clue of how to play this game and format around here. I've been playing Death and Taxes for a few months now, and decided to try something new that still didn't seem _completely_ unfamiliar

First match was versus a rather janky, non-legacy soldier aggro without vial. Many exalted critters, and creature-bolstering enchantments like that new Crusade that only boosts its controller's creatures (pardon my ignorance; I still consider all cards printed past 1999 as "new"). As he began playing creatures game 1, I was anxious if NoGoyf would actually hold up - it's not uncommon for a deck that's designed to beat established top-tier decks to be crushed by casual jank-aggro in my experience. He didn't run any nonbasics, so my first turn Wayfarer wasn't as tech as it should have been. I quickly drew into Umezawa's Jitte and Serra Avenger though, and managed to fend off an Oblivion Ring on Jitte with Spell Pierce (awesome card, it really shined for me today on numerous occasions!). That made a rather quickly decided game one.
Game two was decidedly longer, as he managed to O-Ring a Jitte and an Æther Vial of mine. My crew consisted of Mother of Runes, a Wayfarer and (in the end) two Serra Avengers, and with the help of Mother (who saw a Path to Exile two turns before I won), I managed to fend off his single, exalted 7/8 (or something like that) attacker for quite some time - long enough, as it turned out in the end.

For the second match I was up against UGw-CounterTop-Goyf. Being on the play, I really, really crushed my opponent game 1 - he immediately got what was going on when my first turn wayfarer hit the board, and he fetched for basics (Islands, mostly) whenever he could afford. Avenger and a Jotun Grunt staring down at his 7 life with two lands and no other permanents in play on his side made him concede around turn 10 or so. By that time, I hadn't seen anything non-blue in his deck, and couldn't decide on what he could actually be running. I didn't board anything, and we went on to game 2. He won that one due to Dreadnought+Trickbind which I could not deal with, after having used up 3 of my Swords to Plowshares on other threats he was running. Game 3 was cruel, since I had severe, real card advantage in terms of quantity, yet all I managed to have in hand or draw were either Spell Pierce, Daze or land for six consecutive turns of the game, while he beat my face with a 3/4 Tarmogoyf that I didn't find an answer to. That's why they call it a game of chance, I suppose :)

For my third match, I was paired against Bant Survial fueled by the Loyal Retainers/Iona-combo. The match actually ended in a draw in its extra-turns. When playtesting online, I always had problems winning against Bant (the aggro-variant though!). I missed a full playset of Jotun Grunt during that match, my opponent (who's running Grunts due to its Genesis-like effect) had one game 1 and game 2, and boy, did they give me trouble. Of course, Rhox War Monk and Tarmogoyf were problematic as well. I lost the first game, but managed to turn the tide game 2 when a Jitte-charged Serra Avenger came online, with Mother of Runes as backup and neutralizing a double-Hierarch-exalted Rhox War Monk. Game three quickly saw us over time, and while he actually got Survival online this time (I managed to not let him do that games one and two), getting his Loyal Retainers into play in the third of five extra-turns wasn't enough. I'd have lost this game and match if it hadn't been for that however.

The fourth and final match was against Bant Survival with Natural Order+Progenitus. My opponent had watched some of my earlier games and brought enough basic lands to the table to render my mana denial plan useless. I was hit kinda off-guard by the NOProg-part of his list game one, and not even my trustworthy Serra Avenger carrying Umezawa's Jitte could save me from that two turn clock of his. I decided not to let that happen the next game, and carried it home on the shoulders of two Avengers, a Mother of Runes and a Jotun Grunt munching both our graveyards. FoW took care of an attempt at getting Progenitus into play. Game 3 was rather harsh once more, and NoGoyf once again decided to let me down in a topdeck war. Not even a flipped-up Fathom Seer and a really thinned deck at the time (I had about 3 lands or so left in my library, all fetches) would grant me the much needed solution for a 4/5 Tarmogoyf and a Rhox War Monk widening the gap in life totals between us, and my sole Avenger couldn't do anything but watch me lose in the end. I ended up with something like 3 land, Daze, Spell Pierce and FoW in hand, and 0 life left.

Lessons learned:
Playing this deck is original and truly fun. I really like how it plays, and I guess I'll keep playing it at least for the next tournaments to come. I def. made some gross play mistakes today (and hope to have identified at least some of them ;)), and I firmly believe that I can do a lot better with this deck than how I did today once I know the ins and outs of it somewhat more. Proper sideboarding seems even more of a key factor than with other decks, and the versatility of the suggested sideboard in this thread is tough to master.
When sideboarding, I often grabbed that third Jotun Grunt that NoGoyf's creators suggested in the board, and took out a copy of Knight of the White Orchid. I'm pretty positive I'll be going to 3 or maybe even 4 Grunts mainboard. While Knight is nice when yielding Plains from the library (and even nicer with Jitte), it doesn't do a lot on its own, while Grunt is serious business against a lot of established Legacy decks.
I consider Progenitus a problem. Maybe meekstone isn't that bad as a tutorable one-of in the sideboard. This could also help stop Iona naming white, if she really hits the battlefield.

[pi4meterftw]

There seem to be a plethora of horror stories about mana floods, and not so many about mana screws.

In my poorest finish ever with the deck, which was 2-2, I also ate a few floods.

Unfortunately, it's simply impractical to cut any more lands. We shall forever ere on the side of floods. Especially since people play wastelands and w/e else.

If you're interested, I will play some games with me on UW tempo and you on whatever you please, and you can observe plays and ask questions. I'll leave the video shooting to Matt, though.

By the way, for those who are interested, I used to be a landstill player. This is particularly directed at the claim that landstill is not simpler than UW tempo. Landstill was an incredibly easy deck to play, with essentially no real decisions to be made during play. Maybe I just got so used to playing control, but the actual issue seems to be that you don't have to "decide" if you're going to answer something, or how you'll answer something. You always answer everything, and then there's a clear best card suited for the given situation.

My landstill days took me from 1600 rating up to 1810 ish, and then the latest tournament in which I played bridged the remaining difference between 1810 and 1844.

Lastly, I'll note that unless your metagame is extremely weird (say 100% tempo thresh) I don't recommend more grunts maindeck.

We're running 2 because it's the best in most reasonable metagames. 1 is kind of a bad idea, and we used to run 3 so I won't say it's retarded to run 3, but 4 is absolutely a mistake. I generally hope you see Matt and I as smart enough that our numbers are about right, unless of course you play in an incredibly awkward metagame.

[Forbiddian]

Yeah, I've released some other demo videos on other stuff. I used to do some work on Starcraft and Age of Mythology, and hopefully the same software is still available (or improved-upon, ideally).

I'll try to keep it entertaining and whatever else, although I'll need some sparring partners to shoot footage (sparring partners who don't totally suck so that the games are close).

I've got some scenes in my head that I want to shoot. Situations that come up over and over again that I think most people are fucking up (based on what they say here, the fact that it's complicated, etc.). So I think at least the first set of footage that I shoot is mainly going to focus on, "What should I do in this situation?"-type plays and I won't shoot full games until later. Basically tactical decisions and little tricks you can use to get ahead.

I don't know if that makes sense, I'll try to have something out by next weekend so you can see what I'm talking about.

After I've gone through the individual cards, I can take requests for matchups that people want to see analyzed. People seem to have trouble with Counterbalance-type decks and in general decks where UW Tempo plays aggro or a weird semi-hybrid where you play control for the first few turns and then aggro from then on, with the ability to switch back and forth depending on land counts and cards in hand. I always just play the tactically-best decision. Rarely ever in a game do I think "who's the aggro/who's the control?" When it's relevant is not in a game, especially in Legacy where even the fastest combo deck can have to play defensive draw+go and even the most ponderous control deck can draw 4 Tarmogoyfs and go beatdown.

So it makes me think that the real problem is not knowing some important tricks.


@colo: Nice tournament report.

You mentioned wanting to add more Grunts. Definitely third grunt MD is a powerful option (replaced in the board with e.g. Energy Flux or Propaganda/GP), and you identified the viable cut. I recommend not making the change until you're more familiar with how he is in the different matchups, though.

The decks you went up against were all Goyf decks and a jank size-based midrange deck. Grunt obviously shines against enemy Tarmogoyfs where even if he just lasts 2 turns, he did the damage by moving the Artifacts, Enchantments, and Sorceries under, returning Goyf to 3/4 or less, and removing their Threshold. Also the U-based Goyf decks typically run a lot of cantrips and cheap spells, filling the yard with Grunt food.

He's also extremely good against Zoo for similar reasons: he eats all of their creatures, takes two removal to dump, and shuts down Goyf and Lavamancer. Zoo also dumps a lot of cards into the yard early, so his drawback isn't too bad.

The reason why we cut him down to 2 copies is the existence of matchups like Goblins and particularly Merfolk. Merfolk never puts stuff in the yard, and never uses the graveyard. Against decks that don't fill up the yard, it's harder to get a third turn out of him and he really goes downhill.

Depending on the meta, third MD Grunt can be justified easily, but note that he's not great in a lot of matchups even as a singleton, and drawing double of him in virtually any matchup isn't good.

[Teumie]

intersting thoughts! I can't wait for the video :o)

I think the most important part of the video's will be the 'specific' situations. I guess that most players who are 'decent' players, will make the right decisions in 'regular' situations, but the bizar/weird situations where you maybe have to make a weird decision (just because it fits the deck's strategy better) can be really game turning (or game losing if you don't make those decisions).

Thanks!

[stuckpixel]

Just played a little 4-rounder last night, went 2-1-1.

Round 1 - Played some janky W/B Pestilence deck. Both games played out pretty much the same - whittle down life with mom+dork until I can stick a jitte and destroy things. 2-0

Round 2 - Played against Eva Green with a white splash. Game one was a pretty epic battle back and forth, ultimately I couldn't do anything about two tombstalkers (only had 1 mom+serra avenger to block with). Game two, he mulls to 5, keeps a one land hand, I drop a waste, followed by an avenger + jitte, he scoops. Game three, he's able to stick a fairly early tombstalker. I'm able to keep him off lands (burning all 3 wastes), but I don't topdeck the brainstorm or swords I need to deal with his threat within the 4 turns I needed it. In retrospect, I should have mulled quite a bit more aggressively, until I either had some dig or a swords. It also seems like this would be one of the more rough matchups, as the white splash eva runs 12 land destruction effects (sinkholes + vindicate + wasteland). 1-2

Round 3 - Goblins. This is filled with a ridiculous number of play mistakes by me. I do win game one, despite me ignoring the aether vial I have in play to hard cast dudes. Game two, it's a fairly close match, but I make quite a few key mistakes that lose it for me - the two biggest being swords-ing a piledriver after his +2/+0 ability trigger rather than before, and using my jitte counters way too soon (nerfing piledrivers on spot instead of saving them up to nerf his goblin chiefton - had two BFTs out. Not a pretty game. Game 3, we start with about 2-3 minutes left in round time - and as expected, we end up drawing. I really feel like with more experience (read: less play mistakes), this would have easily been in my favor and I could have won game two.

Round 4 - Opponent concedes 2-0 to me before even sitting down. While I don't mind the free win, I generally go out to a shop to _play_ cards, but as it is a wed night, I can't really blame the guy if he wants to get going home.

I ran with the singleton Knight in my build last night, defering to the deckbuilders. I'll probably stick with the standard build until I get a bit more experience under my belt - I can definately see the merit of him, but running a third stoneforge is also pretty attractive too.

The cool thing with this deck though is that I never really felt out of any game, and it certainly seems like this deck is very, very solid.

[pi4meterftw]

You know that's funny... I used to always compulsively use my jitte counters for some irrational fear of split second spells, and Matt would always laugh at me as I proceeded to lose to his 3/3 that brings things back, or an SGC where now I can never get jitte counters again etc. You learn not to do that.

On the flip side, sometimes I get kgripped and waste more than 2 jitte counters.

For a while I thought that decks running tombstalker were reasonably threatening because they might just draw more TS than you have swords/jitte. Now you also have mom+avenger, and an extra jitte relative to our previous setup, so I don't think it'll be an issue. I think you were really unlucky to lose twice to that trick. Especially once when you already had one answer, and he had two tombstalkers, and you were able to counter neither?

I'm surprised he got the 10+ cards in graveyard needed to do this before you got a grunt as well. I generally don't think of eva green as one of our great matchups because they can still stochastically win with land destruction spells (Any deck deciding the game rather early has the opportunity to fluctuate to the winning side more than decks that play a slower strategy.)

but I wouldn't put eva green at worse than 55-60%.

[stuckpixel]

Yeah, I put the loss to Eva at me not mulling like I should have. I didn't see more than one swords the entire matchup, and the two games I lost I was fighting through land D and discard. I didn't see a single Grunt - but then again I'm pretty sure I didn't side correctly either - ah well. I'll have to do my homework more for next week.

It was very close though - an enjoyable match and I learned a few things, so all in all, good.

I'm happy I built the deck, I can see it doing very well against a lot of the field - and it's fun to play as well.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Played the deck in a tourney today to get some more knowledge on it for a friend who wants to get into legacy somewhat cheaply (two colors makes this manageable). I top 8ed and lost to mono red goblins of all things. I scraped by a win against combo elves and lost to Aggro Loam tonight which are notable. I got the aggro loam guy down to 2 and 3 in games 1 and 2 before he stabilized in the mid game where I lost to 3 land in a row game 1 and 4 land in a row game 2.

My list is not the perfect gem that the twins are running (which is obviously why I lost lol).


// Lands
3 Windswept Heath
4 Flooded Strand
4 Tundra
3 Wasteland
2 Plains
1 Island

// Creatures
2 Jotun Grunt
4 Fathom Seer
4 Mother of Runes
4 Serra Avenger
4 Weathered Wayfarer
4 Stoneforge Mystic

// Spells
4 Brainstorm
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Force of Will
2 Umezawa's Jitte
3 Daze
3 AEther Vial
1 Basilisk Collar

// Sideboard
SB: 1 Jotun Grunt
SB: 3 Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 Thorn of Amethyst
SB: 4 Burrenton Forge-Tender
SB: 3 Aura of Silence
SB: 2 Spell Pierce

Changes to note: -2 Spell Pierce. It's a good card but tapping out is necessary more often than not and I wanted my SF Mystics. This drops blue count, which never was a problem. -1 Knight: 1 is not the right number *baiting fight*
STONEFORGE MYSTIC!!! This guy is the fucking nuts. I was always happy to see him. I tried out basilisk collar as a target as it kills goyf and I'm not sure about it. It won me one game that Jitte would not have since all my guys have 1 power compared to goyf who was a 5/6. SFM was an awesome top deck when people were able to answer my cards. It gives you a body and a Jitte for that body.

One thing I noticed is how many games I absolutely hated a basic Island. Specifically 3 games, and it never was worth it. Even when Aggro Loam got waste lock on me (laughable) it wasn't any good. I would rather play another fetch and probably will in the future. Serra Avenger and all the 1 drops for W are just too damn good.

Otherwise it plays like it always has in my playtesting. I've only been playing with it for a year and 2 months though, since the first thread on it was made and the deck itself was made, not the 2 years that the time machine using creators must have, so don't take my advice seriously.

[Citrus-God]

Why don't you run Empyrial Plate instead of Basilisk Collar? It makes a mere Wayfarer big enough to take a Goyf down.

[stuckpixel]

Agreed - basilisk collar doesn't seem optimal. I'd run one of the swords or plate before collar. I think Collar is going to be a great in standard, but legacy it's not up to snuff.

[Vacrix]

Why don't you run Empyrial Plate instead of Basilisk Collar? It makes a mere Wayfarer big enough to take a Goyf down.

Collar gains you life which is pretty significant when racing aggro or putting you out of ToA ranger against tendrils. Though plate does look pretty good if considering you can quickly refill your hand namely with Fathom Seer. +4/+4? Legit.

Collar looks better in a build with more first strike creatures. Kazandu Blademaster + Basilisk Collar looks really sexy. The only thing is you can't save it when they burn it like you can with Jitte. Maybe it could be viable if they print a good 1cc ally. Otherwise you have to run 4 to get the occasional 3/3.

[pi4meterftw]

Played the deck in a tourney today to get some more knowledge on it for a friend who wants to get into legacy somewhat cheaply (two colors makes this manageable). I top 8ed and lost to mono red goblins of all things. I scraped by a win against combo elves and lost to Aggro Loam tonight which are notable. I got the aggro loam guy down to 2 and 3 in games 1 and 2 before he stabilized in the mid game where I lost to 3 land in a row game 1 and 4 land in a row game 2.

My list is not the perfect gem that the twins are running (which is obviously why I lost lol).


// Lands
3 Windswept Heath
4 Flooded Strand
4 Tundra
3 Wasteland
2 Plains
1 Island

// Creatures
2 Jotun Grunt
4 Fathom Seer
4 Mother of Runes
4 Serra Avenger
4 Weathered Wayfarer
4 Stoneforge Mystic

// Spells
4 Brainstorm
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Force of Will
2 Umezawa's Jitte
3 Daze
3 AEther Vial
1 Basilisk Collar

// Sideboard
SB: 1 Jotun Grunt
SB: 3 Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 Thorn of Amethyst
SB: 4 Burrenton Forge-Tender
SB: 3 Aura of Silence
SB: 2 Spell Pierce

Changes to note: -2 Spell Pierce. It's a good card but tapping out is necessary more often than not and I wanted my SF Mystics. This drops blue count, which never was a problem. -1 Knight: 1 is not the right number *baiting fight*
STONEFORGE MYSTIC!!! This guy is the fucking nuts. I was always happy to see him. I tried out basilisk collar as a target as it kills goyf and I'm not sure about it. It won me one game that Jitte would not have since all my guys have 1 power compared to goyf who was a 5/6. SFM was an awesome top deck when people were able to answer my cards. It gives you a body and a Jitte for that body.

One thing I noticed is how many games I absolutely hated a basic Island. Specifically 3 games, and it never was worth it. Even when Aggro Loam got waste lock on me (laughable) it wasn't any good. I would rather play another fetch and probably will in the future. Serra Avenger and all the 1 drops for W are just too damn good.

Otherwise it plays like it always has in my playtesting. I've only been playing with it for a year and 2 months though, since the first thread on it was made and the deck itself was made, not the 2 years that the time machine using creators must have, so don't take my advice seriously.

Are you implying that we should have opened a thread as soon as we discovered the deck?

That would be retarded. We spent 8 month making sure it was good first. We're not like those people who go: I broke the format, yeah! Only to find out 3 posts later that they lose to kgrip or w/e. So that's what we were doing as far as magic goes for those 8 months. Sorry we didn't post it earlier, I guess.

I don't know why you're triumphantly declaring your changes, but they're highly not recommended.

-1 island: this is probably the best of the bunch in your ideas, but having the extra island opens up a lot of possibilities. It lets you obviously play island around wasteland, magus, etc. You definitely want 3 basic lands in the deck, because you want to rape people for playing crap like PTE, blood moon etc. It's a little harder to make it gg when blood moon locks you off half your deck. (I'm talking about blood moons after you get to play at least 1-2 land.)

We already noted that basilisk collar is bad. It's not entirely clear why it's in your list, unless you think we're retarded. Again, I never quite understand: we're not asking you to think of us as Einstein. In fact, you don't even have to concede that we're smarter than you to reach the conclusion that maybe we know better than you do. We've been playing the deck for twice as long as even the amount of time you've been claiming to play the deck.

I don't get why all these silly comments about our attitude come up, but it's actually pretty ridiculous for our word to not be taken much more seriously than anybody else's, as I said, not because you have to agree that we're smarter, but simply because you have to agree we haven't been twiddling our thumbs for the last 2 years.

Mind you, we're not even just claiming to have tested for 2 years. We're also 2 years familiar with the deck. That's why our bet that SFM is best a 2, and collar/plate at 0 is better than your bet. I'll admit that here you have a nonzero % chance of winning the bet because my theorizing capabilities are imperfect. (Whereas both my theorizing and testing would have to simultaneously screw up for you to be right about stuff I've tested.) I still think it's pretty ridiculous that you speak as if I'm more likely to be mistaken than you are, but in the interest of provoking more interesting discussion I'll let this slide.

-2 spell pierce:
If you find a good card to put in the deck, I'll get behind you on this.

-1 knight:
Lol?

Also, citrus-God we have tested plate, as well as theorized about it. At first it was pretty rape, when we tested thresh and stuff. But I think that was an illusion since we 80% tempo thresh anyway.

It's cute to go like: avenger take 10, rawr!

But the main thing that is lacking for plate is that unlike jitte, your opponent has to get hit for it to really do its thing. In matchups where you need a control spell, your opponent just takes 6-8 damage and says "thanks for tapping a blocker."

In matchups where you need damage (landstill) it's better than jitte, but as a control spell it at best abyss' your opponent instead of abyssing to double abyssing, and sometimes it backfires with few cards in hand.

[Phoenix Ignition]

@ Empyrial Plate: It's always worse than Jitte in pretty much any situation I think. I wanted an equipment that would cost a bit less as well. I'm not sure if I'd keep it in or not, for now it stays though since 3 Jittes is too many with 4 tutors and the whole legendary thing. SoFI or SoLS also can't take down big threats. I was expecting Dreadnaught, Iona, and Dark Depths, so Basilisk Collar was a tutorable counter to that. No other equipment that I am aware of can take down such big threats (although depths doesn't die, I know, I know).

@The twins: Sorry, I honestly didn't read and don't care what you guys said, as I know it's snide remarks or something similar. I posted this for the people who are getting into the deck because it is cheap. Legacy is expensive now. If it was other stupid remarks, I'm not going to play the deck anymore, it was for a friend to give better advice, so sleep happy.

EDIT: Also@ Plate, there were maybe 3 games tonight that I just got down to top decking and emptying my hand. Top decking a collar at this point means a Mom can take down a goyf, whereas getting a Plate does me no good.

[Tinefol]

Another brief report from me, and 4 more rounds of swiss. Didn't mulligan once today.

Round1. Belcher.
Game1. I FoW first turn Belcher, Later on unmorph Fathom Seer, and quickly beat with Jotun Grunt and Jitted Seer. My notes indicate 20-> 18 -> 9 -> 0. I draw second force in between, being sure I can answer the next Belcher.
Game2. I draw a lot of counters, FoWing 2nd turn Belcher, casting Aura of Silence, but not much to beat with. Lonely mom takes some hits, then joined by Avenger, and then by another Avenger. My opponent attempts to go for ETW, but there are too many ESGs and SSGs in his hand, and he gets only 8 tokens, which I easiliy race.
I think this isn't that good of a match up if opponent goes for turn1 ETW.

Round 2. RGW AggroLoam.
Game1. He mulls to somewhat questionable hand, I start with Wayfarer, go for Wasteland plan, a bit later get Fathom Seer with Jitte and he conceded on one land facing 2 turn clock.
Game2. I go turn1 vial, turn2 Wheel of Sun and Moon, turn 3 Fathom Seer, vial in 2 Avengers (met by STP, Lightning Bolt), and he conceded with loam in hand, when he attacked with 3/4 Goyf into vialed Jotun Grunt.

Out of my limited testing, this match is horrible preboard (2-5) and really good postboard (4-0 so far).

Round 3. Merfolk.
Game 1. Turn 1 mom, turn 2 jitte, he FoWs, I FoW back, and Wayfarer under jitte with mom's protection does the job.
Game 2. He mulls to 5, goes turn1 vial, turn 2 jitte, which I Pierce, later on gets another jitte. I've had rather a slow start, but my turn 1 mom was able to hold the jitte useless, Wayfarer got rid of Mutavaults and I just beat in with Serra Avenger and Jotun Grunt.

Jitte and Mom really turn the game around :)

Round 4. ID into second place (equal prizes to top6).

Deck worked like a charm today.

[Forbiddian]

Nice job. Finally you got to play against some Tier 1 opponents (and finally you got to play some games starting with all 7 cards). Also, you continued your streak of not losing any games where you don't mulligan.


Belcher's a good matchup, although your analysis is probably correct. IF they can turn 1 Empty, then they're in good shape. If they can't (which happens in the vast majority of games), they're in bad shape.

From the play, they have above a 50%, I think. From the draw, it's a lot lower, so the overall matchup is pretty solidly in UW Tempo's favor.

Empty is tough to play through FoW. FoW on Desperate Ritual takes away 5 mana effectively (so they'd need 9 mana without LED to get to Empty in their starting 8 (7+Empty). But even if they can play through FoW, FoW on the Empty means they needed a very high storm count to actually win. Also, if they miss with Empty, they don't get a chance to recover because they lost too much fast mana and too much storm count. By the time they can build up another Empty, we probably have a couple of critters out.

Or if their hand doesn't have enough storm+whatever to get Turn 1 Empty, if they wait, the EtW isn't going to get there.

With 1 creature opposing you, you need 8 tokens to win.
With 2 creatures opposing you, you need 10 tokens to win.
With 3 creatures opposing you, you need 14 tokens to win.

[Citrus-God]

@Plate: I haven't tested Plate yet, but thanks for the input.

We haven't really discussed what kinds of opening hands we should keep and how we should play certain hands. I'm still inexperienced with this deck, and I've been playing Landstill for a long ass time. The transition to a creature deck is really fucking weird to me, and the transition to a creature deck that is THIS difficult to play is also foreign. I kept some notes as to what hands to keep and how I should be playing them. And sometimes, it's really hard to make calls for opening plays with certain opening hands. For example

Marsh Flat
Force of Will
Brainstorm
Brainstorm
Stoneforge Mystic
Fathom Seer
Umezawa's Jitte

Against Zoo, on the play.

1. If I don't hit a land and/or Vial with BS, I lose. If I do find a land and/or Vial, I also want to find a strong critter to create presence on the board.
2. I won't have any presence with the board for the first turn, but 2nd Turn may be justifiable if I have a good mix of other cards, assuming I hit land and perhaps a Mom/Wayfarer with BS.
3. FoW can only be used to either protect one of my hopefully topdecked critters or keep a bigger one off the board. Obviously, I want to protect a critter as I can get Jitte online and win, but then I also have to worry about Qasali Pridemage. True, I have Stoneforge Mystic to net another Jitte, but 4 mana investment is heavy for this deck; especially with a hand like this.

Also, if I do hypothetically mulligan, what kind of hand would I want to see against a deck like Zoo?

[Moonlight]

I dont think you should keep the hand you listed.. because:
- onelanders are bad
-if you don't draw a second land you will die, vial wont win you the game here If you dont draw any other lands..
-SFM + jitte is basicly the same card.. you want one of them, not both.
-fathom seer is for the fow, it has no other meanings this way because you will not be playing it until turn 4-5 or something.. BS, BS, SFM and jitte are first in line.

Allthough, having jitte + brainstorm makes it a rather tough choice. But I say mull.. :)

[Maveric78f]

I dont think you should keep the hand you listed.. because:
- onelanders are bad
-if you don't draw a second land you will die, vial wont win you the game here If you dont draw any other lands..
-SFM + jitte is basicly the same card.. you want one of them, not both.
-fathom seer is for the fow, it has no other meanings this way because you will not be playing it until turn 4-5 or something.. BS, BS, SFM and jitte are first in line.

Allthough, having jitte + brainstorm makes it a rather tough choice. But I say mull.. :)

The question is not how bad the hand is but how bad the mulliganed hand is likely to be in comparison with this one.

[Forbiddian]

Moonlight's advice is not accurate.

I'd keep that hand against any non-WL deck (and against Zoo). It's a slightly soft hand in the Zoo MU (no Mom, no Swords), and you have to draw into parts to make it work, but the six is not going to be better and you have SFM and FoW. Keep in mind on UW Tempo: you only have 17 land, and only 13 land that make W. A six card hand with like Tundra, Wasteland is not better than the seven cards you have including double Brainstorm, Fathom Seer.

I don't even think it's a very tough decision. You obviously want to see a better fuel+air mixture, but you're only going to be able to get that through smart play -- not more aggressive mulligans.


The fact that you have Jitte + SFM isn't remotely bad. You have two brainstorms. SFM even has a built-in shuffle effect, so after the brainstorm, just put the Jitte on the bottom, then cast SFM.


Not that you have to memorize these odds or anything (though it does help a little):

If you fetch Tundra and Brainstorm at the opponent's endstep, you have a 65% chance of making your two drop and being able to cast SFM. If you miss, you have a 51% chance of picking up the two drop during your next turn with the second Brainstorm. Together that's an 83% chance of getting the second land.

If you wait until your second mainphase (to get an extra draw in), you have a 77% chance of making your second land drop. You can't retry that turn, but after your next draw, you get a 52% chance of picking up a second land. Together, that's an 89% chance of getting the second land.

I would cast the Brainstorm at endstep. SFM immediately is too powerful in this situation, cause it unlocks 9 extra lands that don't force me to redraw Umezawa's Jitte.


Either way, if the question is just about keeping the hand vs. not keeping the hand, it's not very close. You get at the lowest an 83% chance of getting out of it in very good shape, compared to a six-card hand which has around a 20% chance of sending you straight to five cards.

I don't have any idea why you'd think keeping that hand is too risky, but then you're willing to ship down to a six card hand.

[pi4meterftw]

I think in testing we found the deck was roughly 50% against the meta when it starts with 6 cards vs. the opponent's 7. Against nonwasteland decks, it's clear you keep, but against an unknown opponent you can still resolve the question. It's harder, but I think most of the time by keeping this your shot at winning is >50%.

[Forbiddian]

I think in testing we found the deck was roughly 50% against the meta when it starts with 6 cards vs. the opponent's 7. Against nonwasteland decks, it's clear you keep, but against an unknown opponent you can still resolve the question. It's harder, but I think most of the time by keeping this your shot at winning is >50%.

Yeah, that's starting with 6, but that doesn't account for the "go to five" which happens like 20% of the time.

It's *really* hard to win with 5 cards against Zoo. Maybe you have a 20% chance, but that means at the moment you mulligan your 7, your odds to win are like around maybe 35-40%.

The hand has to be quite bad (<40% you think) to justify a mulligan (something like no-land, all-land, 1 land without one drops, etc.) against Zoo.

[Forbiddian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQz0J_lneYc

Might have to wait a bit for it to process if you can't see the cards right now. It will be in high quality when Youtube finishes processing (usually takes about 1h).

Part 2 will be up later (not as interesting, I just smash him), but I'm off to play at Artifex for a few hours and the video is currently being exported.

[pi4meterftw]

@Plate: I haven't tested Plate yet, but thanks for the input.

We haven't really discussed what kinds of opening hands we should keep and how we should play certain hands. I'm still inexperienced with this deck, and I've been playing Landstill for a long ass time. The transition to a creature deck is really fucking weird to me, and the transition to a creature deck that is THIS difficult to play is also foreign. I kept some notes as to what hands to keep and how I should be playing them. And sometimes, it's really hard to make calls for opening plays with certain opening hands. For example

Marsh Flat
Force of Will
Brainstorm
Brainstorm
Stoneforge Mystic
Fathom Seer
Umezawa's Jitte

Against Zoo, on the play.

1. If I don't hit a land and/or Vial with BS, I lose. If I do find a land and/or Vial, I also want to find a strong critter to create presence on the board.
2. I won't have any presence with the board for the first turn, but 2nd Turn may be justifiable if I have a good mix of other cards, assuming I hit land and perhaps a Mom/Wayfarer with BS.
3. FoW can only be used to either protect one of my hopefully topdecked critters or keep a bigger one off the board. Obviously, I want to protect a critter as I can get Jitte online and win, but then I also have to worry about Qasali Pridemage. True, I have Stoneforge Mystic to net another Jitte, but 4 mana investment is heavy for this deck; especially with a hand like this.

Also, if I do hypothetically mulligan, what kind of hand would I want to see against a deck like Zoo?

I should note that I actually had to think a decent amount to get this one figured out. I think Matt's stronger in mulligan decisions than I am. I think this is a valid question, but at the end of the day I still think that application of the standard sort of reasoning will give a clear cut answer on this one.

I don't consider mulliganning with the list to be much harder than with other lists. Actually, due to experience, I don't consider the deck to be that hard to play, but that is probably because there wasn't anyone to tell me I was misplaying when I was learning, so I "felt like" I was doing the right thing. You must keep your eye out for chances to stick a few extra damage down your opponent's throat, manipulations that give you slight advantages etc. The hardest part about the deck is you can't afford to be bad at anything.

I used to be a dedicated landstill player. Control, especially landstill, was one of the easiest archetypes to play ever because you did not need to have combat math mastered.

I was called on being too slow at the SCG 5K when I had to figure out empty the warrens math, but that is just a straight computation. The harder situations involve analysis of probability and statistically expected value, variance, etc.

If you need additional sources of watching Matt and I play the deck, please watch the matches from the SCG 5K LA. I mulliganned rather aggressively, compared to what I usually see people doing.

Hopefully you found this post "supportive." I am trying to encourage support for the deck from reasonably minded thinkers seeking to play the deck.

[Plague Sliver]

Nice work guys.

I've watched the SCG video with Jeff, read most of the pages here, and it looks like an awesome Fish deck. I really like Jeff's comment about the fact that you're drawing into more gas when you play less lands overall. Already ordered my playset of 4x Chinese Weathered Wayfarers and ready to give it a go.

My meta has got at least 2-3 goblins, some ichorid, some Tempo Thresh. No zoo or combo. Seems like a deck that's well positioned for this type of field.

2 questions:

1. What do you side 4x BFT in for vs. Goblins? I'm assuming Fathom Seers or Wayfarers but not 100% sure. Goblins has no nonbasics except for Wastelands and Ports...

2. How do you side in the 2x Enlightened Tutor package + Crypt/Wheel/Relic vs. Ichorid?

[Forbiddian]

Cut wayfarers in both Ichorid and Goblins.


If there's really no combo, you can take out the Thorn of Amethyst and Enlightened Tutors for more yard hate and Goblins/Ichorid hate (like Propaganda).

Against Ichorid, you're also boarding in the Grunt and all of your BFTs. BFT doesn't need a target for the sacrifice to work (check the wording), so you can use it to burn bridges.

[Forbiddian]

Ok, the next part is up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7j9AhsmtUg

I'll add some more stuff later. Feel free to post whatever, critiques, questions, suggestions, either here or on Youtube. Also looking for sparring partners to shoot more footage (you know, the kind who don't use their last card in hand to daze a spell when I still have mana up), I'll post the games if they're interesting, even if I lose.

I don't think anybody else has really done these first person VoD-type commentary, so I want to try to see 1) if there's any interest and 2) what I'm doing wrong. The closest to what I'm doing is SCG's casts, but they're not commentated by players, and I think there's more potential for a commentary to be interesting if players with some experience are playing the decks.


Two more matches up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFFumGU8n0o <-- vs. Ichorid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTjeQLewjAY <-- vs. Lands

Exporting game 2 and 3 for Lands, I think I'll finish that later.



So I have 999 posts, I'm OCD like that, don't want to have my 1k post be some lame QFT.

@ Shronkor: Yeah, I made some horrible play mistakes that game 1.





Great movies! Really enjoying the watch.

In game 2 against Bant Aggro, why did you Force of Will the Trygon Predator?
It's not really a threat and Jitte kills it before it can swing.

Cool, I guess one vote for liking it so far.

@ play: So at the time, I didn't have any artifacts, but also no swords and no flyers. I should have probably pointed this out during the video, but there's some double psychology I noticed during the game:

So he has 1 card in hand when he kgrips my Jitte, then fetches and looks at a new top 3 with the Top. If he has a Trygon, he should have cast it last turn (over staying open for Kgrip), making at almost certain that he topdecked the Trygon Predator, which meant it was his strongest threat in his top 3 cards. Since I have more draw than he does, and I'm just trying to lock out the game, it made sense to play it really defensively instead of waiting for a small threat to become a big threat.

I think it's similar to like turn 1 vs. Zoo you force the Kird Ape. Yeah, you can force something better later, but by then Kird Ape did more damage than the "stronger" spell would have. Also, they probably don't have anything better because they lead their strongest spell (why would you lead Kape if you have Nacatl?). It seemed like he thought that Trygon was his best threat, so I went ahead and countered it.

I had a lot of draw material, but you can always topdeck shit. I wanted to make sure that I could handle his board no matter what I drew, and with just two Swords left in the deck, I didn't want to end up in the, "ah crap, I need to topdeck to stay alive" situation.

It was kinda one of those wash situations, but he's bant aggro, he doesn't have anything scarier than Trygon Predator. Also, TP actively takes away 3 outs from my deck (2 SFM and 1 Jitte left, and those spells trump the rest of his deck). I dunno, I think it was the right play, but it was probably a lot more questionable than I made it out in the audio commentary. I just said, "Huh, I pitched a Daze... interesting."

Just to clean up my notes: I was surprised when I pitched the daze (thinking I should ditch a SP or think about it more), but it was definitely the right play to ditch Daze. He has a lot of lands, so hard to daze him (but SP is still possible), and then I also have another Fathom Seer, so I'm not really looking to miss more land drops.

[Mayk0l]

Great movies! Really enjoying it.

In game 2 against Bant Aggro, why did you Force of Will the Trygon Predator?
It's not really a threat and Jitte kills it before it can swing.

[nodahero]

I have two questions for Forbiddian.

Question 1: In the second Thresh video at like 9 min and 50 seconds or so your opponent is cardles and casts Warmok. Why wouldn't you counter that leaving him zero pressue and allowing you to swing all in and apply pressure like you stated you wanted to a few seconds earlier?

Question 2: On the turn after that (24 according to MWS) you draw a SFM with access to 4 mana. Why wouldnt you play the SFM, fetch a Jitte, and equip to the angel and swing? Did something change in your mindset about applying pressure or does that not apply as much pressure as casting MoM, SFM, and just droping a Jitte into play with Pierce back up?

Props to the videos though. These are really handy... I can only read so many threads a day.

EDIT: Wow I am a donk... SFM dosn't put it into play... I knew that card seemed way to sick... next time at release tournies I should actually read cards...

[Forbiddian]

Game 1 I have a flyer + Mother of Runes, so the 3/4 Lifelink is useless. Contrast to the earlier situation when I don't have an answer to the Trygon Predator in hand, so I wanted to make sure I didn't need any draws. I could draw nothing but lands and still win the game.

I wanted to apply pressure earlier, meaning I wanted to use the creatures I have to apply pressure (instead of drawing a land, I beat for 1 extra and cast a mother of runes, which is probably the better play). It doesn't mean that I want to give up countermagic for nothing.

The only thing the 3/4 does is wall off my 1/3s and my wayfarer, and then it gets in I think one swing before Mom makes it so he can't possibly attack. So since I had an overwhelming board, I wanted to make sure he couldn't cast something that could possibly swing the board state.


I think it's the right play, it's good to be careful to lock the game out. I needed a topdeck to be able to beat the Trygon Predator, but at the time he cast the RWM, I didn't need anything, so I just saved the Force to stop anything that could potentially change the game.


@SFM: Yeah, I wish....

[pi4meterftw]

Matt nice videos. I think you should have Forced as the opening play against ichorid. I think you had a solid game thereafter when you play SFM, forcing him to start coming up with an answer to the threat you have in 2 turns of killing his crap, killing your own crap with jitte counters, and having blockers. It perhaps may even allow you to play a grunt t3, if even just to return two cards and to make him miss 2 turns.

EDIT: why didn't you waste tabernacle?

[nodahero]

Because his opponent would have just replayed it off of Loam. He couldnt hope to win a game of attrtion against Lands in that position. His ownly chance was to time his Wastes to take out Maze I'm thinking... Correct me if I am wrong.

[pi4meterftw]

Because his opponent would have just replayed it off of Loam. He couldnt hope to win a game of attrtion against Lands in that position. His ownly chance was to time his Wastes to take out Maze I'm thinking... Correct me if I am wrong.

Maybe I wasn't paying enough attention, but I thought he just put the loam under with grunt, and didn't know his opponent had a burning wish for another? If he could put another card in the yard, he could also stick tabernacle under. I dunno, I play very differently against lands and I actually find the matchup kind of easy, but maybe the deck has evolved since my experiences, which are admittedly quite in the past.

[nodahero]

I think paying 1 for Tabernacle is alot less annoying given the matchup then having to swing in with 2 critters only to have the weakest connect due to a Maze.

[Vacrix]

Agreed. Those videos were excellent. All the established decks should have walk through sample game vids like that.

One game rose a question for me though. How strong is Knight of the White Orchid, really? He seems good with Jitte, and for the occasion when you need that extra land to drop and equip jitte at the same time, but in matchups where you go for heavy wasteland plays, often the opponent has fewer lands than you do, making Knight's extra ability rather useless. Other times, you have fewer lands and you can fetch out Tundras but how often do you really need them? Wouldn't Kazandu Blademaster be a better choice? The more I see of him, the more I like him. Vigilance makes it better with Jitte, and I'm sure in at least 1/4 of your games that you drop it you it will wind up being a 3/3. Is there something I'm missing? To contrast, I've played with Serra Avenger in DnT and UW Tempo (and some variants of both) and vigilance is SO significant in winning races. In which matchups is the extra land significant?

[Mark Sun]

I'm actually building this deck as a backup to Landstill so I can audible out of the latter for a while (depending on how I perform this weekend). I will say right now that I hate all of you tempo decks for having access to 3-4 extra pieces of free countermagic in Daze, as well as Spell Pierce... but after playing it for a while, it's really, really addicting to be on the other end of that whole thing. :eek:

Of course, thanks Forbiddan for the videos, I'll be reviewing those more as I learn more about this deck, and my learning curve is a reduced a little after seeing it in play. As Vacrix said, having a youtube walkthrough with newer decks speeds up how in touch with it you are and it's wonderful.

I also questioned the 1-of KoWO, I know its purpose, but having it as a 1-of isn't really my thing. There are a lot of shuffle effects, but there's no real way to make sure you draw him. (I guess he could be SFM #3)

[alderon666]

I'm actually building this deck as a backup to Landstill so I can audible out of the latter for a while (depending on how I perform this weekend). I will say right now that I hate all of you tempo decks for having access to 3-4 extra pieces of free countermagic in Daze, as well as Spell Pierce... but after playing it for a while, it's really, really addicting to be on the other end of that whole thing. :eek:

Of course, thanks Forbiddan for the videos, I'll be reviewing those more as I learn more about this deck, and my learning curve is a reduced a little after seeing it in play. As Vacrix said, having a youtube walkthrough with newer decks speeds up how in touch with it you are and it's wonderful.

I also questioned the 1-of KoWO, I know its purpose, but having it as a 1-of isn't really my thing. There are a lot of shuffle effects, but there's no real way to make sure you draw him. (I guess he could be SFM #3)

What is up with people not liking one-ofs? You don't HAVE to draw it, it's not vital for anything. It's a good creature that has synergy with Brainstorm, Fathom Seer, Jitte and Vial. It's just like playing a Path to Exile as a 5th StP, it's not quite StP but it gets the job done. KotWO is a 8th fetch, a 5th wayfarer, a 5th Avenger. While it doesn't do any of those roles like the original cards, it works well with a lot of cards in the deck.

I can tell that SFM #3 is probably bad, you already have BS/Fathom Seer for digging SFMs/Jittes, running 3 might end you up with hands with 2 SFMs and a Jitte.

[Uncoordinated]

@Forbiddian:
To respond to one of your comments made in your Land.dec video ( your third video/MU, entitled "UW Tempo vs. Lands (1/3)," I'm pretty sure that all relevant abilities trigger at beginning of upkeep, and then are stacked in APNAP, as you mentioned in the video. It doesn't really matter that the Tabernacle trigger is added last, and thus resolves first; your triggers are already on the stack. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's how it works.


By the way, really loving this deck. I think the strong interactions between Wayfarer and pretty much everything else is great, and gives amazing tempo/CA. I mention this, and not the rest of the deck, because I feel that this is the strongest tempo/CA - generating aspect of the deck, even though Wayfarer is sided out completely in some MUs. I don't think one can call Wayfarer, or in fact anything, the core of this deck. More precisely, I think it functions like the elementary forces - all deck elements are linked, whether strongly or weakly, and they all perform roles in different situations. I truly think that this is a control deck, and shouldn't be confused with any other archetype. Performing actions in the right order is paramount to this deck, and it has a MUCH stronger late-game presence than anywhere else, provided it is doing what it wants to do ( create tempo/CA, then drop a Jitte and hoard counters - both in hand and on the Jitte - for the win ).


EDIT

Scratch that, I re-read the Comp Rules on Cumulative Upkeep. I'm pretty sure the Cumulative Upkeep trigger fizzles upon resolution in that case since the ability reads "age counter on target permanent," and after resolution of the Tabernacle trigger, the Grunt's not really in play anymore. I thought the Cumulative Upkeep ability generated two separate triggered abilities: adding an age counter, and the tax effect. Link here (http://mtg.wikia.com/wiki/Cumulative_upkeep).

[flrn]

I've been following this thread for quite some time now, because I'm interested in this deck. First of all, i wanna thank Forbiddian for those video's he did until now. Great work to get an understanding of how to play the deck, even if you make some mistakes while playing. But you probably should use some sort of numbering, if you play against the same matchup twice, since you always have several parts of those games. If you look here (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=clipboard024fgk.jpg), you see two times UW Tempo vs Bant Aggro 1/2 and two times UW Tempo vs Bant Aggro 2/2. Can get confusing, if you add more of those to your videos.

And then i have a question about the deck. Standstill doesn't seem too bad in this deck. I know it can be a situational card, but since you're playing Vial and counters, you got two reason to play this card. And you said in one of those video's, that you're a card advantage whore. Some sort of explanation, why Standstill isn't included would be nice. The question got probably answered before, but i couldn't find it.

[Mark Sun]

<snip>

Didn't look at it that way, actually. Trust me, I understand that whole grouping-by-role thing. I was going to explain why I thought he was weird here, but halfway through I realized it's just my twisted train of thought. Excuse me.

[stuckpixel]

What is up with people not liking one-ofs? You don't HAVE to draw it, it's not vital for anything. It's a good creature that has synergy with Brainstorm, Fathom Seer, Jitte and Vial. It's just like playing a Path to Exile as a 5th StP, it's not quite StP but it gets the job done. KotWO is a 8th fetch, a 5th wayfarer, a 5th Avenger.

Thank you for posting this - I never really realized how analogous this was to the 5th swords/1st path to exile it really was.

It makes a lot more sense now.

[Tychoides]

My only complaint about the videos? How you say "Jitte". It's "G-tay" :)

Also, nice to see another Starcraft fan who enjoys Korean pro-gamers!

Thanks, Forbiddian!


Agreed. Those videos were excellent. All the established decks should have walk through sample game vids like that.

I agree completely, this was really nice to see.

[Tinefol]

Great videos!

I have a question, which bugged me for a while. Suppose you keep a one lander (fetch). It also has some combination of Vial/Daze/Wayfarer/Brainstorm. What do you fetch for, basic plains, island or tundra, considering that your opponent runs FoW/Daze/Wasteland (TT or Merfolk)?

If you opt for basic Island, you can daze and brainstorm, but if you don't get to topdeck anymore lands, you might be in trouble, as you can't use Wayfarer.
If you fetch for basic Plains, you might be able to use wayfarer later on (not garaunteed), but you can't use Daze or Brainstorm outright.
If you go for Tundra, you might lose to Wasteland, not topdecking anymore lands.

What's the right move?

[Yan]

just a thought after watching the game against ichorid:

Isn't Propaganda just strictly better than Ghostly Prison? Yes, the deck have 1 more plains than island but that doesn't seem to be a valid reason. The fact that Propaganda can be pitched to FoW however, is. Assume that you are playing against f.e. Belcher. You probably side it in against empty the warrens tokens, but if the opponent goes for Belcher instead, it's better to have 1 more blue card to pitch for FoW, right? I've tested the deck for quite a while and this thing just caught my attention...I don't even play the card in the sideboard my self...

[Moonlight]

Propaganda is boarded in vs. gobo's too.. and the chance to face Pyroblast in those games is pretty high.
I can only think of belcher where you want the dubble job of the propaganda. Against every other MU where you want to see propaganda or prison, you are just happy enough to see it in your hand, and will play it instead of pitching it I suppose..

[pi4meterftw]

@ tinefol: you fetch tundra, then play vial. If they open with waste, then they're screwed, as a matter of tempo. You start the game up with everything the same as before except your vial is already in play, with one counter on it.

[pi4meterftw]

just a thought after watching the game against ichorid:

Isn't Propaganda just strictly better than Ghostly Prison? Yes, the deck have 1 more plains than island but that doesn't seem to be a valid reason. The fact that Propaganda can be pitched to FoW however, is. Assume that you are playing against f.e. Belcher. You probably side it in against empty the warrens tokens, but if the opponent goes for Belcher instead, it's better to have 1 more blue card to pitch for FoW, right? I've tested the deck for quite a while and this thing just caught my attention...I don't even play the card in the sideboard my self...

I question your definition of "strictly" but I don't even think it's better in a weighted average against the standard metagame.

Incidentally, I don't run any GP effects in my sideboard. It's an interesting choice, but I'm actually not sure how Matt made room for it, nor did I know that he was running it.

[markbris]

@forbiddian

whats the latest list you are running?

[HAVE HEART]

The Kazandu Blademaster comment looks interesting. It could be Serra Avenger 5/6. The only creature it does not beat up with a Jitte is Tarmogoyf, but it could still survive. Obviously the Blademaster would be more synergistic with four copies, but that may not be necessary. First Strike and Vigilance are two abilities that this deck has benefited from, but never on the same creature. The one MAJOR problem I can see with this creature is that he provides absolutely no utility. Much like Serra Avenger, all he would do is attack and block (he has no evasion, though). Maybe that is enough, but for most creatures, it is not.

[Forbiddian]

The OP is current to what I'm playing. Jeff plays the same list minus some SB changes. He has -1 GP for the 4th BFT, and I think -1 Thorn of Amethyst for +1 Ethersworn Canonist. Jeff's list is much more well-tested, I'm just testing some cards, although so far they've been cool.

So I have some more games getting processed/being posted. It takes a while for Window's Movie Maker to compile the videos, and then it takes Youtube a while to process the videos. The first is being uploaded atm and then I'm compiling the others.


I'll tell you up front I'm not going to bother playtest Kazandu Blademaster. It's a 2/2 first strike with Vigilance, but Vigilance is only useful when you can also attack with impunity. I'd much rather have a land (card advantage) than vigilance.

Even if their abilities look similar, it doesn't do any tasks that Serra Avenger does. The vigilance on Serra Avenger is amazing because she can attack every turn and can't get blocked. That means she advances a stalled board position. With Kazandu, you can't advance against a stalled board position, so the vigilance is only marginally useful or perhaps never useful.

At any rate, Serra Avenger's abilities are extremely synergistic, but KB's are not.

[Tinefol]

I'm trying a 1-of Sword of Fire the Ice now, with introduction of Mystics. Been working fine so far, and it so good on Avenger. What do you think?

[Vacrix]

I'm trying a 1-of Sword of Fire the Ice now, with introduction of Mystics. Been working fine so far, and it so good on Avenger. What do you think?

It works well in DnT, but UW Tempo is already tight for space. What did you drop for it?

[Forbiddian]

I'm trying a 1-of Sword of Fire the Ice now, with introduction of Mystics. Been working fine so far, and it so good on Avenger. What do you think?

SoLS is much, much better than SoFI, but I could definitely see using SoLS in UW Tempo now.

SoLS makes you immune to every removal spell in the game. It's only worse against the miniscule subset of decks that use red (and not red removal), don't have any W or B, AND have a lot of creatures with <3 toughness.

And even in those matchups, half the time you'd rather gain three life and get a blocker back than smoke a dude and draw a card. The only decks I think you'd rather have SoFI than SoLS against is Goblins and Elves. And possibly, POSSIBLY faeries. But even Merfolk you'd rather have the SoLS when the game is close.

I can't think of any other situations when you'd actually want SoFI over SoLS, and I can think of a ton of matchups where you want to blank Swords, Snuff Out, etc. or just gain life over dealing some damage. For some reason, people ride the delusion that SoFI is better and then automatically think that when they think of the Sword equipments. But SoFI it relies on your opponent having <2 toughness guys more than SoLS relies on you having guys in the graveyard, and on the protection front it isn't even close.

[flrn]

And then i have a question about the deck. Standstill doesn't seem too bad in this deck. I know it can be a situational card, but since you're playing Vial and counters, you got two reason to play this card. And you said in one of those video's, that you're a card advantage whore. Some sort of explanation, why Standstill isn't included would be nice. The question got probably answered before, but i couldn't find it.


I'm still interested to discuss the possibilty of running Standstill. I still can't see the reason, why this card isn't included in the deck. Someone mind telling me? :)

[Mark Sun]

I'm still interested to discuss the possibilty of running Standstill. I still can't see the reason, why this card isn't included in the deck. Someone mind telling me? :)

From my point of view, it seems that it is a little overkill here, as you already have plenty of forms of card advantage generated by Wayfarer tricks, SFM, Fathom Seer, etc. Putting Standstill in the deck means you have to take something that increases the rate you kill your opponent out, and although it is nice to have a Standstill with a Vial under it to apply pressure, it isn't needed in this case. I watched some of the videos, the deck doesn't seem to skip a beat with CA to begin with.


@ Forbiddan, what would you cut for SoLaS?

[Citrus-God]

I'm trying a 1-of Sword of Fire the Ice now, with introduction of Mystics. Been working fine so far, and it so good on Avenger. What do you think?

SoFI is only good when Avenger and/or Mom are in play. Other than that, it doesn't swing a game to your favor on it's own. For example, if you equip SoFI onto something small like a Wayfarer or Seer and it dies in combat, SoFI doesn't pose as a future threat. But if it's a Jitte, it becomes a threat once another critter hits play, as the Jitte is already charged up.

Also, I there are plays where I attach a Jitte onto a Wayfarer or Seer over an Avenger, mainly because it's already charged (I attach Jitte onto Avenger main to to be left back as a blocker). I do this because Avenger is already going to do damage, and also as a possibility for my small critter to take another creature down in the red zone or at least do more damage compared to my Avenger (planning ahead and deciding how much damage you need to deal per turn is definitely worth the calculation).


But I assume you're playing the SoFI over the Knight of the White Orchid, so that's fine in my book, as long as SoFI isn't replacing Jittes. Although, I would love to run a better critter threat in the slot of KotWO, as KotWO seems like it could be replaced by something much, much better. Knight of the Holy Nimbus is a maybe, but Kira Great Glass-Spinner seems stunning (tech I stole from Merfolk)!

[Mark Sun]

but Kira Great Glass-Spinner seems stunning (tech I stole from Merfolk)!

The only problem is, you'll need to use :4: to equip something with her in play. The play that you decide to equip something, that creature will be vulnerable for the rest of the turn. (Basically, you'll have to be opportunistic, but still, perhaps not an optimal situation?)

[Tinefol]

But I assume you're playing the SoFI over the Knight of the White Orchid, so that's fine in my book, as long as SoFI isn't replacing Jittes.

Right. I've cut one KotWO and playing 2 Mystics, 2 Jittes, 1 SoFI. I might try SoLS now. Of course I always fetch Jitte first, but If I already got one, Mystic still has a use and can get another piece of equipment. It certainly doesn't hurt.

[Forbiddian]

Knight of the Holy Nimbus is a maybe, but Kira Great Glass-Spinner seems stunning (tech I stole from Merfolk)!

What's wrong with:
http://medievalyfantasia.com/uploads/cartas-magic/bloque-urza/legado-de-urza/cartas-blancas/mother-of-runes-carta-magic.jpg

You want to pay 1UU for a worse effect? Lol, Merfolk players should splash white and come steal OUR tech.



Right. I've cut one KotWO and playing 2 Mystics, 2 Jittes, 1 SoFI. I might try SoLS now. Of course I always fetch Jitte first, but If I already got one, Mystic still has a use and can get another piece of equipment. It certainly doesn't hurt.

Yeah, that's the obvious cut. I haven't run into many situations where I lose with an active Jitte, though.

Incidentally, a couple more videos are up.

[Citrus-God]

What's wrong with Mom?

You want to pay 1UU for a worse effect? Lol, Merfolk players should splash white and come steal OUR tech.

Merfolk players should. It's easier to Vial in Moms and eats removal so that their future Lords wouldn't get hit.


I wanted to try Kira because I couldn't find anything I would rather have over KotWO. I've thought about some awful possibilities besides KotHN like Diplomatic Escort and Eight-and-a-Half-Tails. None of which satisfied me.

Btw, what do you think of Preacher in that slot?

[Herudaio]

The problem with preacher is that preacher costs 3 which is bad for vial and generally hard to reliably cast him. Usually you can very easily stay od 2 lands.

[Forbiddian]

I wanted to try Knight of the White Orchid because I couldn't find anything I would rather have over KotWO.

This is why we play Knight of the White Orchid.

[pi4meterftw]

I'm not cutting KOTWO for SOLS. You can almost never make use of two equipments in play, and jitte is better than SOLS, with the sole advantage of SOLS being that you can play it alongside a jitte, which I just asserted isn't actually useful.

So the question becomes something similar to if I would run 5 jittes. But it's actually even worse than that, since SOLS can't even be played as a jitte if I draw it as my single equipment in a game.

KOTWO is awesome. It rapes goblins, it lets us turn wasteland into a ridiculously one-sided tempo play, it wears jitte well, and besides goblins, there's also merfolk, elves, and the small creatures of zoo where a 2/2 first striker does something on its own besides attack or chump block.

[gustha]

I'm actually switching in and out for Aven Mimeomancer, which is just that good since I face lots of dephts and big fatties like dreadnought, plus makes all opponent's creatures just that easier to kill with jitte, is a 3/1 flying on its own and makes wayfarers, moms, seers a lot more powerful! On the other hand knight is simply that good, so the package looks like:
2 SFM (simply insane)
2 Jitte
1 KotWO/Aven Mimeomancer

Ps: props on the videos, though one opponent or two played horribly.. :)

[Sevryn]

How necessary do you guys feel the Spell Pierces are main deck? What I want to do is replace the two Pierces with 1 Ancestral Vision and 1 additional land. I know it's kind of splitting hairs over 17 or 18 lands in the deck, but I feel very uncomfortable only running 17. Sometimes you DO mulligan, and having to go to 5 because you didn't draw any land in 6 is bad times. No, one more land does not 'fix' this, and maybe I'm just giving into The Fear, but 18 feels good to me.

Which brings me to... IF you were to add an 18th land to the deck, what would it be? Fetch #8? Island #2?

Oh and circling back to the Ancestral Vision: I'm actually on board with you guys over one being the right number to run of a card. I know you're going to have a tough time convincing people that one KotWO is correct, but when you rarely if ever want to draw two of a card, one is fine. The whole toolbox argument is dumb, too; just because you can't tutor for a card doesn't mean you have to run 4 of it haha. For example, I run only one Enlightened Tutor in my Enchantress deck; I'm always happy to see it, but drawing two of them in a game would suck so bad. And so, I think one Ancestral Vision is correct in this deck. It's vroom vroom gas that doesn't cost 3 mana like Fathom Seer, and worst case it removes to Force. But two delayed draw spells in the same game would be not-so-fun, considering you could have drawn something else (like your 18th land!).

[Tinefol]

I have a question about videos. Why do you often search for mana lands (Tundra/Plains/Island) with Wayfarer, instead of searching for fetchland and then fetching? That certainly thins the deck, giving you more non-land topdecks over the time. Are you afraid of that 1 life loss?

[stuckpixel]

I really don't like cutting pierce personally - especially if we're not replacing with two blue cards. This deck is already pretty blue light, and you need to make sure you can support FoW.

That being said, if I was to add an extra land, I'd put the 4th wasteland in.

Why are you thinking about Ancestral Vision? It really seems like we generally have enough draw in the deck with fathom seers and brainstorms.

[Forbiddian]

I have a question about videos. Why do you often search for mana lands (Tundra/Plains/Island) with Wayfarer, instead of searching for fetchland and then fetching? That certainly thins the deck, giving you more non-land topdecks over the time. Are you afraid of that 1 life loss?

The deck thinning aspect of the fetchlands is not as relevant as the life in most matchups, since the life loss divided by the deck thinning ability averages out to about 10 life per land cycled (and sometimes you "cycle" into another land). Usually that's not worth it, so if you're solely using it to deck thin, you're making a mistake against most decks.

You still want a fetchland if you can use any of its additional effects:

More cards in the graveyard, shuffle effect, or land count manipulation. You also want fetchland if you're not sure which land you want right now, and the life loss isn't critical.


Hmm, actually, I can redo the math.

Ok, so here's the equation: Average Life Cost Per Cycle = Cards in the deck / draws remaining in the undecided game. You can actually calculate this during a game.

So that should be like 40/5 or so for an average early to early-mid game situation with Wayfarer. The problem is differentiating between the undecided game and the decided game. Getting the cycle effect when you're locking the game out is not worth paying 5-10 life when the game is up for grabs. If your opponent's only out is going to be killing you, it's hard to justify paying so much life for such a small edge on card quality.