[SCD] Phyrexian Dreadnought [Archive]

Dazed

03-11-2010, 06:54 PM

This artifact creature has been present on the competitive enviroment for many, many years. The posibility to cheat it into play via Vision Charm and Stifle/Trickbind has been appreciated for the Legacy Comunity since we realized its potential. Even entire archetypes have born around this 12/12 fattie. The "once upon a time" DTB Dreadstill, the underrated DreadStalker and some aggresive control engines supported on Trinket Mage were created as a way to abuse of the power of this beater.

However, today´s metamage has shifted. Now it is difficult to accept this card as a viable option for competitive play. At least that is what its sistematical abscense on the top8 all around the world seem to represent.

What are the facts that may explain this changes?

Perhaps the printing of Quasali Priedmage. Or its exigence to trade two cards (stifle,dreadnought) for a fragile board control that can be removed not only via the classical StP, Smother or Path to Exile but also with the allways present Krosan Grip and the now heavily played Nature´s Claim. Or maybe the Vampire Hexmage/Dark Depths combo proved to be superior to the Stifle/Dreadnoght (eventhough Stifle is good on itself because on the way it interacts with fetchlands).

What would you say about this card and the current metagame?

Kuma

03-11-2010, 07:38 PM

Iona and Progenitus.

Both cards have a built in way to stop removal aimed at them, while Dreadnought is vulnerable to both artifact and creature removal of all stripes. If you're going to invest that many resources in a finisher, you'd better be sure it sticks around to do the job. Iona and Progenitus do that all by themselves. Phyrexian Dreadnought does not. Hell, even Dark Depths has indestructibility going for it plus the ability to kill in one swing. Dreadnought is the fourth best finisher creature in the format. That's why it's not being played.

Pastorofmuppets

03-11-2010, 07:58 PM

also, Chalice @ 1

alderon666

03-11-2010, 08:04 PM

Qasali Pridemage is EVERYWHERE!

Getting owned by maindeck Watchwolfs is not fun. While people think they can counter everything with Counterbalance, Krosan is always there to prove them wrong.

FoolofaTook

03-11-2010, 08:42 PM

Forbiddian

03-11-2010, 09:28 PM

There's nothing to say about Phyrexian Dreadnought and Dreadstill in the current metagame that was not said 2 years ago. It's still strong when played by a skilled player and it still beats the crap out of small tourneys on a regular basis. For whatever reason, and Qasali Pridemage and Krosan Grip are not the reason, Dreadstill has never acquired a large following and so it lurks under the radar waiting for a good pilot to win a big tourney with it.

For the amount that it is played probably no deck but ANT does as well as it does in the meta today.

I remember two years ago when I got my Phyrexian Dreadnought Qasali'd. It sucked, cause I was like all reading it a bunch of times cause I didn't know what it did and stuff.

Also, I remember there was this guy playing red-based aggro, so I was all: Cast a dreadnought on turn 2, but then I still lost lost the race because he had really fast beaters like Wild Nacatl and Steppe Lynx, it was insane! I didn't even know those cards existed, and he was all like: "VOOOOSH!!!! You're dead."

That situation really sucked, because everyone was going on and on about how Dreadnought was so fast that you could race all the current aggro decks at the time with a bit of removal, a fast dreadnought, and one or two counterspells. I guess people put it in their decks two years ago because that allowed Counterbalance-strategy decks to race the fastest aggro decks in the format.

But I guess since we can't say anything different about Dreadnought than what was being said two years ago, then I guess all that is still true and Dreadnought is king! Wonder why it hasn't placed in any tournaments recently?

from Cairo

03-11-2010, 10:26 PM

Qasali Pridemage and Krosan Grip are not the reason...

Qasali Pridemage absolutely was the largest contribution to this deck's fall. The fact that the format got faster (Ad Nauseum, Wild Nacatl, NO+Prog, etc) also contributed; and the fact that the format got another RFG removal spell in Path to Exile didn't help either. But Qasali Pridemage definitely gets the bulk of the credit.

Clark Kant

03-11-2010, 11:21 PM

I don't think it's because of Pridemage. It's just one card. Blue and Black have more than sufficent resources to answer Pridemage, starting with Spell Snare, Daze and FoW. It's absent from the meta for the same reason Sea Drake is absent from the meta. Scarcity. Even then Dreadstill still does fairly decent in every major tourney almost everytime it's piloted.

I think the card is very potent, but no one has really bothered to abuse it in a shell that can get it out consistently, and pairs it off with other threats so that it doesn't have to carry the deck by itself like it sometimes does in Dreadstill

However, I have seen a deck that did a great job of consistently playing and abusing Phyrexian Dreadnought floating around this forum before.

That list played...

4 Phyrexian Dreadnought
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Tombstalker

4 Vision Charm
4 Stifle

Vision Charm pumps Tarmogoyf, reduces Tombstalker's casting cost by 5, "stifles" Dreadnought into play, AND can protect Dreadnought from removal by phasing it out till the end of the turn, all at instant speed.

Just add in the b/u disruptive cards and cantrips that make Reanimator and Team America such a wrecking ball, and you're golden.

Another theory is that before Reanimator, for whatever reason, the format shifted away from big threats to instead playing more and more threats. Many thresh players play more creatures than just Goyf and Mongoose now. They practically play Bant Aggro.

Likewise, Team America is a deck that was always played and frequently won. And it too stopped being played for whatever reason. Yet, that reason clearly has nothing to do with Pridemage.

FoolofaTook

03-11-2010, 11:25 PM

Qasali Pridemage absolutely was the largest contribution to this deck's fall. The fact that the format got faster (Ad Nauseum, Wild Nacatl, NO+Prog, etc) also contributed; and the fact that the format got another RFG removal spell in Path to Exile didn't help either. But Qasali Pridemage definitely gets the bulk of the credit.

I don't understand why you say that Qasali Pridemage lead to the downfall of Dreadstill. As far as I can see there's been no downfall of Dreadstill. It Top 8's nearly as much as it did before Qasali Pridemage was printed, which is to say not that much. It also wins just as much as it did before Pridemage was printed, which is fairly often given the amount that it is actually played.

For the record, just to keep things in perspective, here are the relevant facts from Deckcheck.net:

Dreadstill first was recorded in a Top 8 on October 11th 2007. Qasali Pridemage was first recorded in a Top 8 May 9th, 2009.

From October 11th 2007 to May 8th 2009 Dreadstill recorded 133 Top 8's and 22 wins in 18 months. That averages out to 7.39 Top 8's and 1.22 wins a month.

From May 9th 2009 to today Dreadstill recorded 62 Top 8's and 13 Wins in 10 months. That averages out to 6.2 Top 8's and 1.3 wins a month.

The consistency is pretty amazing if you think about it. Dreadstill wins 16.9% of the tourneys it Top 8's in. It won 16.5% of those tourneys before Qasali Pridemage was printed and it has won 21% of the tourneys it Top 8's in since the "killer" card was printed.

Just for the hell of it I did win %'s of Top 8's for Tempo Threshold as well for comparison. I decided to use the 10/11/07 date for the start of the Tempo Threshold sample in order to keep the two samples coherent in terms of opposition and time frame.

From Oct 11th 2007 to May 8th 2009 Tempo Threshold recorded 191 Top 8's and 27 wins in 18 months. That averages out to 10.61 Top 8's and 1.5 wins a month. Tempo Threshold won 14.1% of the tourneys it Top 8'd in over that span.

From May 9th 2009 to today Tempo Threshold recorded 183 Top 8's and 26 wins in 10 months. That averages out to 18.3 Top 8's and 2.6 wins a month. Tempo Threshold won 14.21% of the tourneys it Top 8'd in.

So what we get from all this is that Dreadstill is played less now but, as it was before Qasali Pridemage was printed, it is still an amazingly effective winner of tourneys it Top 8s in. I don't see a downfall here. I see a bunch of players afraid to play a deck that still proves out as superior to most of the rest of the field.

Otter

03-12-2010, 02:25 AM

FoolofaTook

03-12-2010, 02:53 AM

Pridemage didn't make Dreadnought unplayable, but the main advantage Nought has over Natural Order is that it's faster against aggro. Since the most popular aggro deck plays Pridemages, it's a bit silly to run the more frail Nought.

Dreadnought also has a better companion than Natural Order in Stifle. Ur Dreadstill, at least, is also a bit more solid mana base and less likely to get pummeled by Wasteland and Stifle.

I think Dreadstill's problems are more of perception than reality. It's easy to imagine Qasali Pridemage to be a killer of Dreadnoughts and so people think that he is. However the answers for QPM run all through Dreadstill naturally (and did before he was printed.) Wastelands and Stifle can keep people off the mana needed to cast QPM, Spell Snare, Daze and Force of Will can stop him from landing, Engineered Explosives can easily remove him pre-emptively before a Dreadnought lands, and even in the worst case where the opponent dodges all of the above and lands QPM there's always the chance that Stifle or Trickbind says so what?

I understand the perceptions that have lead to Dreadstill's being less played since QPM came out and since Zoo combined him with Path to Exile to make what looks like a formidable gauntlet for Dreadnought. I just think those perceptions run far ahead of the reality. A 12/12 trampler on turn 2 is ridiculously powerful even in the fastness that is Legacy.

Kuma

03-12-2010, 10:49 AM

Even then Dreadstill still does fairly decent in every major tourney almost everytime it's piloted.

Even if this is true, you have to ask yourself why you're running Dreadnought over Iona, Progenitus, or Dark Depths. Just because a deck performs decently doesn't mean there aren't better options that fill a similar role.

I'm not saying Dreadnought is weak, but it's the third best, arguibly fourth best, at what it does.

Likewise, Team America is a deck that was always played and frequently won. And it too stopped being played for whatever reason. Yet, that reason clearly has nothing to do with Pridemage.

IMO, the reason Team America isn't played is because it's terrible against Zoo and Merfolk.

As far as I can see there's been no downfall of Dreadstill. It Top 8's nearly as much as it did before Qasali Pridemage was printed, which is to say not that much.

If it's top-eighting at a similar rate now as it did when it was a DTB/DTW, why isn't it a DTW anymore?

I see a bunch of players afraid to play a deck that still proves out as superior to most of the rest of the field.

How is Dreadstill superior to Reanimator? For that matter, how is it superior to CounterTop with Progenitus and Bant Survival?

Dreadnought also has a better companion than Natural Order in Stifle.

You're saying Stifle is better than green creatures?

The comparison is Phyrexian Dreadnought and Natural Order, not Phyrexian Dreadnought and Progenitus.

menace13

03-12-2010, 11:21 AM

Gui

03-12-2010, 11:27 AM

My thinking would be that zoo-the most popular deck in the format-plays 8 main decked answers to dread(after boarding it just goes downhill into Aincent Grudge/Krosan Grip).
Also 2 for 1 on your finisher is bad.

And that would be nothing compared to the amount of counters you get, and also you can consider stifle/vision a way to protect Dreadnought from qasali.

The deck isn't played a lot anymore because there are easier decks to play with similar results, i.e. Zoo.

F3lix

03-12-2010, 12:31 PM

Even if this is true, you have to ask yourself why you're running Dreadnought over Iona, Progenitus, or Dark Depths. Just because a deck performs decently doesn't mean there aren't better options that fill a similar role.

I'm not saying Dreadnought is weak, but it's the third best, arguibly fourth best, at what it does.

How is Dreadstill superior to Reanimator? For that matter, how is it superior to CounterTop with Progenitus and Bant Survival?

You're saying Stifle is better than green creatures?

The comparison is Phyrexian Dreadnought and Natural Order, not Phyrexian Dreadnought and Progenitus.

1. It can be played as fast as iona and kill one turn earlier, faster than Pro, and it's hard to lose to DD when you play with Wastelands and 6 stifle effects. Sure it can't protect itself, but sometimes it comes down so fast it doesnt matter.

2. I'm not going to say that Dreadstill is superior, but it can kill a turn earlier (barring a 1st turn ritual). It plays Countertop so you better combo out quick or it'll lock you out. Plus you are affected by GY hate. It's fair to say that artifact removal, krosan grip in particular, is Dreads main weakness, but grip costs 3 and is green, while reanimators weakness (crypt, relic) can be played and activated on turn 1 and cost colorless.

3. I'm not sure what you're asking. Why are you comparing NO to naught. I think you'd have to compare Pro to naught, or Stifle to NO. If so, Pro, in a vacuum is certainly better than naught. But when you factor in that you need four mana and a green creature, it's harder to say. You should also consider that when playing, it would be advantagous to wait to have 5 mana to play around daze. Not to mention that on it's own NO is useless. Stifle is almost never useless, and if you like to compare NO to naught here, I would say that at least naught on its own can remove bridges and grow goyfs. Also, there are some occaions where you have already played a few stifles and you want to bait a counter so you can play naught and let it get countered because they're expecting it will get trickbind. Plus Dreadstill can win with 1 blue and 1 colorless mana, this cannot be underestimated. In a meta with so many Wastelands and stifles, getting to four can be tough.

FoolofaTook

03-12-2010, 12:32 PM

I'm not saying Dreadnought is weak, but it's the third best, arguibly fourth best, at what it does.

The deck it is in is not third or arguably 4th best at what it does: which is to both disrupt the early game, put down CounterTop to disrupt combo and aggro-control, and also run out the biggest finisher this side of Aggro Loam and potentially much earlier than Aggro Loam can. The only deck in the meta that has the potential to do all of that at the moment is Dreadstill. People have chosen a more direct approach with Tempo Threshold, because the disruption is always present and usually does not have to be mulled into. It's a safer ride to the top 8 if not as productive once you get there.

If it's top-eighting at a similar rate now as it did when it was a DTB/DTW, why isn't it a DTW anymore?

Dreadstill was only a DTW for a very short period of time, around the time of the Source Anniversary tourney. It never really was played enough to deserve that ranking but it was hard to ignore it when it was going 1st and 3rd at that 127 person tourney and then 1st and 3rd at the SCG Boston 5K 187 person tournament (after Qasali Pridemafe was printed and had been in Top 8's).

For whatever reason, and I think that reason is perceptual more than anything else, Dreadstill becomes a regional option and a DTB in those regions but never fully penetrates (and has never penetrated) the mainstream of Legacy play. It was a very strong, probably the strongest, competitor in the Northeast US for a long run straddling the release of Qasali Pridemage, and it is currently a strong competitor in the German meta. There were 11 decks that went undefeated day 1 at GP Madrid and Dreadstill was one of those, despite only a few Dreadstill decks being entered in the 2220. (Edited the number from 5 because I can't find the overall GP Madrid metagame breakdown post I saw previously.)

How is Dreadstill superior to Reanimator? For that matter, how is it superior to CounterTop with Progenitus and Bant Survival?

I don't think it's a question of superiority over any of those decks. I think it's a question of adaptability and power level. Dreadstill can move easily along the spectrum from aggro-control to control and then back again when needed, and it can do it on 2or 3 mana if necessary. The hate that people can pack in for Dreadstill in game 2 is limited, usually just to red blasts and Krosan Grip. Reanimator has a fairly strong hate package awaiting it in the graveyard hate that is present in the meta, which will adapt heavily towards Faerie Macabre or Extirpate if Reanimator follows up on it's success at the GP and becomes a DTB. CounterTop with Progenitus requires mana to operate efficiently. It can't run on the 2cc Legacy curve. I think that's a weakness that is inherent in the deck although it is obviously quite powerful, particularly against decks with no counterspells and minimal or no way to effect the opponent's mana. Bant Survival needs mana to run. That's always been Survival's weakness in the meta. It also probably has the toolbox problem with mulligans.

Of the four decks I guess Dreadstill is not the most powerful when everything is going fine, mana is readily available and the opponent is not countering the important stuff. When the fur starts flying though and things get unsettled I'd rather be playing Dreadstill than any of the others.

You're saying Stifle is better than green creatures?

Stifle is one of the best cards ever printed. And yes Stifle is a lot better than Dryad Arbor and Wall of Roots.

The comparison is Phyrexian Dreadnought and Natural Order, not Phyrexian Dreadnought and Progenitus.

I would argue that Phyrexian Dreadnought is better than Natural Order, even though both of them are dependent on having another card to be worth much. You can actually cast Phyrexian Dreadnought and it's co-dependent on 3 mana or less. Natural Order costs 4 and does nothing at all without a green creature available to turn it on. Phyrexian Dreadnought with no Stifle in hand can get rid of Bridge from Below and make your Goyf +1/+1 or even +2/+2.

Clark Kant

03-12-2010, 12:55 PM

Even if this is true, you have to ask yourself why you're running Dreadnought over Iona, Progenitus, or Dark Depths. Just because a deck performs decently doesn't mean there aren't better options that fill a similar role.

I'm not saying Dreadnought is weak, but it's the third best, arguibly fourth best, at what it does.

Only if you look at creatures in a vaccume.

Iona (Reanimator), devotes a whopping 26 cards to it's combo that otherwise neither disrupt, nor control the opponent.

Dreadnought only requires you to play 3-4 shitty cards (Dreadnoughts) in the deck to devote to the combo. Stifle/Trickbind are excellent cards at attacking manabases, stopping Tendrils of Agony, stifling cards like Pridemage and Wasteland etc. So much so that Stifle is played in plenty of legacy decks that don't even play Dreadnought. Even if you opt to play Vision Charm instead of Trickbind, (and you should, it's much cheaper and extremely versatile), Vision Charm is never a dead card just because you don't have a Dreadnought. It's great at reducing Tombstalker's cc by 5 while simultanously pumping Tarmogoyf, basically acting as both a Dark Ritual and a Giant Growth simultanously. It can protect a Dreadnought that's already on the board from bounce and removal. And it can even disrupt your opponents manabase or pitch to FoW.

Dark Depths + Hexmage requires that you play 8 crappy cards useless by themselves in your deck, rather than just 4. This in turn neccesitates that you devote additional cards to tutors making it a total of 12 cards devoted to the combo, minimum. Compare that to Dreadnought which has you play 4 useless cards (Dreadnoughts) and 6-8 cards that are actually extremely useful by themselves. By being able to play more of the latter, it actually decreases your odds of having a Dreadnought in hand without the other piece of the combo and thus having it be useless. Thus you don't even need to play tutors. Basically, you'll have dead cards in your hands a lot more frequently in Depths combo, than you will in Stiflenought combo. Depths combo also costs you both a land drop and 2 mana to combo out.

Natural Order is actually fairly light (it doesn't require too many cards devoted to it). But it is very mana intensive. Nevertheless, I will concede that the NO combo is probably superior to the Dreadnought combo. It should be, seeing as how you're spending twice as much mana for it and have to wait two turns longer to cast it. And lastly, it simply doesn't work in the same type of deck. It only works in decks with very large creature counts, and creatures that generate mana for it.

menace13

03-12-2010, 12:56 PM

And that would be nothing compared to the amount of counters you get, and also you can consider stifle/vision a way to protect Dreadnought from qasali.

The deck isn't played a lot anymore because there are easier decks to play with similar results, i.e. Zoo.

Not sure we have the same understanding of the word nothing here.
FoW costs you another blue card that along with the stifle/naught is 4 cards to his 1.
Spell Snare can hit the mage and FoW for PtE, but Grudge costs you 2 counters, Grip renders them useless and daze can be played around, so you really dont have all the counters you get.
Pridemage is arguably the 2nd most played duder in Legacy and Krosan Grip is one of the most used SB options as well.

Adan

03-12-2010, 12:56 PM

Qasali Pridemage absolutely was the largest contribution to this deck's fall. The fact that the format got faster (Ad Nauseum, Wild Nacatl, NO+Prog, etc) also contributed; and the fact that the format got another RFG removal spell in Path to Exile didn't help either. But Qasali Pridemage definitely gets the bulk of the credit.

Yeah...NOT! ABSOLTELY NOT!

Pridemage was never the problem. Dreadstill has Spell Snare, remaining Stifles and Trickbinds and Forces to deal with that guy. That's like... 14 outs? Even more if you have Counterbalance out which can simply lock out certain decks.

Counterbalance was also the reason why Dreadnought could persist on the tables. Sure, Progenitus has got a protection built in by itself, Dreadnought has to be protected by Counterbalance, but in the end, the effect is the same: You gat a finisher that lasts and get's the job done.

You also miss that of all the fatties, Nought is the fastest! 2nd Turn Nought is currently the format's fastest fattie. This will change if Reanimator sees more play, okay, but it still needs more setup and Show and Tell is also slower.
Dark Depths can only archieve the same speed it it goes like Turn 1 Urborg, Turn 2 Depths+Hexmage, but that's 3 cards.

IMHO, the main problem of Dreadstill is Zoo. Especially with Steppe Lynx, they have a ridiculous one drop that obsolete Counterbalance and Standstill. If you drop Standstill you die, if you drop Balance, they will still bash your face in with the Lynx.

My friend Fabian (Dreadstill) played against Alix (Zoo) and Alix just went:

Alix Turn 1 Lynx.
Fabian Turn 1 Land, go
Alix Turn 2 Fetch, swing for 4, Lynx, Lynx
Fabian Turn 2 Land, "OMG MY COUNTERBALANCES AND STANDSTILLS ARE SOOO DEAD NOW"
Alix Turn 3 Fetch, swing for 12, Fireblast.
...Fabian bursts out in anger.

Dreadstill has an incredible hard time with fast critters, not with Qasali or something. Fabian, me and even Rodney also agreed that playing against Zoo is just such a cramp, it's unbelievable. Although Fabian has won the last few Zoo Matchups 2-1 (always very close on just a few life), he thinks it's a very bad matchup.
Even if you replace some of these Lynxes with... Kird Apes, Loam Lions or Nacatly, the effect would have been the same.

And since Zoo has got it's high times currently, Standstill and Counterbalance become very clunky and highly situational cards. it actually has nothing to do with the Nought being bad or something (because it's not).

FoolofaTook

03-12-2010, 01:09 PM

Dreadnought is actually one of the main reasons that Dreadstill has a chance to hang with Zoo at all, the others being Wasteland and Stifle. If you really want to look for a reason for Dreadstill's decline then probably the lack of spot removal for creatures is the biggest one. People just don't believe that you can win in this meta with only 7 to 9 creatures + Mishras, limited or non-existent spot removal and your biggest threat theoretically removable by a wide range of played removal. Despite that the people who actually play Dreadstill tend to win.

Clark Kant

03-12-2010, 01:20 PM

Going slightly off topic here, but in a deck like this...

I don't think it's because of Pridemage. It's just one card. Blue and Black have more than sufficent resources to answer Pridemage, starting with Spell Snare, Daze and FoW...

I think the card is very potent, but no one has really bothered to abuse it in a shell that can get it out consistently, and pairs it off with other threats so that it doesn't have to carry the deck by itself like it sometimes does in Dreadstill

However, I have seen a deck that did a great job of consistently playing and abusing Phyrexian Dreadnought floating around this forum before.

That list played...

4 Phyrexian Dreadnought
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Tombstalker

4 Vision Charm
4 Stifle

Vision Charm pumps Tarmogoyf, reduces Tombstalker's casting cost by 5, "stifles" Dreadnought into play, AND can protect Dreadnought from removal by phasing it out till the end of the turn, all at instant speed.

Just add in the b/u disruptive cards and cantrips that make Reanimator and Team America such a wrecking ball, and you're golden.

Wouldn't Lightning Greaves be a fantastic way to both speed up and protect Dreadnought (and your other threats) and basically nullify all of the weaknesses of Dreadnought that everyone keeps bringing up here? I believe the deck did play the card. It costs 0 to equip, which means you can equip it the same turn you cast your threat.

All 12 creatures benefit greatly from haste, and from shroud. The haste basically nullifies the turn you spent casting Lighting Greaves. But the Shroud is what takes it over the top. Every single card that people mentioned here as an answer to Dreadnought, would be rendered moot by Lightning Greaves (as long as you play it when your opponent is tapped out).

You can even equip and reequip each of your threats individually as they come out, so that you give multiple creatures haste (one turn Goyf comes out, with haste forcing your opponent to use an StP in response, the next turn Tombstalker comes out also with haste, and you opponent is suddenly out of answers so you get 5 damage in, and the next turn, Dreadnought comes out with haste and swings alongside the Tombstalker killing them.)

I would definately want to play 2-3 copies.

Kuma

03-12-2010, 01:44 PM

The deck it is in is not third or arguably 4th best at what it does: which is to both disrupt the early game, put down CounterTop to disrupt combo and aggro-control, and also run out the biggest finisher this side of Aggro Loam and potentially much earlier than Aggro Loam can. The only deck in the meta that has the potential to do all of that at the moment is Dreadstill.

CounterTop with Progenitus can do all that too. It doesn't disrupt the early game quite as well since it doesn't (usually) run Stifle and Wasteland, but it has a much better finisher, and you don't need to set up CounterTop in order to protect it. The deck also runs a much more robust creature base in case things don't go according to plan.

Who cares that Dreadnought is a 12/12 to Progenitus's 10/10? They both kill in two swings, but one can't be blocked at all and is immune to 95% of the format's removal.

By the way, when I said "third or fourth best at what it does" I was referring to Phyrexian Dreadnought itself. I'd much rather have an Iona or Progenitus than Dreadnought, and you have to give Dark Depths some consideration too.

Dreadstill was only a DTW for a very short period of time, around the time of the Source Anniversary tourney. It never really was played enough to deserve that ranking but it was hard to ignore it when it was going 1st and 3rd at that 127 person tourney and then 1st and 3rd at the SCG Boston 5K 187 person tournament (after Qasali Pridemafe was printed and had been in Top 8's).

I know it's not a perfect system, but isn't DTB/DTW status solely determined by top eight penetration? Saying it wasn't played enough to deserve the ranking is a tautology.

I'm not saying the deck can't win big tournaments. I'm saying that there are better options for an aggro-contol deck with a big finisher, or at the very least better finishers.

It was a very strong, probably the strongest, competitor in the Northeast US for a long run straddling the release of Qasali Pridemage, and it is currently a strong competitor in the German meta.

I bolded the important part.

I'm not saying that the deck was never good either. I was a huge proponent of the deck when it came out, and I ran out and bought Dreadnoughts almost immediately after they were unerrated. But I think Progenitus and Iona are better as kill conditions now. I liked Dreadstill, but it's time to move on.

I don't think it's a question of superiority over any of those decks. I think it's a question of adaptability and power level.

What?

When I said superiority, I wasn't talking about Dreadstill versus specifically those decks. I was referring to how strong those decks are against the entire metagame at large compared to Dreadstill.

You're doing yourself a disservice by running anything less than the strongest deck in the format, a deck that beats the strongest deck in the format, or a deck that has a good matchup against both. If Dreadstill isn't the best at one of those things, it shouldn't be played.

Dreadstill can move easily along the spectrum from aggro-control to control and then back again when needed

So can CounterTop with Progenitus.

The hate that people can pack in for Dreadstill in game 2 is limited, usually just to red blasts and Krosan Grip. Reanimator has a fairly strong hate package awaiting it in the graveyard hate that is present in the meta, which will adapt heavily towards Faerie Macabre or Extirpate if Reanimator follows up on it's success at the GP and becomes a DTB.

Reanimator is pretty resilient to graveyard hate. It's loaded with Countermagic and discard and runs Mystical Tutor to find answers. The format may shift towards Faerie Macabre and Extirpate, but until it does it's a moot point.

I'd much rather be vulnerable to graveyard hate than artifact and creature hate. I know what shows up in more Legacy decks and in greater numbers.

CounterTop with Progenitus requires mana to operate efficiently. It can't run on the 2cc Legacy curve.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I think that's a weakness that is inherent in the deck although it is obviously quite powerful, particularly against decks with no counterspells and minimal or no way to effect the opponent's mana. Bant Survival needs mana to run. That's always been Survival's weakness in the meta. It also probably has the toolbox problem with mulligans.

CounterTop with Progenitus is plenty strong against decks with countermagic. If they counter your Counterbalances, Tarmogoyfs, etc., they probably won't be able to stop your Natural Order. The deck puts its opponents in a perpetual "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. And even if they have countermagic for your Natural Order, you're running just as much countermagic as they are.

Natural Order also dodges the shit out of Counterbalance, unlike Dreadnought.

Of the four decks I guess Dreadstill is not the most powerful when everything is going fine, mana is readily available and the opponent is not countering the important stuff. When the fur starts flying though and things get unsettled I'd rather be playing Dreadstill than any of the others.

Can you elaborate as to why?

Stifle is one of the best cards ever printed. And yes Stifle is a lot better than Dryad Arbor and Wall of Roots.

I don't run Wall of Roots, and I agree that Stifle is a better card than said wall.

The problem with Stifle is that it can either disrupt your opponent or resolve a Dreadnought, not both. My green creatures can hit my opponent and turn into Progenitus at a moment's notice.

Every playable card in Legacy is one of the best cards ever printed.

I would argue that Phyrexian Dreadnought is better than Natural Order, even though both of them are dependent on having another card to be worth much you can actually cast Phyrexian Dreadnought and it's co-dependent on 3 mana or less. Natural Order costs 4 and does nothing at all without a green creature available to turn it on.

Most Natural Order decks run 14+ green creatures. How many Stifle effects do you run?

It's totally worth the extra mana to be immune to removal and dodge Counterbalance at the same time.

Phyrexian Dreadnought with no Stifle in hand can get rid of Bridge from Below and make your Goyf +1/+1 or even +2/+2.

A minor point in your favor.

FoolofaTook

03-12-2010, 02:04 PM

Most Natural Order decks run 14+ green creatures. How many Stifle effects do you run?

I'm not going to argue most of your response, because we obviously have a difference in opinion and I don't think we'll get anywhere with that. This point however I'll argue because it runs to the heart of what makes for good plays in Magic in general and in Legacy in particular.

Yes, Natural Order decks run a bunch of very good efficient green creatures, I'll concede the point because I think it's obvious. Turning most of those creatures into Progenitus is win-more in a deck with counter spells and CounterTop in particular. This is not true for the very cheap creatures that the deck runs out at the start, however it's true for many of the other creatures in the deck. The cheap creatures that get run out, with the exception of Noble Hierarch in the builds that use him, are weaknesses in the overall deck - Tarmogoyf obviously excluded, although changing Tarmogoyf into Progenitus is about as win-more as you can get.

Right now NoPro is seeing a huge amount of play because people are fascinated by the deck, and because it is fed by many recent cards that people are still exploring. It's a very good deck, in the same way that Supreme Blue without NoPro is good and that Baseruption was good when it was played. It is putting up a lot of results because it is played a lot. It is not constrained much by price concerns once people have assembled the basic UG power set, unlike Dreadstill which requires a big investment in the Dreadnoughts - expensive cards only used in one deck really. Silly as it sounds even with the judge foil reprints Dreadnoughts are still going in the $30-40 range. Editing: whoops didn't realize Natural Order had skyrocketed as much as it did. I guess cost can be removed as factor.

And there's the other factor of Dreadstill just feels wrong somehow. I've always wondered what the response of the Source Illuminati was, after they had as a group pooh-poohed Dreadstill, to it winning and placing 3rd in the two biggest Legacy tourneys in the northeast to date. I see the 2-for-1 thing also and I also wonder why it doesn't seem to actually matter as much as people think it should, but it's a perceptual weakness not really an actual one. Dreadstill is not like Solidarity, a really good deck that had it's time and then passed on into the mists when the meta shifted. Dreadstill is still alive and kicking and it kicks really hard now and then.

Kuma

03-12-2010, 04:28 PM

Yes, Natural Order decks run a bunch of very good efficient green creatures, I'll concede the point because I think it's obvious. Turning most of those creatures into Progenitus is win-more in a deck with counter spells and CounterTop in particular. This is not true for the very cheap creatures that the deck runs out at the start, however it's true for many of the other creatures in the deck. The cheap creatures that get run out, with the exception of Noble Hierarch in the builds that use him, are weaknesses in the overall deck - Tarmogoyf obviously excluded, although changing Tarmogoyf into Progenitus is about as win-more as you can get.

Sometimes changing Tarmogoyf into Progenitus is win-more. That's when you don't cast Natural Order. I've played the deck in dozens of tournaments, and Natural Order wins you games you otherwise would have lost. Sometimes one Tarmogoyf isn't enough to get the job done.

I have never lost a game because I drew Natural Order and didn't have a green creature to sacrifice. What you seem to have missed is that Natural Order is essentially a one-card combo. That's arguably its biggest advantage over Dreadnought.

Right now NoPro is seeing a huge amount of play because people are fascinated by the deck, and because it is fed by many recent cards that people are still exploring. It's a very good deck, in the same way that Supreme Blue without NoPro is good and that Baseruption was good when it was played. It is putting up a lot of results because it is played a lot.

Do you have data to back this up? Does Dreadstill have a better ratio of top-eights/number of players than CounterTop with Progenitus?

And there's the other factor of Dreadstill just feels wrong somehow. I've always wondered what the response of the Source Illuminati was, after they had as a group pooh-poohed Dreadstill, to it winning and placing 3rd in the two biggest Legacy tourneys in the northeast to date.

Dude, really?

You're not suggesting there's some kind of conspiracy to keep Dreadstill out of the Decks to Beat forum, are you?

FoolofaTook

03-12-2010, 04:48 PM

Do you have data to back this up? Does Dreadstill have a better ratio of top-eights/number of players than CounterTop with Progenitus?

I don't understand your response here. I didn't suggest that NoPro had a better or worse ratio than Dreadstill, all I said was it's being played a lot because people are fascinated by the interactions in it and because it has received many recent cards that are worth exploring. If however you believe that NoPro is Top 8'ing in significant disproportion to the number of people playing it then I think you should put the data up to show that.

Dude, really?

You're not suggesting there's some kind of conspiracy to keep Dreadstill out of the Decks to Beat forum, are you?

Again, I don't understand the response. The DTB forum is based purely on the number of Top 8's above a certain tourney size that a deck shows up in in the sample being measured. I've already said that I think that Dreadstill is underplayed, and underplayed decks are rarely going to crack the DTB forum. That's not politics thats demographics.

paK0

03-12-2010, 06:10 PM

I don't think its underplayed, its only not played because its not good enough.

Usually new decks that are good are underplayed, because lots op people don't trust them. Dreadstill is a different shoe.

Basically every Legacy player knows about the deck, and that includes the good ones. Ususally at least some of these players will find out if a deck is good or not and then take a spinn with it. Dreadstill is not played because lots of players think it is bad (or at least not good enough to consider it).

Bantsur for example was not playeed much either, but it posted results and people started playing it because it showed how good it is, Dreadstill fails to do that.

The main reson why Dreadstill fails:
Bant Countertop is just better.

Both have the Countertop-Engine and both have a big ass finisher. However if none of these plans succeed Dreadstill has nothing, where the CTop deck has the ususall Bant-Aggro stuff (not as good, but better than some random Stifles).

And I thing its safe to assume that Progenitus > Nought.

Progenitus is harder to kill overall, while Nought dies to a lot of things, including being blocked by Progenitus + Goyf/Qasal/Kotr.

Dreadstill is still a potentially good deck, but it has no place in the current meta.

Clark Kant

03-12-2010, 07:25 PM

Both have the Countertop-Engine and both have a big ass finisher. However if none of these plans succeed Dreadstill has nothing, where the CTop deck has the ususall Bant-Aggro stuff (not as good, but better than some random Stifles).

This thread is about Dreadnought, not Dreadstill. There is absolutely no reason why a deck playing Dreadnought can't have back up threats that are also large and scary.

As I posted already, this...

4 Phyrexian Dreadnought
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Tombstalker

4 Vision Charm
4 Stifle
2 Lightning Greaves

Vision Charm pumps Tarmogoyf, reduces Tombstalker's casting cost by 5, "stifles" Dreadnought into play, AND can protect Dreadnought from removal by phasing it out till the end of the turn, all at instant speed.

approach has a lot of potential. You get to devote fewer slots to threats than Bant, and still end up with better quality threats overall.

It's just not played, not because it's not good but because most haven't heard of it (same as Bant Survival as you point out). Once that approach gets played and does well, more poeple will start playing it.

Rood

03-12-2010, 07:40 PM

It's not more removal that is why Dreadnought is seeing a decrease in play it's people look at it and see a 2 mana combo in Entomb+Reanimate which says target player can't play spells. Which is fine Iona is a beast, But that combo also has it's flaws as well.

Kuma

03-13-2010, 11:59 AM

I don't understand your response here. I didn't suggest that NoPro had a better or worse ratio than Dreadstill, all I said was it's being played a lot because people are fascinated by the interactions in it and because it has received many recent cards that are worth exploring. If however you believe that NoPro is Top 8'ing in significant disproportion to the number of people playing it then I think you should put the data up to show that.

Right now NoPro is seeing a huge amount of play because people are fascinated by the deck, and because it is fed by many recent cards that people are still exploring. It's a very good deck, in the same way that Supreme Blue without NoPro is good and that Baseruption was good when it was played. It is putting up a lot of results because it is played a lot.

Given that you've been arguing for how powerful and underplayed Dreadstill is, saying this strongly implies that you think that Dreadstill is putting up better results based on number of players.

I never made any claims about NoPro top-eighting. I said that it does what Dreadstill does, and does it better.

Again, I don't understand the response. The DTB forum is based purely on the number of Top 8's above a certain tourney size that a deck shows up in in the sample being measured.

This is the first indication that you understand that.

I've already said that I think that Dreadstill is underplayed, and underplayed decks are rarely going to crack the DTB forum. That's not politics thats demographics.

My bad. I didn't mean to paint you as some kind of conspiracy theorist. You said "Illuminati" and my mind went to conspiracy theories.

Forbiddian

03-13-2010, 01:04 PM

Dreadstill first was recorded in a Top 8 on October 11th 2007. Qasali Pridemage was first recorded in a Top 8 May 9th, 2009.

From October 11th 2007 to May 8th 2009 Dreadstill recorded 133 Top 8's and 22 wins in 18 months. That averages out to 7.39 Top 8's and 1.22 wins a month.

From May 9th 2009 to today Dreadstill recorded 62 Top 8's and 13 Wins in 10 months. That averages out to 6.2 Top 8's and 1.3 wins a month.

When I read this, I was stunned. I was very surprised that Dreadstill was still performing as well as it had been before Qasali Pridemage was printed. I was about to apologize in the face of this evidence when I realized that you have a history of being a little snot-nosed liar, and I figured you were probably just lying. Anyway, you almost got me, but instead of trusting your crappy, misleading analysis, I decided to do my own.

So you start the clock the first day that Rodney Hannigan got a top 8 in an online tournament, even though the deck puts out no other top 8s for like 4 months after that when Rodney Hannigan strikes again. In fact, it's ALL RODNEY HANNIGAN FOR SIX MONTHS, but this time is all "on the clock" for pre-may-2009 time. And don't pretend you didn't see that, you looked at the data enough to analyze it yourself you little liar.

You also start the Qasali Pridemage clock in May 2009, which is again very misleading. Dreadstill is definitely on a downward spiral by then, but it doesn't bottom out for a while, yet you're starting the clock as early as you think you can get away with to try to manipulate the numbers.

Anyway, here's a higher resolution picture of Dreadstill's performance, binned by-quarter. I.e. Jan-March is X.00, April to June is X.25.

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z5/Forbiddian/Top8HistoryforDreadstill.jpg

And we can see that Dreadstill begins its journey on the back of Rodney Hannigan. It takes a while for it to build up, but it builds to a top 8 rate of about 10 tournaments a month. It is very comfortably hovering around 10 top 8s a month (30 per quarter) until Qasali Pridemage is printed. In the following Quarter (July, August, and September, 2009, when QPM first starts getting played at its current rate) Dreadstill drops off the table, exactly as everyone predicted. This data proves everyone in this thread is right (except Foolofatook, of course).

NICE TRY, FOOLOFATOOK!

Some Guy

03-13-2010, 01:24 PM

I remember two years ago when I got my Phyrexian Dreadnought Qasali'd. It sucked, cause I was like all reading it a bunch of times cause I didn't know what it did and stuff.

thats amazing , considering the card is only 11 months old. I remember casting kozilek off x3 black lotus, an underground sea and some moxen back when alpha got released. everyone was just like "what ? what ?" cause it hadnt been printed yet so they didn't know what it did and stuff.

menace13

03-13-2010, 01:25 PM

When I read this, I was stunned. I was very surprised that Dreadstill was still performing as well as it had been before Qasali Pridemage was printed. I was about to apologize in the face of this evidence when I realized that you have a history of being a little snot-nosed liar, and I figured you were probably just lying.

You are my hero!

FoolofaTook

03-13-2010, 05:00 PM

Forbiddian

03-13-2010, 05:21 PM

@Forbiddian

First of all adopt a civil tone in your posts. I may disagree with people but I don't act like an asshole in the process, you could learn something from that. If you find me that disagreeable you should just put me on ignore. It's what I'm going to do to you after this post.

Secondly, your chart shows that Dreadstill was already on the decline before Qasali Pridemage entered the scene. It went from the peak of 40 odd Top 8's at the end of 2008 to to 30 for the first half of 2009, which was safely in the period before Qasali Pridemage was played in tourneys. Scott Blumenthal won the SCG 5K in Boston playing Dreadstill at just the point that your analysis suggests it was in severe decline, Rich Shay finished third in that tourney playing Dreadstill, at what is still the largest Legacy tourney to date in the northeast region. They did this on June 21st 2009, well past the point at which your analysis suggests Dreadstill had declined to the plateau it is on right now. They did this at an event in which Zoo, with Qasali Pridemage, was present as indicated by Alix Hatfield's fourth place finish playing that deck. Note that by definition the Zoo deck was beaten by one of the Dreadstill decks and quite possibly by both in the Top 8.

In any case, respond as you will. I will not be watching the response so feel free to use whatever level of histionics you choose.

Not the first time I've caught you lying and using dishonest debate tactics.

Also, I was merely correcting your crappy analysis/lies by giving the real facts you were trying to hide. Nice job writing an essay explaining why it was stupid in the first place. You just proved how slimy you are at debating and how little evidence means to you. In one sentence, the consistent number of top 8s that Dreadstill has PROVES that Qasali had no impact. Then I point out how that's a sack of shit and that the same facts you were supposed to present tell the OPPOSITE story, guess what you? You jump ship and act like the numbers are meaningless and that I was the first person to bring them up.

Bardo was nice enough to present some new debating guidelines. Maybe you should read them. It includes stuff like, "Don't outright lie to cover your ass" and "Be ready to admit when you're wrong." I think that this would have been one of those times.

I don't understand why you say that Qasali Pridemage lead to the downfall of Dreadstill. As far as I can see there's been no downfall of Dreadstill. It Top 8's nearly as much as it did before Qasali Pridemage was printed.

Keep in mind, he was looking at the same data I was. Again: This was after he'd examined the SAME Deckcheck data that I was/am looking at. Then I totally own him, and he suddenly switches gears. Read his next post:

Secondly, your chart shows that Dreadstill was already on the decline before Qasali Pridemage entered the scene.

LOL!

[/warpath]

Anyway, people really need to step up and call people out for lying. I mean, it's one thing to be wrong about something, or even most things, but The Source is about improving on our ideas. If you're doing research into an idea (like looking at the rate of Top 8s for Dreadstill to see if new sets had an impact), and then the data show that the other camp is correct -- DON'T JUST LIE ABOUT IT AND PRETEND LIKE YOU WERE RIGHT ALL ALONG!

I was ALMOST tricked by Foolofatook (who's had this coming for a long time and I actually remember him for being a liar/dishonest debater -- hence I think why other people thumbed him down and why I went out of my way to make sure he wasn't lying with his analysis this time). If he had been a less disrespected debater, I wouldn't have bothered to check his facts and would have just believed him.

pi4meterftw

03-13-2010, 06:15 PM

Jon Stewart

03-13-2010, 06:36 PM

Meekrab

03-13-2010, 06:53 PM

"Lol I pwned someone with a chart of one metric varying over time that can't possibly be due to confounding variables, durr hurr I win one internet."

There are many reasons why dreadstill might have suffered such a drop in Top 8 results, and lots of them don't have anything to do with it being an empirically bad deck. The fact that it continues to place well in large tournaments despite an undeniably small number of people playing the deck seems to bear that out.

Forbiddian

03-13-2010, 06:59 PM

Jesus, there's no reason to gang up on the guy.

Both Matt and Foolatook made valid points. Going purely based on the graph, there has clearly been some decline in Dreadstill's top 8s.

But again, going purely by the graph, I see no indication that the decline can be attributed to Pridemage. Much of the decline seems to have occured before Pridgemage saw wide play.

Anyways, regardless of who's correct, I don't think it's fair to direct adjectives like "snot-nosed liar", "slimy", "crappy", and "stupid" at another poster. It's needlessy inflammatory and doesn't come off as very mature.

The problem is that the debate isn't about whether or not Pridemage is the sole reason for Dreadstill's decline. Foolofatook argues that Dreadstill has not declined, and that it is as good as it ever was, and that it's merely lacking exposure. He backs this up with data. The data turn out to be fraudulent, with him bending every possible number to try to squeeze out a result that somewhat supports his camp (that Dreadstill is making as many top 8s as ever). And nobody looking at the data could have made an honest mistake, it's just a flat lie.

Then after the true data is presented, he continues to try to lie his way out of it by saying "YOU SEE? DREADSTILL STARTED TO DECLINE BEFORE PRIDEMAGE!!! I WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG!!! IT WASN'T PRIDEMAGE!!!"

Even though when he looked at the data, he concluded that Dreadstill had NOT declined at all, and that's the point I was responding to. He's *completely* flipping his position but still saying, "You see, I was right!" even after he was exposed for lying. Also, not the first time he's done shit like this, read through the thread on the reprint policy and be amazed how this guy gets away with his dishonesty.

We could call this debate tactic "The Tin Man." You create a Strawman built on a lie (a "fake strawman?"), and then when someone calls you on it, you flip your position, burn your own strawman, and pretend like you were right all along. Genius!

It's not about the facts being good ones, or irrefutable ones. There could definitely still be debate on the cause of Dreadstill's demise. From some experience testing Dreadstill, I think Qasali Pridemage was a really large contributing factor. The problem is when people have information and lie about it to trick readers. I don't even think the analysis of top 8s over time is very good evidence. But the point is that the data clearly show one trend and Foolofatook pretended like they pointed the other way.

His arguments are crappy. His supporting facts are lies. He's a slimy debater. I stand by these statements.

I don't have facts on the status of the snot in and around his nose as of yet. I admit that was speculation, and I apologize.

Otter

03-13-2010, 07:17 PM

*chuckle* Whatever I've thought about Forbiddian from the last few months of his relentless NoGoyf spamming in every thread pales in comparison to my respect for the gigantic can of whoopass he just opened on this thread. Nicely done, good sir.

Jon Stewart

03-13-2010, 07:46 PM

The problem is that the debate isn't about whether or not Pridemage is the sole reason for Dreadstill's decline. Foolofatook argues that Dreadstill has not declined, and that it is as good as it ever was, and that it's merely lacking exposure.

That seems like a mischaracterization of his argument. He specifically posted that the amount of play Dreadstill sees HAS declined. He seems to be saying that this isn't because the deck is not competitive. It's because people have lost interest in the deck but that it still performs well when it's actually played. It's just not played as often. And if a deck is played less often overall, it's obviously going to top 8 less often as well. That's atleast how I read his argument. He even put forward the theory that the reason it's not played as much is because it's not as novel as Pro-NO and Reanimator decks. And historically that seems plausible, I've seen many decks spike in popularity when first introduced, and then see a decline in play after people get sick of them (or they have less of a surprise factor), even if they are still competitive.

There's a whole slew of decks Faire Stompy, Merfolk, Painter, Dragon Stompy that were extremely popular when the first emerged, because they seemed really novel and exciting, but atleast from what I've seen aren't played quite as much these days. Eldariel swears that Fairie Stompy is actually stronger in the current meta than it was before, and he understands the deck better than most.

I don't know if Foolatook's assessment is correct. But your data certainly hasn't debunked it. The only way to debunk that is to actually show that Dreadstill is taken to tournaments just as often as it was two years ago but yet doesn't top 8 as often despite seeing the same amount of play as it did before.

To my knowledge, there's no repository of how often the deck is played, only of how often it Top 8s. So I don't think it's even possible to prove that point empirically.

Just going by ancedotal evidence of what I see, it does seem like fewer players are playing Dreadstill at tournaments. So the decrease it top 8s may infact be for that reason alone, that not as many people are playing. I won't make that conclusion though, because it's strictly based on ancedotes. And even if fewer people are playing it, we still don't know what caused what. Did people drop the deck because they no longer think it's viable, or was it because it was no longer novel?

If they stopped playing it because they were worried that it's not viable thanks to Pridemage, were they correct to make that decision? If the deck is indeed no longer viable, why is it still top 8ing tournaments in what appear to be well developed metas?

I would be intrested in hearing from other people here. Do you see Dreadstill played at tourneys as frequently as you did two years ago.

pi4meterftw

03-13-2010, 10:01 PM

That seems like a mischaracterization of his argument. He specifically posted that the amount of play Dreadstill sees HAS declined. He seems to be saying that this isn't because the deck is not competitive. It's because people have lost interest in the deck but that it still performs well when it's actually played. It's just not played as often. And if a deck is played less often overall, it's obviously going to top 8 less often as well. That's atleast how I read his argument. He even put forward the theory that the reason it's not played as much is because it's not as novel as Pro-NO and Reanimator decks. And historically that seems plausible, I've seen many decks spike in popularity when first introduced, and then see a decline in play after people get sick of them (or they have less of a surprise factor), even if they are still competitive.

There's a whole slew of decks Faire Stompy, Merfolk, Painter, Dragon Stompy that were extremely popular when the first emerged, because they seemed really novel and exciting, but atleast from what I've seen aren't played quite as much these days. Eldariel swears that Fairie Stompy is actually stronger in the current meta than it was before, and he understands the deck better than most.

I don't know if Foolatook's assessment is correct. But your data certainly hasn't debunked it. The only way to debunk that is to actually show that Dreadstill is taken to tournaments just as often as it was two years ago but yet doesn't top 8 as often despite seeing the same amount of play as it did before.

To my knowledge, there's no repository of how often the deck is played, only of how often it Top 8s. So I don't think it's even possible to prove that point empirically.

Just going by ancedotal evidence of what I see, it does seem like fewer players are playing Dreadstill at tournaments. So the decrease it top 8s may infact be for that reason alone, that not as many people are playing. I won't make that conclusion though, because it's strictly based on ancedotes. And even if fewer people are playing it, we still don't know what caused what. Did people drop the deck because they no longer think it's viable, or was it because it was no longer novel?

If they stopped playing it because they were worried that it's not viable thanks to Pridemage, were they correct to make that decision? If the deck is indeed no longer viable, why is it still top 8ing tournaments in what appear to be well developed metas?

I would be intrested in hearing from other people here. Do you see Dreadstill played at tourneys as frequently as you did two years ago.

Your claim seems to be that the evidence Matt provided was insufficient.

It's technically always true that evidence is insufficient to prove a claim in a world where the very nature of truth is out to get you.

If your philosophy of life is that the world is unforgiving, and truth is out to get you, then you ought to operate under logical proofs only. Luckily, I don't restrain myself in this way, but if you do, then you shouldn't be willing to look at any evidence at all. You seem to have an unreasonably high threshold for what you have to see before you'll even call it "evidence" let alone "proof."

Jon Stewart

03-13-2010, 11:03 PM

Your claim seems to be that the evidence Matt provided was insufficient.

It's technically always true that evidence is insufficient to prove a claim in a world where the very nature of truth is out to get you.

If your philosophy of life is that the world is unforgiving, and truth is out to get you, then you ought to operate under logical proofs only.

What?

No, my claim was that Matt was proving something that wasn't what was being debated.

Foolatook argued that Dreadstill is being played less overall, and that was the reason that it was top 8ing less.

Matt's graph proved that Dreadstill wasn't top 8ing as often as did at it's peak.

But that was a point Foolatook already conceded. He already wrote that the deck is top 8ing less. His point was that the only reason the deck was top 8ing less was because it was being played less overall. But those who are still playing the deck, are top 8ing with it just as often as they did before.

So basically, according to Foolatook, if you take Dreadstill to a tourney today, you are just as likely to top 8 with the deck as you were two years ago. The only reason the deck isn't top 8ing as often as it did two years ago, is because people got bored with the deck, and thus not as many people are playing it today as they were two years ago.

We don't have the data to evaluate who is correct. To evaluate who is correct, we first have to establish how many people take Dreadstill to tournaments now, compared to two years ago.

If throughout the 2007, 400 people took Dreadstill to tournaments, and 80 of them of top 8ed with the deck.

And then we find out that for the entire year of 2009, only 40 people played Dreadstill at a tournament, and 8 of those people top 8ed with it.

Then it would suggest that Foolatook is correct. Dreadstill hasn't gotten worse. It is just as likely to land you a top 8 if you take it to a tourney as it was two years ago (discounting confounding variables).

On the other hand, if that data showed that for the 2009, 200 people played Dreadstill at a tournament, and yet only 8 of them top 8ed with it. It would support Matt.

It's the proportion/percentage of wins that matters to establish how well a deck performs. Not the raw number of wins.

To illustrate with an extreme example, if just about every single player started playing 9 Land Stompy. It would suddenly have more wins than every other deck in the format. And at the same time, if only one single person played ProBant at one tournament. Even if that person won GP Madrid, ProBant would have only have 1 top 8 for the whole year. If you evaluate the deck's strictly based on the raw number of top 8s as Matt's graph, and the DTB forum does, that would mean that 9 Land Stompy is the best deck in the format and ProBant is the just about the worst deck in legacy.

Rood

03-13-2010, 11:14 PM

Dreadstill has seen a decline of results since I haven't had the deck since around early 2009.

/Thread

FoolofaTook

03-13-2010, 11:25 PM

Dreadstill has seen a decline of results since I haven't had the deck since around early 2009.

/Thread

That would certainly explain a decrease in Top 8's, since you Top 8'd many of the tourneys you attended with it. The thing that I am getting at though is that when a good pilot plays Dreadstill in a tourney they're not significantly less likely to perform well with it than they did prior to Qasali Pridemage coming out. In fact Dreadstill has won 21% of the tourneys it Top 8'd in since the first tourney in which Qasali Pridemage was in a Top 8. That's a huge percentage to be winning when you Top 8. The relatively small sample size of tourneys in which Dreadstill has Top 8'd makes the possibility that the 21% number is a random variation to the high end of it's win curve real, but it's still an amazing number.

If you picked up Dreadstill again I would expect you to Top 8 just as often as you did prior to the printing of Qasali Pridemage.

walkerdog

03-14-2010, 07:58 PM

So, I'm not sure how interesting this is for the discussion, but Stiflenought was the bee's knees in Classic (the MTGO eternal format). Due to a lack of "real" duals for a while, then a lack of enemy duals, being mono or two allied colors was a big benefit. 1-3 color Stiflenought performed even through the printing of Kro-Grip. It didn't do as well, but hung around with Grip in the meta. Then Pridemage joined the format, and the deck just died online. I haven't seen one T8 this year, and it does get played. It is just awful now.

pi4meterftw

03-14-2010, 09:50 PM

That would certainly explain a decrease in Top 8's, since you Top 8'd many of the tourneys you attended with it. The thing that I am getting at though is that when a good pilot plays Dreadstill in a tourney they're not significantly less likely to perform well with it than they did prior to Qasali Pridemage coming out. In fact Dreadstill has won 21% of the tourneys it Top 8'd in since the first tourney in which Qasali Pridemage was in a Top 8. That's a huge percentage to be winning when you Top 8. The relatively small sample size of tourneys in which Dreadstill has Top 8'd makes the possibility that the 21% number is a random variation to the high end of it's win curve real, but it's still an amazing number.

If you picked up Dreadstill again I would expect you to Top 8 just as often as you did prior to the printing of Qasali Pridemage.

Well you can expect whatever you want but you'd only expect what you said if you were retarded.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 01:25 AM

What?

No, my claim was that Matt was proving something that wasn't what was being debated.

Foolatook argued that Dreadstill is being played less overall, and that was the reason that it was top 8ing less.

Matt's graph proved that Dreadstill wasn't top 8ing as often as did at it's peak.

But that was a point Foolatook already conceded. He already wrote that the deck is top 8ing less. His point was that the only reason the deck was top 8ing less was because it was being played less overall. But those who are still playing the deck, are top 8ing with it just as often as they did before.

So basically, according to Foolatook, if you take Dreadstill to a tourney today, you are just as likely to top 8 with the deck as you were two years ago. The only reason the deck isn't top 8ing as often as it did two years ago, is because people got bored with the deck, and thus not as many people are playing it today as they were two years ago.

We don't have the data to evaluate who is correct. To evaluate who is correct, we first have to establish how many people take Dreadstill to tournaments now, compared to two years ago.

If throughout the 2007, 400 people took Dreadstill to tournaments, and 80 of them of top 8ed with the deck.

And then we find out that for the entire year of 2009, only 40 people played Dreadstill at a tournament, and 8 of those people top 8ed with it.

Then it would suggest that Foolatook is correct. Dreadstill hasn't gotten worse. It is just as likely to land you a top 8 if you take it to a tourney as it was two years ago (discounting confounding variables).

On the other hand, if that data showed that for the 2009, 200 people played Dreadstill at a tournament, and yet only 8 of them top 8ed with it. It would support Matt.

It's the proportion/percentage of wins that matters to establish how well a deck performs. Not the raw number of wins.

To illustrate with an extreme example, if just about every single player started playing 9 Land Stompy. It would suddenly have more wins than every other deck in the format. And at the same time, if only one single person played ProBant at one tournament. Even if that person won GP Madrid, ProBant would have only have 1 top 8 for the whole year. If you evaluate the deck's strictly based on the raw number of top 8s as Matt's graph, and the DTB forum does, that would mean that 9 Land Stompy is the best deck in the format and ProBant is the just about the worst deck in legacy.

Sometimes you can step back from the data and use common sense: Is the deck fairly fun? Yes. Was it good? Yes. Has it been doing much lately? No... hmm... What has changed? Grip and Pridgemage, along with the printing of better fatties...

Now if none of those things were true (say, it is miserable to play, no new cards that hose it, no better alternatives) then we could talk about why it is underplayed. But it pretty much is ungood now.

F3lix

03-15-2010, 03:34 AM

Sometimes you can step back from the data and use common sense: Is the deck fairly fun? Yes. Was it good? Yes. Has it been doing much lately? No... hmm... What has changed? Grip and Pridgemage, along with the printing of better fatties...

Now if none of those things were true (say, it is miserable to play, no new cards that hose it, no better alternatives) then we could talk about why it is underplayed. But it pretty much is ungood now.

Grip has been around for as long as Dreads been around, and while QPM is a real threat and played in two popular decks MD, it is met with many MD answers before and after its resolution. Grip is probably the single biggest threat to nought, and its played by many more decks the QPM is, though only seen in games 2 and 3.

If I may present an alternative theory why we're seeing less DS around, it may be because people love playing tournament worthy decks that can kill with huge fatties. Now that people can play a 10/10 pro everything, and 7/7 target opponent cannot cast spells anymore, all in a blue shell, and be able to come down in turns 2 and 3, people with similar playstyles as a DS player may have just wanted to try something else new and exciting.

What's your reasoning for an "ungood" deck managing to go undefeated in day 1 of Madrid?

menace13

03-15-2010, 04:10 AM

Marius Hausmann is still keeping this thing going, about the only list i would play is his.

Forbiddian

03-15-2010, 04:36 AM

I saw a guy playing Dreadstill at the Pro Tour side event. He was my round 1 opponent. I mailed him a donut and he ended up going 4-0 after that to make it to the 4-1 bubble matchup, which he lost to go 4-2, out of top 4 contention.

The same guy was at table 1 for a round or two at the Knightware event (@ like 2-0 and then 3-0), but he missed out on Top 8 after two losses in a row.

Julian23

03-15-2010, 06:53 AM

What's your reasoning for an "ungood" deck managing to go undefeated in day 1 of Madrid?

Neither Marius nor Bernhard were undefeated Day 1. And they both were the only Dreadstills making Day 2. Just to clear this up.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 08:09 AM

Grip has been around for as long as Dreads been around, and while QPM is a real threat and played in two popular decks MD, it is met with many MD answers before and after its resolution. Grip is probably the single biggest threat to nought, and its played by many more decks the QPM is, though only seen in games 2 and 3.

If I may present an alternative theory why we're seeing less DS around, it may be because people love playing tournament worthy decks that can kill with huge fatties. Now that people can play a 10/10 pro everything, and 7/7 target opponent cannot cast spells anymore, all in a blue shell, and be able to come down in turns 2 and 3, people with similar playstyles as a DS player may have just wanted to try something else new and exciting.

What's your reasoning for an "ungood" deck managing to go undefeated in day 1 of Madrid?

The same thing people go undefeated in big tournies with bad decks (vamps in standard won SCG 5Ks before WWK was out...)... good matchups and good play. It can happen. Doesn't make it a good deck.

EDIT: According to the final standings from round 9, he was 3 points off of perfect; either he had some draws or lost a match. Still a good performance. Also, your above theory: aren't those fatties just better? Pro everything? Yes please! You don't cast spells? Yes please! As I said above, better fatties along with strong hosers = the deck is ungood (that might be too strong, but whatever).

FoolofaTook

03-15-2010, 12:39 PM

Dreadstill, particularly the Ur version, is about as close to MUC as you get in Legacy at this point. MUC has always been boring as hell to play and takes a particular mindset to want to play it. Dreadstill's heyday was when the the Ugr decks let people pretend they weren't just playing MUC. Look at the lists Rodney started with and the lists still Top 8ing today, those are the pure Dreadstill lists and I think there are just very few people who want to play that kind of deck.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 12:56 PM

grahf

03-15-2010, 01:00 PM

Neither Marius nor Bernhard were undefeated Day 1. And they both were the only Dreadstills making Day 2. Just to clear this up.

Are you sure? If that's the case, this list is wrong:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpmad10/day1undefeated

Marius Hausmann is clearly listed under the Day 1 undefeated decklists.

FoolofaTook

03-15-2010, 01:07 PM

Umm... people are still trying to make U/x landstill variants work that don't have stiflenought... so why would you think they'd want to play the more boring, slower deck?

Because the more boring, slower deck is much more traditional and much less like MUC. Landstill has removal, counters and inevitability - that's a classic archetype that has been supported in tourney play since tourney play began. Ur Dreadstill has almost no removal, has few if any non-blue spells in the main deck (the usual list has nothing but blue and artifacts), and doesn't even run bounce the way MUC often does to make up some of the removal gap. Ur Dreadstill runs no specific creature removal main deck. It just doesn't feel right. The fact that people can do very well with it doesn't change the popular perceptions of it enough for it to see wide play. The Ur version never saw wide play in the first place.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 01:07 PM

Are you sure? If that's the case, this list is wrong:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpmad10/day1undefeated

Marius Hausmann is clearly listed under the Day 1 undefeated decklists.

He had 3 points off of a perfect day: either he drew a ton or he picked up a loss.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 01:11 PM

Because the more boring, slower deck is much more traditional and much less like MUC. Landstill has removal, counters and inevitability - that's a classic archetype that has been supported in tourney play since tourney play began. Ur Dreadstill has almost no removal, has few if any non-blue spells (the usual list has nothing but blue and artifacts) in the main deck, and doesn't even run bounce the way MUC often does to make up some of the removal gap.

Yes, except that decks like this have been huge in Ext (goyf instead of nought) the last time countertop was legal there, and a large % of the "best players" prefer to play MUC or derivatives of it any time it is viable as they feel they have more control over their decisions and their opponent's decisions. This vague, "people just don't play it... because... it's... something..." feeling you have is just wrong. Nothing bad about that, but it is an incorrect stance.

FoolofaTook

03-15-2010, 01:38 PM

Yes, except that decks like this have been huge in Ext (goyf instead of nought) the last time countertop was legal there, and a large % of the "best players" prefer to play MUC or derivatives of it any time it is viable as they feel they have more control over their decisions and their opponent's decisions. This vague, "people just don't play it... because... it's... something..." feeling you have is just wrong. Nothing bad about that, but it is an incorrect stance.

I disagree with the MUC thing. I think people hate playing MUC. I went and looked on Deckcheck.net just to double-check, since the northeast US meta may be unrepresentative of Legacy as a whole. 81 decks were listed for MUC, 79 from 2007 to 2010. That number looked really high to me and so I started clicking in the lists themselves and 25 of the 79 were not actually MUC, having Swords to Plowshares or something else non-blue in the main list. People just don't like playing decks that can't remove creatures from play unless they're planning to win really fast, something that Ur Dreadstill can do but often does not.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 01:50 PM

I disagree with the MUC thing. I think people hate playing MUC. I went and looked on Deckcheck.net just to double-check, since the northeast US meta may be unrepresentative of Legacy as a whole. 81 decks were listed for MUC, 79 from 2007 to 2010. That number looked really high to me and so I started clicking in the lists themselves and 25 of the 79 were not actually MUC, having Swords to Plowshares or something else non-blue in the main list. People just don't like playing decks that can't remove creatures from play unless they're planning to win really fast, something that Ur Dreadstill can do but often does not.

Umm... you realize calling a deck MUC is a little looser of a distinction that you are making, right? You're disqualifying Uw MUC but counting Ur Dreadstill even though it splashs a little at times?

EDIT
In fact, from the DS thread:
"Zoo Preboard 55/45 - EE is your friend in this MU. Almost all of their drops are 1CC creatures. Dreadnought wrecks face if you can burn down their hand some. Remember...Pridemage has to stay off the board at all costs. So be sure to keep a Snare ready for him and obviously Goyfy. Counterbalance also is your friend here...try to get it online ASAP if you can. Preboard Zoo shouldn't be giving you much troubles.
Postboard 40/60- Zoo has alot of hate for Dreadstill postboard including more StPs/K-grips etc etc. You really have to play this extremely controlling preboard because we have alot of tools to deal with their threats. Don't foolishing drop a Dreadnought or it will surely cost you this match postboard.
[Side-(draw) -2 Daze -1 Dreadnought -1 Standstill -1 Trickbind -1 Counterbalance +1 EE +3 BEB +2 Firespout]
[(play)- +1 Daze +1 Standstill -1 BEB -1 Firespout]"

So post-board the matchup is awful against Zoo due to cards we've been mentioning, plus StPs (now paths probably so you don't even get to gain 12). Also, his list runs removal in red and often taps out or taps low for EEs... so by your definition this is not a MUC deck either, right? Cuz y'know, not having non-U in the main but having it in the side, and relying on REBs and firespouts definitely doesn't fit your definition... splashing in the SB counts too.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 02:00 PM

I'm actually curious enough that I'm going to go run it in some practice MTGO games. I'll use Rood's list, +- an expected meta choice or two.

Julian23

03-15-2010, 02:04 PM

Are you sure? If that's the case, this list is wrong:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpmad10/day1undefeated

Marius Hausmann is clearly listed under the Day 1 undefeated decklists.

It's an coverage error. He wen't 8-0 (with 3 Byes) then lost the final round to...I forgot. Still a really impressive finish overall.

grahf

03-15-2010, 03:35 PM

It's an coverage error. He wen't 8-0 (with 3 Byes) then lost the final round to...I forgot. Still a really impressive finish overall.

OK Cool. Actually come to think of it... didn't he lose to Nikitin Loam? I was watching a video of that match on Youtube.

menace13

03-15-2010, 04:14 PM

OK Cool. Actually come to think of it... didn't he lose to Nikitin Loam? I was watching a video of that match on Youtube.

Yes The Loam player drew the nuts, if it wasnt for that Marius could have prolly won that one.
Walker try the list Marius plays, very well put together and he top 8's all over Europe with it.

FoolofaTook

03-15-2010, 04:50 PM

Yes The Loam player drew the nuts, if it wasnt for that Marius could have prolly won that one.
Walker try the list Marius plays, very well put together and he top 8's all over Europe with it.

Except for the composition of the fetchlands that list is one card main deck off of the list Rodney Hannigan used at the end of 2008 to win the Source Anniversary tourney. It's amazingly consistent.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 05:08 PM

Except for the composition of the fetchlands that list is one card main deck off of the list Rodney Hannigan used at the end of 2008 to win the Source Anniversary tourney. It's amazingly consistent.

Seems good so far. Posting a vid in a bit. Problem: if they do draw grip, you just scoop pretty much ahah. I'm scared to death of fighting a thresh deck with this unless you wreck them mana.

Clark Kant

03-15-2010, 05:18 PM

I'm wondering if the weakness isn't so much Dreadnought, as it is Dreadstill reliance on Standstill and Dreadnought (it's low threat count) in the current environment.

With the rise of aggro decks, drop off in control decks and the lack of removal for Dreadstill, Standstill looks like it would be a big liability.

Say your opponent leads with a Wild Nacatl or Kird Ape or Loam Lion or something. Even if you Daze or FoW it, they will just play one their next turn before you can play your Standstill.

Suddenly, all the Standstill you have in hand become dead cards.

That's why I'm more intrigued by the Dreadstalker approach. It plays 12 threats...

4 Tarmogoyf
4 Tombstalker
4 Dreadnought

All of them are big enough to trump, all other aggro decks. And you play enough threats that a successful removal or countering of one of your threats doesn't really phase you. If you are absolutely certain that your opponent will be siding in Krosan Grips and all sorts of hate to attack your Dreadnought, you can even side the card out and instead just play more control transforming into Team America, while simultanously rendering all the artifact/enchantment hate they bring in moot and generating virtual card advantage.

FoolofaTook

03-15-2010, 05:29 PM

Seems good so far. Posting a vid in a bit. Problem: if they do draw grip, you just scoop pretty much ahah. I'm scared to death of fighting a thresh deck with this unless you wreck them mana.

Maybe Marius or Rodney will explain this situation better. Threshold is not a real threat to Dreadstill. The Rock, Landstill, mid-range control in general, that's where Dreadstill gets really uncomfortable.

deadlock

03-15-2010, 05:33 PM

Nought is not that good in a purely aggressive shell, with no way to regain the lost card advantage.

Before dropping Standstill i would try splashing white for 3-4 STP and maybe 2 Jotun Grunt maindeck, this way you adress the aggresive trend of the meta and increase the power of Standstill in this deck even more. Grunt was the other card, which came to my mind when thinking about the white splash. It can screw a little bit with your opponents GY and is a solid wall / beater for a couple of turns. Just a thought.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 05:38 PM

Clark Kant

03-15-2010, 05:59 PM

It's a nice theory, but I'd disagree with it... Zoo goes 3+ power 1-drop, then burns your fat blocker (aside from nought) and trades the 1 drop for it. Or they just STP/path you out.

Zoo doesn't play countermagic, you do.

Just daze their burn spell and you will both kill their blocker and cost them a burn spell (2:1 card advantage in your favor and one that's both less mana intensive and much more likely to happen than when you manage to blow up 2 cards with 1 EE without losing anything).

If they manage to StP/Path your threats through your countermagic when your deck plays 12 threats. Then it's a surefire bet they would've been able to StP/Path your Dreadnought when you are only playing 4 threats. Atleast when it's your Goyf or Tombstalker they are StPing rather than your Dreadnought, atleast you're not taking a 2:1 card disadvantage. They clear your opponent's hand of their removal so your subsequent Dreadnought can finish them off in two turns flat.

----------------------deadlock,

Standstill only generates card advantage if you already have control of the board. If you don't have board control, then Standstill is card disadvantage (a dead card taking up valuable space in your hand). Decks like Zoo, Goblins, Merfolk, aggro decks of all forms, make it extremely difficult for Dreadstill to have control of the board. And in all those matchups, Standstill hurts you way more often than it helps you imho.

The more common or potent aggro gets, the worse Standstill gets in an aggro control deck like Dreadstill. And aggro has been getting extremely powerful with each set printed over the past few years, with no signs of that trend reversing.

Rood

03-15-2010, 08:08 PM

Seems good so far. Posting a vid in a bit. Problem: if they do draw grip, you just scoop pretty much ahah. I'm scared to death of fighting a thresh deck with this unless you wreck them mana.

Bait out the grip with a Counterbalance or just don't play the Dreadnought. Playing around Grip is generally the first thing you learn once playing with Dreadstill a bit. It's like learning how to play Ichorid postboard around Relic or Crypt.

walkerdog

03-15-2010, 08:12 PM

Zoo doesn't play countermagic, you do.

Just daze their burn spell and you will both kill their blocker and cost them a burn spell (2:1 card advantage in your favor and one that's both less mana intensive and much more likely to happen than when you manage to blow up 2 cards with 1 EE without losing anything).

If they manage to StP/Path your threats through your countermagic when your deck plays 12 threats. Then it's a surefire bet they would've been able to StP/Path your Dreadnought when you are only playing 4 threats. Atleast when it's your Goyf or Tombstalker they are StPing rather than your Dreadnought, atleast you're not taking a 2:1 card disadvantage. They clear your opponent's hand of their removal so your subsequent Dreadnought can finish them off in two turns flat.

How do you plan to daze the 1CMC burn, such as lightning bolt? It's fairly likely that they possess a 2nd mana. If not, sure, daze away, but if they have a 1 drop, you play goyf/big Tombs, they attack, you block and they kill him with burn... he's still deadsville man.

Also, I think that 2/1ing them with EE is much more likely since I do it regularly. Given Spell Snare, Stifle and Wasteland, the opponent is fairly like to find themselves, on turn two, playing a 1CC threat. If they have more mana, then you obviously are going to try to counter or delay new threats, but you're seeking to set them up to drop two 1CC fellas quickly.

Clark Kant

03-15-2010, 08:40 PM

How do you plan to daze the 1CMC burn, such as lightning bolt? It's fairly likely that they possess a 2nd mana [to both block and use a burn spell your goyf to kill it.]

You do realize that Zoo plays creatures right? And likes to cast them their first few turns.

If they decide to leave all their lands untapped instead of playing any creatures, so that when you swing your Goyf, they can block + burn it even thru a Daze, and essentially use up two cards AND a full turn of tempo just to kill it. Either let them do it (you are getting a 2:1 trade after all AND wasted their turn to boot), or just FoW it if you can't Daze it. Then play your second threat the next turn.

It's fairly likely that they possess a 2nd mana. If not, sure, daze away, but if they have a 1 drop, you play goyf/big Tombs, they attack, you block and they kill him with burn[and also lose a blocker]... he's still deadsville man.

Yes he is dead. My point is that when you're playing 12 different threats, any one of which can win games singlehandedly, you wouldn't care as much.

Both Dreadstill and Dreadstalker can play the exact same base of countermagic to protect their threats.

But with Dreadstill, if you lose your threat, (Dreadnought), it can be a devastating loss, since you invested 2 cards into getting the one into play and only play 4 threats total.

In Dreadstalker, if you lose an early threat, you don't care as much, because you only invested one card into it, and likely have a second threat in your hand all ready to go.