Article: Eternal on the Other Side of the Ocean: Learning from Three Flawed Decks

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

Well, my new article is out somewhat earlier than expected - hopefully some of you enjoy the additional Legacy-content, let me know what you think about this approach to deck-analysis! :) Btw, my publishing schedule is all organized now, so don't expect another one two days from now :p

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/21062_Eternal_on_the_Other_Side_of_the_Ocean_Learning_from_Three_Flawed_Decks.html

[Cthuloo]

Good work, as usual, and interesting topic. I only half agree of faeries, though: you're right when you say the deck needs another good finisher, but when it manages to drop Stalker the tempo plan is really efficient. Bitterblossom can also be definitely strong: it's a way to capitalize on the tempo gain (similarly to UGB thresh with Confidant) and lets you switch to the control role when needed. The deck IMHO is not "structurally" flawed, like the other two, but rather misses a piece (a second good finisher).

[wcm8]

Hyper-linear combo decks that use one method of attack to kill their opponent are bad in Legacy. If you have the trump card to their attack, the deck crumbles. Dredge? Grave-hate. Burn? Counter-top or an even faster clock. Belcher? Force of will, or perhaps the deck just fizzles on its own. These decks can win in a small tournament because the meta-game may be unprepared to deal with them. But at a large tournament, barring the stars aligning and having good matchups all day, they are poor choices if the intention is to actually win the whole thing. I think your article did a great job pointing this out.

The other end of the spectrum, ‘nebulous inconsistency’ like that found in Legacy Faeries, is also bad because all of the tempo it gains isn’t backed up by a fast clock, as you pointed out. A tempo deck does not want the game to go on long, because they don’t typically have a strong end-game. I’d much rather be swinging with a huge Tarmogoyf or Knight of the Reliquary than 1/1’s, hoping to find my 1 or 2 Jittes with only 6 cantrips.

Successful decks, in general, seem have either a) high consistency, or b) multiple modes of attack that they can shift between, depending on their opponent or simply the cards they’ve drawn. For example, Dreadstill can shift between playing combo, control, or ‘tempo’ (a very loosely defined term, but here I mean disruptive in an attempt to gain incremental advantage turn by turn) and isn’t limited to only one method of actually winning the game. This is in part why Faeries in Extended is the best deck, because it can alter its play style and go for alternative modes of winning. I think you find that a lot of better players prefer to play decks that, while perhaps not boasting as much raw strength as a combo deck, allow for superior play skill to show itself over the course of a tournament.

Hyper-linear combo strategies seem to be falling by the wayside. Without efficient tutors like Mystical Tutor or Survival of the Fittest, combo decks can’t as consistently assemble or protect their mode of attack. Yes, a turn 2 Emrakul trumps most decks, but how often over the course of a tournament must the deck spend turns searching for Show and Tell and then actually resolve it safely?

Legacy is not Vintage, tempo and incremental advantage matters. There are no Time Vault/Key top decks, Demonic Tutors, or Yawgmoth Wills. Dredge does not have access to Bazaar of Bagdhad, and prison-type decks can’t [usually] lock the game down completely in the first few turns. Personally, I am glad that ‘unfair’ and ‘non-interactive’ decks aren’t as good in Legacy as they are in Vintage, because it makes for a more interesting and varied meta-game. How would you really like it if you had to devote 6-7 slots to Dredge in your sideboard if you wanted a chance at winning a tournament?

Tl;dr: liked the article, inconsistent combo decks usually suck in legacy

[Rico Suave]

Successful decks, in general, seem have either a) high consistency, or b) multiple modes of attack that they can shift between, depending on their opponent or simply the cards they’ve drawn.

For b) I think the word you're looking for is flexibility.

[wcm8]

Yes, exactly.

[Tammit67]

Loved the article! Thanks for the good read

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

@Cthuloo: Happy you liked it. Concerning Faeries, I agree that this is clearly the most salvagable of the three decks. My problems with it are that I don't see what you gain by playing objectively weaker cards (Bitterblossom/Sprite) over Tarmogoyf/Stalker and more regular countermagic as long as you don't take some real advantage of the tribal-synergies. This is especially true when considering that the slowness Bitterblossom represents is one of the main problems with making the tempo-plan effective. If the deck was better prepared to follow either the Tempo- or the control-plan, that would deal with my issues with it quite well, actually.

@wcm8: I generally agree with what you're saying, though I think the problem isn't with hyper-linear combo in general (though consistency is clearly extremely important). Something like TES can interact with the opponent's disruption and fix its draws, allowing it to win through a FoW or even two. As such, you can outplay the opponent and don't lose to them mulling to one much-played card (mulling to CB alone usually isn't enough). Sure, these decks become vulnerable to certain forms of hate because of their linearity but they remain flexible enough to actually win against hate a reasonable amount of the time. Well, some of them do, at least. Throwing all combo-decks in with Belcher is going too far in my opinion.

@Tammit67: Happy you enjoyed it :)

[Tammit67]

@wcm8: I generally agree with what you're saying, though I think the problem isn't with hyper-linear combo in general (though consistency is clearly extremely important). Something like TES can interact with the opponent's disruption and fix its draws, allowing it to win through a FoW or even two. As such, you can outplay the opponent and don't lose to them mulling to one much-played card (mulling to CB alone usually isn't enough). Sure, these decks become vulnerable to certain forms of hate because of their linearity but they remain flexible enough to actually win against hate a reasonable amount of the time. Well, some of them do, at least. Throwing all combo-decks in with Belcher is going too far in my opinion.



Would have liked you to more explicitly state which combo decks you thought were Hyper-linear as opposed to somewhat multifaceted. I don't know if it is really proper to talk about most combo decks as linear or not, but rather just on a speed vs resiliency continuum.Eg: Mystical Tutor Ant/ Reanimator where very linear in that they had one real method of attack, but by no means bad choices because they could not be so easily disrupted. Would you not consider these hyper-linear?

[Amon Amarth]

Were there any other decks you wanted to include here but couldn't due to space or some other reason? Good article,these kinda things tend to get people talking.

[brianw712]

I'm not sure that the fact that Faeries plays long-term cards like Bitterblossom really clashes with it being a tempo deck. The point of tempo decks, in my opinion, is to disrupt the opponent's early game plan long enough so that, by the time they catch up, you're already so far ahead that it doesn't matter anymore. Some tempo decks, like Canadian, do that by putting pressure on the opponent through Mongeese and Goyfs; by the time the opponent starts resolving relevant spells, they're already in burn range. Faeries does it by already having Bitterblossom, 3-4 Faeries, and Jitte in play before the opponent does something relevant. At that point, it doesn't matter if the life totals are relatively even, or that the Faeries player is only dealing a couple damage a turn; in most cases, the opponent isn't coming back from that.

Not saying that this strategy works all the time, just saying that it isn't necessarily a bad thing for tempo decks to include cards that provide pseudo-inevitability instead of cards that provide faster clocks (Bob in UGB Tempo Thresh decks is another example).

[Tammit67]

Not saying that this strategy works all the time, just saying that it isn't necessarily a bad thing for tempo decks to include cards that provide pseudo-inevitability instead of cards that provide faster clocks (Bob in UGB Tempo Thresh decks is another example).

The difference being though, the opponent will not do "something relevant" with an active bob, whose controller will draw more threats/ tempo cards. It ends up being a clock in itself. With bitterblossom, it takes more than keeping a 2/1 alive, and multiple fae enchantments can be quite bad for you.
Faeries plays a card that is needs a lot of time before it overcomes the deck being built around the tribal interactions. If it runs out of steam, you have a hand-full of 1/1 flyers. If Canadian thresh runs out of steam, it has Goyf.