Can someone justify the statement "It takes skill to play reanimator"?

[k2thej]

I just don't see it. I played a guy last night who was obviously a very good player, but he was playing reanimator and I never got to see his skillz. Playing this deck has less decision-making that Germany in the 1940's

[Telperion]

While some decks are just a dog to reanimator, burn/elves etc, most decks stand a fair chance for the match. Fast combo decks are usually favored game one, and appear relatively simple i.e. resolve engine and win. This isn't trivial if your opponent has any idea what they are doing and you don't have the perfect seven.

Have you ever seen cavern-ooze or played any combo deck versus RUG? You realize Karakas just trumps the deck, and is uncounterable and free? Do you know how to properly ponder and brainstorm, and when to blow daze for value? Not to mention the post board games with leyline, surgical, crypt, faerie macabre etc. Making this topic suggests you've never played a post board game with this deck.

[alderon666]

I just don't see it. I played a guy last night who was obviously a very good player, but he was playing reanimator and I never got to see his skillz. Playing this deck has less decision-making that Germany in the 1940's

Where you playing that really complicated deck that plays green dudes and then turns them sideways?


Reanimator really does present a lot less opportunities for you to outplay your opponent. It either has it or doesn't, and there aren't many things between those two extremes.
There will be games where the best player in the world wouldn't be able to do nothing to win and there will be other where the worst player in the world wouldn't be able to lose.
What makes a player better than other are the games between those two extremes, where a simple choice makes all the difference. Drawing 7 with Griselbrand knowing the %s of what you need to draw vs what opp might have, instead of just doing on autopilot.

[joemauer]

Any deck that plays Brainstorm takes skill since it is one of the most skill intensive cards in the format, right?

[dsck]

Any deck that plays Brainstorm takes skill since it is one of the most skill intensive cards in the format, right?

Lets make this another BAAAWWWWW brainstorm is broken :cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry: thread?

Because we dont have enough of those.

[Koby]

Does any Linear deck require much skill to play?

The more powerful the cards involved, the more rigid their gameplan becomes. This doesn't apply to all Linear strategies, but a good amount of them don't waiver much from the fixed gameplan.

Take Hive Mind/Omniscience - doesn't take much skill and can autopilot once its in play. The skill lies in getting it into play against hate.

[ahg113]

Just acknowledge that luck (statistical variance) is a huge part of the game, and then problems such as the OP's shouldn't weigh a person down.

Cheers,
I bet it stinks to get struck by lightning

[joemauer]

Does any Linear deck require much skill to play?

The more powerful the cards involved, the more rigid their gameplan becomes. This doesn't apply to all Linear strategies, but a good amount of them don't waiver much from the fixed gameplan.

Take Hive Mind/Omniscience - doesn't take much skill and can autopilot once its in play. The skill lies in getting it into play against hate.

I once beat a Hive Mind player with Goblins because I outplayed him.

I believe even with straight forward or linear decks they take a certain amount of skill to win with in Legacy. It is the nature of the format.

[Shawon]

At face value, Reanimator doesn't require much skill to play, other than having a basic intuition of sniffing your opponent's countermagic. But I think there is some skill required in knowing when to mulligan. Especially post-board games. But you can say the same with Dredge or combo decks, so you may be right if your claim is that Reanimator isn't exceptionally skill-intensive.

On the other hand, knowing how to play around your opponent does require your skill. How many non-Reanimator players are aware of using Entomb while Exhume is on the stack? You can use this trick after an opponent crypts you in response to Exhume, or if you want to don't want to be Chanted after you play Entomb. I don't know about you, but if I hadn't read about that trick from The Source, and you put a Reanimator deck in my hands and asked me to play a few games, I would likely miss that trick if the opportunity presented itself.

[Grand Superior]

I treat Reanimator exactly like I treat Dredge (unsurprisingly). Preboard games are usually a joke, but postboard games are a lot more interesting because everybody plays sideboard cards against your strategy and you have a lot of cards to play around (and it's not always clear which graveyard hate cards you have to fight). I personally feel like unless the opponent is completely unprepared, you have to earn a lot of your match wins with the deck.

Reanimator might be easier to play than other combo decks because it is a relatively compact combo deck that runs discard, countermagic and cantrips, but fighting through the million different graveyard-hate options available in Legacy and winning does take some skill.

[Einherjer]

Where you playing that really complicated deck that plays green dudes and then turns them sideways?



Maverick requires alot more skill than Reanimator for sure.

[alderon666]

Maverick requires alot more skill than Reanimator for sure.

Requires or benefits from? I've seen some pretty bad people winning with GW just because it ran Knight of the Reliquary. On the other hand you'll NEVER see a bad player putting out good results with Doomsday.

[RaNDoMxGeSTuReS]

OP probably had bad beats. Needs more Tormod's Crypt.

[Jenni]

I wouldn't say it's one of the most complicated decks to play, but some of the more difficult parts of the deck are:
knowing when to mull a hand that looks good, but might not be (eg. turn 2-3 reanimation, but only one card in hand to protect it, can be a rough keep in a lot of matchups)
Knowing what to reanimate, and when. Karakas is a problem for the deck normally, since most of the reanimation targets people use now are vulnerable to it, so playing around that can be an issue. Having your big nasty creatures hit by swords to plow shares can be a problem too. So getting a feel for when (and how) to play around stuff like that can be a challenge (even if your deck's answer to all this is just an inkwell leviathan, you still need to get him on the field, which control decks aren't going to make easy on you.)
Game 2, when your opponent brings in their hate (if they know enough to build a sideboard, they almost certainly have hate) things get pretty rough, too, since now you have the issue of "What do I do if my opponent opens on a leyline of the void?" or "If my opponent sugical extractions, can I still win with this hand?" that sort of thing.

[Darkenslight]

The problem i think you're having with Reanimator is that the skillcap for it is deceptively high, even though the fundamental game-plan of the deck is simple. IT's by no means Solidarity -level complex, but knowing when to bait with your spells, as well as playing around splash hate is a remarkable skill to ahve for the deck.

[(nameless one)]

The problem i think you're having with Reanimator is that the skillcap for it is deceptively high, even though the fundamental game-plan of the deck is simple. IT's by no means Solidarity -level complex, but knowing when to bait with your spells, as well as playing around splash hate is a remarkable skill to ahve for the deck.

Basically like Dredge. Dredge is an auto pilot deck game one but it's as hard as TES post board. Knowing when to draw or dredge and when to go all in or slow while playing around hate.

[ESG]

Requires or benefits from? I've seen some pretty bad people winning with GW just because it ran Knight of the Reliquary. On the other hand you'll NEVER see a bad player putting out good results with Doomsday.

The OP is talking about Reanimator, not Doomsday. No one said Doomsday was easy to play.


Game 2, when your opponent brings in their hate (if they know enough to build a sideboard, they almost certainly have hate) things get pretty rough, too, since now you have the issue of "What do I do if my opponent opens on a leyline of the void?" or "If my opponent sugical extractions, can I still win with this hand?" that sort of thing.

These aren't huge obstacles if the opposing deck got run over in Game 1. Reanimator brings in the Show and Tell package, and then those things matter less. The hate cards matter more in matchups running counterspells.

Playing Dredge postboard is actually a challenge because you have to play through the hate rather than circumventing it with a package like Show and Tell. (Before someone mentions it, the Painter-Grindstone transformation plan is awful.)

All decks take skill to play, but Reanimator ranks low on the scale.

[Awaclus]

It does take skill to choose the deck you have the best results with. If you're a bad player, it's a skillful choice to play Reanimator. If nobody in your metagame runs grave hate or counterspells, it's a skillful choice to play Reanimator. If you won a tournament with Reanimator, it did take some skill - if not during the actual tournament, the skill was required when you were preparing for the tournament. Unless you just had ridiculously good luck.

[kaiserruhsam]

It does take skill to choose the deck you have the best results with. If you're a bad player, it's a skillful choice to play Reanimator. If nobody in your metagame runs grave hate or counterspells, it's a skillful choice to play Reanimator. If you won a tournament with Reanimator, it did take some skill - if not during the actual tournament, the skill was required when you were preparing for the tournament. Unless you just had ridiculously good luck.

Exactly. You would be idiotic to play a large standard tournament with a deck kold to Delver right now.

[ykpon]

Sea, Swamp or Island? What if they have a Stifle? Ponder, Seize or Entomb? To keep or shuffle away? What to discard? When to cast? What to find? Should you Daze this Cabal Therapy? Or Brainstorm in resp? Or just let it resolve?

And yeah, that's just turn one.

[Mr. Froggy]

I used to play Reanimator on MTGO, and I've found myself on autopilot a couple of times.. I find its one of the easiest decks to play (maybe because I played it a lot though..) albeit one of the best, too.

My basic opening used to be: Entomb into Jin, Reanimate. Hold counters in hand. Not the most complicated line of play in the world, but one of the most powerful I saw.

[slave]

I come up against reanimator frequently - quite common round me it seems.

I'm surprised how often peeps who have just sewn up game 1 will continue to game 2 without any SBíng at all. I mean, sure you won, but don't you expect me to respond?

I see reanimator as a very strong deck, and easy to pilot, but really - half the peeps I play against aren't seasoned players just by what they let me get away with, and the errors they make - that's fine - we all have to learn somewhere, but Reanimator does attract noobs.
FACT.
The deck still wins in the hands of noobs though, and I'll bet it's one of the most net-decked options new players to legacy look for.

[BWM]

Who needs skills when you can just win instead?

I played Reanimate on GP Ghent, with less than ten games of testing, after starting at 1-1 I proceeded to go to 6-1 without any resistance (I either played against unlucky or bad players or I had the shiznit), in the last two rounds I had two tight matches in which I lost game 3.

This deck can autopilot itself, but why is that a problem? I don't mind not having to think during a tournament if I get to keep the prizes ;-)

[k2thej]

Who needs skills when you can just win instead?

I played Reanimate on GP Ghent, with less than ten games of testing, after starting at 1-1 I proceeded to go to 6-1 without any resistance (I either played against unlucky or bad players or I had the shiznit), in the last two rounds I had two tight matches in which I lost game 3.

This deck can autopilot itself, but why is that a problem? I don't mind not having to think during a tournament if I get to keep the prizes ;-)

I just think a good rule of thumb is that if a deck's mirror match isn't determined by skill, then it's usually not great for the format. I think if you're playing a reanimator mirror, skill certainly helps, but it doesn't have nearly as high an impact as it does in maverick stoneblage, RUG, gobs, elves, merfolk, etc.

[Grand Superior]

I just think a good rule of thumb is that if a deck's mirror match isn't determined by skill, then it's usually not great for the format. I think if you're playing a reanimator mirror, skill certainly helps, but it doesn't have nearly as high an impact as it does in maverick stoneblage, RUG, gobs, elves, merfolk, etc.

I personally think the Reanimator mirror is pretty interesting and skill-intensive. You have to be very careful with your enablers because your opponent can just untap and Reanimate your Griselbrand, you have to fight through blue countermagic and black discard, and you have to remember the little things like Entombing a creature in response to their Exhume to beat or legend rule their fatty, using Thoughtseize as an enabler, etc etc.

Certainly more skill-intensive than something like the Sneak and Show mirror or the Belcher mirror.

[ColeM]

It's probably best to relate the influence of skill on a game's outcome to the amount of interaction between the two participating decks in a given game. The more interactions the more skill matters. So, Reanimator deck probably benefits greatly from a skilled pilot in a matchup against hate + other disruption, but benefits a lot less against mono red burn or something.

This should be pretty much true for any deck.

[catmint]

I agree with ypkon. Same stuff was told (is true) about Show&Tell. You can win games by itself without knowing the deck/beeing a good player. But over a number of games/tournaments an experienced/good pilot has a HUGE edge over a bad player.

And altough this statement is less true about other decks, keep in mind also the decision heavy decks have a powerlevel to enable draws that autopilot themselves so anybody can win. RUG on the play with a nut draw: Delver, Daze, FoW, Bolt your face happens just like turn 1 chalice against RUG or Maverick winning with exalted Thalia beats while wasting dual lands versus storm.


It's probably best to relate the influence of skill on a game's outcome to the amount of interaction between the two participating decks in a given game. The more interactions the more skill matters. Not only. Knowing how to board, how to mulligan is a huuuge factor for every deck and is only interactive in the sense of knowing what your opponent does, but basically a very skill dependant non-interactive decision making process.

[ColeM]

I agree with ypkon. Same stuff was told (is true) about Show&Tell. You can win games by itself without knowing the deck/beeing a good player. But over a number of games/tournaments an experienced/good pilot has a HUGE edge over a bad player.

And altough this statement is less true about other decks, keep in mind also the decision heavy decks have a powerlevel to enable draws that autopilot themselves so anybody can win. RUG on the play with a nut draw: Delver, Daze, FoW, Bolt your face happens just like turn 1 chalice against RUG or Maverick winning with exalted Thalia beats while wasting dual lands versus storm.

Not only. Knowing how to board, how to mulligan is a huuuge factor for every deck and is only interactive in the sense of knowing what your opponent does, but basically a very skill dependant non-interactive decision making process.

One could probably argue that sideboarding and mulligans are part of increasing or decreasing interaction. You do allude to a few things I didn't mention, however.

It is true that it takes some skill just to goldfish a deck. Decks with less clear (or more ) lines of play are more difficult to operate in an optimal manner. Storm is more difficult to operate than mono red burn. However, I feel that it's important to understand that the influence of skill level can be a function of opposing matchup. Reanimator is much easier to play if your opponent is piloting 40-lightning-bolt.dec than when he/she is piloting RUG.

[FieryBalrog]

Well, if it's any consolation Show & Tell makes Reanimator look hard.

Deckls Mav and Miracle Top tend to have way more interesting, interactive decision trees than these clowns. Storm isn't all that much for the interaction but has some complex internal decision making. Combo has gotten a lot less cool now that much of it consists of "get card X and card Y". Show & Tell is a terrible, boring card.

[Jamaican Zombie Legend]

It takes skill in an absolute sense, but relative to many other Legacy archetypes it is as dumb as can be. No combat math, no tricky decisions on what to remove/counter, no complicated board states, no spell chains, no Doomsday piles, no Upkeep triggers to manage, no tricky stack shenanigans, relatively little room as far as tuning for the meta (compared to something like SI, Maverick, Enchantress, Blue Tempo, ). And the decision faced by the opponent boils down to "Do I have the specific answer to his haymaker-critter, Force, or the right yard hate fast enough?". What engrossing gameplay....

[Esper3k]

Meh, I've had plenty of games where opponents playing Storm combo claimed to have great skill and they just sat and died to a Thalia + Mom. So much skill on both sides!