Printable View
For the love of all that is holy, do NOT add Living Wish to this deck. That's terrible.
When someone Extirpates Tarmogoyf? Not really care. Said it once, say it again: If they're playing Extirpate, likely odds on beating them with Shackles is high. Black decks don't deal with artifacts.
Reading is fundamental. Please exercise your fundamentals.
Most decks that play Extirpate, and in fact most black decks in the format, also play a second colour that can deal with Shackles just fine, and often even in the form of Krosan Grip.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
Yet, as a matter of fact, I do not expect ITF to lose to, say, Sui Black because of Seize->Extirpate on Goyf. Those that are the beatdown against your deck will probably prefer to bring in Needles, or nonbasic hate, or artifact/enchantment hate.
But control and midrange? Totally another matter. In fact, for most decks that play Pernicious Deed - anything from Landeed to Survival to The Rock - Extirpate from the sideboard would look like an automatic board-in, if at least to get rid of your recursive engines. And unless they're absolutely terrified of Stronghold/Witness, they're going to hit that Goyf if given the opportunity. They often do that against Threshold, why wouldn't they against ITF?
Conclusion: I -almost- join the crowd, and support 1 Unkillable And/Or Recursive Finisher of Choice in the SB (hence the "almost"), with Gigapede being the frontrunner candidate.
Granted, but the sideboarding issue is a whole other can of worms.
I haven't decided on exactly what I want to play in the board. There are only a couple of options right now. Obviously, Leyline and Grip. But after that, it get's a little bit more murky. I LIKE the two Loams in the board, and I THINK Blasts are a good idea, but I'm not permanently sold on them. Additionally, with that configuration, there is one slot left. Obviously, if you're afraid of Extirpate (which I don't think you should be) you can play the one-of here, where you argue that people will bring in the grave hate.
Additionally, the decks that play the other colors that can deal with Shackles usually have to aim those things at Counterbalance. Otherwise, they can't play Magic. That's the key thing here. There are many difficult decisions when you play against It's the Fear, and fucking up too many of those will kill you just as easily as being unable to make the right one.
Take it from me. I've been playing a deck that's been focused on using Extirpate to it's fullest potential. You know what? The card just isn't all it's cracked up to be. Sure, sometimes it's good. Of course, other times it's fucking awful because it will NEVER AFFECT THE BOARD. The fact that you MUST combo it with another card just makes the card unwieldy and difficult to use a great deal of the time. Plus, it's actually really easy to counter with Counterbalance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
Valid arguments are fundamental. Please exercise those. You know full well that almost every "black" deck in the format is supported by other colours which CAN deal with artifacts. While the game isn't over just because you've lost all four Tarmogoyfs, you should not assume that the game is over just because you have Shackles, either.
Perhaps ironically, I actually agree with you that Shackles is more useful than the current crop of possible beaters. I'm still unconvinced about StP, which leaves me almost equally doubtful of Gigapede. I love Gigapede, and I think it's a great card regardless--but The Fear is incapable of maximizing its potential. Not to mention the fact that if Goyf gets Extirpated, making an effort to cast and maintain Gigapede (with its one toughness and zero evasion) is going to slash the efficacy of the deck's strong control suite (including--and perhaps especially--Shackles) because of the high mana requirement and the need to discard a card.
I don't think that the argument ends there, however. Once Goyf goes, you have to rely on Shackles to snare beaters, yes, but your strategy also has to adapt. Deed and StP become that much more important to clear the board and allow Shackles to remain dominant. Personally, I am not comfortable with the low creature count--it just doesn't suit my playstyle. And indeed, if a strong beater comes around, my vote is to include it. But if we're just talking about a single card to beat out Extirpate, I think that we're losing focus. Once that happens, scrambling to bust out a new beater is going to compromise what is already a fairly strong alternative strategy centred around Shackles. The concern is a legitimate one, but I believe that the focus should be on strengthening Plan B, not introducing a Plan C.
Does that make sense? I hope so. I'm not convinced I was all that clear.
Riddle me this Batman; why would I have to exercise valid arguments WHEN I'VE ALREADY DONE SO. I've stated my arguments. I firmly believe that the few decks that play Extirpate (in the main), do NOT have artifact removal (in the main). Thus, the answer is simple. Rely on Shackles. Not that earth-shattering. If something bad happens, adapt. If I already went over that, then it's STILL A VALID ARGUMENT. The fact that nobody disputed it doesn't magically make it go away. It's still the strategy that I plan on using. It's also the strategy that I would encourage others to use. I'm not dodging the issue, I've made my point clear.
Thank you for agreeing with me (to a point). I don't think Gigapede is utilized effectively here, and really would like to move discussion in some other direction.
However, I am saying that the idea is TO ADAPT. Shackles becomes a forerunner in terms of game enders, and thus the strategy becomes re-centered around the idea of keeping and protecting Shackles. Should Extirpate happen, deal with it. Change plans accordingly. The deck is plenty versatile. Don't blind yourself because Tarmogoyf is so insanely good. Sometimes bad things happen. Deal.
I don't mean to come off angry, but I think this conversation is moot. "Oh NOES! IF a series of bad plays were to happen to you, then bad things would happen to you!" is not something I want to discuss until I'm blue in the face. There are contingencies for everything that happens. I can deal with that. Sure, the deck can't beat everything. I know that. Trying to come up with scenarios that point out minor flaws in the deck don't really accomplish anything.
The real way to further discussion would be to point out relevant sideboarding in situations that call for it. Plans against abundant Wastelands, Ichorids, or Combo. A control heavy metagame.
Coming up with a scenario that's difficult to accomplish in actuality and using that to say the deck is weak is poor logic.
Please stop buying meteor insurance.
I won't litter your thread with more counters after this reply, but I do think this is relevant because you're claiming to have made an important argument that, in fact, has not been made as far as I can see. For the record, I still agree with you about your strategy if Tarmogoyf kicks the bucket. In fact, that strategy is necessary anyway, since four Tarmogoyfs aren't going to impress most decks.
In the interests of fairness, however:
You'll have to excuse me, but I've searched the ENTIRE thread and can't find any post where you do so. I do so in my last post, but sadly, I can't find a single instance where you do beyond the set of lines in question.Quote:
Riddle me this Batman; why would I have to exercise valid arguments WHEN I'VE ALREADY DONE SO. I've stated my arguments.
I can see you dismissing (rightly) Wasteland + Extirpate on Tropical Island, and what you say there could be applied to Extirpate on Tarmogoyf if you stretch your imagination a tad--but you never actually addressed that much more plausible scenario. Thirdly, you dismiss INCLUDING Extirpate but nothing more. The only attempt you made at addressing the question in question (ha!) was in the contested set of lines--which, obviously, don't count. Especially since you now claim to have made the argument (validly, no less) earlier than those lines.
Therefore, the argument was not made.
In any case, as a matter of principle, every argument you make should be valid, especially in a post with as many pages as this one. Few people are willing to scroll through a dozen pages to find whatever point you made earlier, and only I'm obsessive enough to call you on it and check for myself. I agree, it sucks, but unless you do so, these questions will keep on popping up again and again.
By the way, if you did make that argument and I missed it, then I apologize, but humbly ask that you at least PM me the passage and its location.
That's NOT what you said. What you said was that black decks don't have access to artifact removal. Which means that you were making at least two base assumptions: 1.) the only decks running Extirpate are black, and 2.) the only decks running extirpate are mono-black. I can believe that's not what you intended to say, but it remains what you said, and it remains out and out wrong--and a horrendously invalid argument.Quote:
I firmly believe that the few decks that play Extirpate (in the main), do NOT have artifact removal (in the main). Thus, the answer is simple. Rely on Shackles.
I believe you're bang-on about the rest, however. Wasteland + Extirpate on Tropical Island is much more unlikely than killing or countering a Tarmogoyf and then getting rid of it. And besides, the deck HAS to be able to deal with ineffective Goyfs anyway, since four creatures aren't usually too daunting on their own--at least until late-game recursion.
I have a real question for you, however: are you using Swords to Plowshares more on creatures that Deed and Shackles have a harder time dealing with, or on more or less anything that's threatening?
My biggest beef vs Shackles is, and still is, against creatures like Mongoose and Gigapede. If I Extirpate Goyf, how do you deal? Counterbalance itself is not the best argument, considering many cards, like Deed, handle that issue. Unless you have an active Counterbalance and counter Extirpate (which the Extirpate player shoudn't be casting if they know it is going to get countered), how do you deal? You need a back-up plan. Is 1 Gigapede (read: ONE), really going to hurt the deck?
I'm honestly done giving opinions. I will agree that Tog isn't necessarily the best fit here... but if Gigapede isn't making the fit within the 75 cards, I don't think I can offer anything else relevant to this thread. Enjoy taking it in the ass to Extirpate, which IS actually played by quite alot of decks that splash black in the format.
I know for a fact that my midrange Threshold/Landstill variant LOVES that Tarmogoyf is your only win condition outside of Shackles (which does nothing to me). Recurring EE or Witness over and over can wins games too, I guess... but don't expect something that slow to answer something as fast as Threshold beats w/ recursion + CA.
Well I can't believe this thread turned into a bickering fight, and I'm not even involved........See bardo, I'm not the bad guy for once,,,lol. AnywazeQuote:
Originally Posted by Hanni
Start by I guess talking about extirpate, Actually if you wasteland+extirpate trop against Deepers list, that should be game because he can't play any creatures and you just overrun him or play mongoose to beat him. One thing to really help out against extirpate which Deeper did at the beggining of this thread. TOG. Its already been talked about how gig is not a finisher when he dies to a lonely mog fanatic and only playing 4 tarmogoyf is making your life hard against extirpate or even runed halo.
Now on to the actual qoute..... Finally you will stop harping about gigapede and Where do you think that your threshold/landstill deck doesn't have problems with shackles,, what creature other than mongoose does it not work on? And before you answer this, if I take factory, is stays with me even when it goes back to a land. Oh and when has threshold every had recursion........
There is a very simple fix to all of this, take out 1 tundra or underground and replace it with a forest if you have alot of dragon stompy or a savannah(for tundra) or bayou(for sea) and it keeps you from worrying about extirpate.(this play also helps with choke as well.) And play 2 togs like the old list and you are fine.
I play through extirpate all of the time, and I still win games.
EDIT: Now reading through the last posts 3 times now, This has gotten way to confusing and should be stopped. Lets move on since you are now not argueing on extirpate but on who answered a question or not.
On to talk about sideboard since it has not been argued enough:
I have this right now
4 BEB
4 leyline/crypt
3 grip
3 thoughtseize
1 loam
And right now I have decided to change it since my meta has no dredge and the one person playing breakfast is the only person playing dragon stompy at this point
4 BEB
3 grip
2 thoughtsieze
1 loam
3 leyline
2 hydroblast(if dragonstompy, it not go back to origonal.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
These quotes all make my position clear on Extirpate vs anything (that isn't Shackles).Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
For the record, Extirpate on Tropical Island amounts to EXACTLY the same thing as Extirpate on Tarmogoyf.
@landstill101: Hey, I was wondering if you could possibly remember the "6" in my name. That would be awesome. Also 2 Thoughtseize? That doesn't make any sense. If you want to have them against combo, you need to ensure that you see them early. Just playing 2 isn't going to do that.
@Hanni: Wow, you sound bitter. Chill dude. Seriously. I'd rather have the 21st land instead of a card that costs 5. I'd really rather not force Intuition to ALSO be my mana fixer. That's not what the card should be doing.
Sorry, I was really drunk when I posted that last night. Now I have a hangover and have to go to work in an hour.Quote:
@Hanni: Wow, you sound bitter. Chill dude.
Costing 5 actually seems like a positive thing against an opposing Counterbalance... however, the Deeds and EEs you run probably negate that enough. Still though, a recurring Goyf from Stronghold also costs 5 mana.
A lone Fanatic kills Gigapede in combat and then Gigapede recurs next turn. A lone Fanatic stops Tog from swinging for lethal, so I don't really see the strength of the argument. Aggro across the other side of the table is going to stop any aggro in the deck from swinging through because of the lack of evasion... yea, Gigapede actually dies, but he also recurs himself. I don't see how a lone Fanatic automatically makes him a bad card when Gigapede is way better than Tog against Threshold and other control decks like Landstill.Quote:
One thing to really help out against extirpate which Deeper did at the beggining of this thread. TOG. Its already been talked about how gig is not a finisher when he dies to a lonely mog fanatic
However, no one else feels the need for Gigapede (or Tog), so making further arguments for or against it is just derailing the thread.
Well that is if you don't play loam or play eternal witness which in my opinion hitting trop is alot worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
Get a better name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
There is no combo in my meta other than 1 belcher deck and one breakfast which makes my need for thoughtseize go down, I DON'T NEED THAT MANY. wow learn to read the post right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deep6er
Wow, "get a better name". This coming from the guy named landstill101. Ouch. I think I'm going to go cry myself to sleep now.
See, my point about Thoughtseize was that if you were playing too few, maybe you should PLAY OTHER CARDS. Exercise critical thinking. I DID in fact, read the post correctly. Thanks.
EDIT: Is it just me or is it even funnier that you can't spell my name right and then accuse me of NOT READING? I find that just delicious. Thanks.
Back on the topic at hand. I don't think the fear is that good of a deck. While at the Grand Prix Side event, a few major decks that were there were goblins, Dredge and Threshold, and those matchups are very hard for the fear to beat. Not to Mention Dragon stompy or Enchantress. I think you two should stop crying to each other about a pointless deck. WHy don;t you two work on a way to make the deck good instead of complaining about others' names
Oh, Dave.
"Argue not with idiots, lest an idiot ye become; and when ye gaze too long at a 'tard, the tard gazes back, and then asks you if you want to be his friend, and it just gets really awkward from there."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
@OneBigSquirrelGod: It's unfortunate that you think that way. I'll tell you that you're wrong, but you likely won't believe me. So, instead of going on and on about how you're wrong, I could just point out that it's both your free time and your electricity that you wasted by coming in here and not doing anything. Thanks.
@Jack: You win. Whatever game we were playing, you've definitely won. That was awesome.
Sigged.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
Oh, and landstill101, I'm flattered that you consider me, one guy out of 12-18 people at our tournaments enough to alter your sideboard, but don't you think it's a bad idea to alter your sideboard based on which deck you think I'm playing that night? Do you really know beforehand whether or not I'm playing Cephalid Breakfast, Dragon Stompy, or something completely different?
Since you don't want to run Gigapede (or Tog), what about dropping 1 StP for 1 Shriekmaw? That now gives you the ability to recur spot removal for when you don't want to recur EE (possibly once CB hits the table and you need to blow EE for 2). Not only that, it answers some things that recurring EE cannot (like some of the Dragon Stompy beaters), and it fills some of the roles that Gigapede would fill:
Additional win condition
Evasive
5cc to play through opposing CB's
5cc to use with Stronghold + CB vs FoW and etc
Plus other stuff I'm probably forgetting.
What creature would be in play that isn't dealt with by my own Tarmogoyf's can't be stolen with Shackles, and, for whatever reason, can't be Swords'd?
Honestly, I'll consider adding some kind of additional win condition if you can come up with one that is honestly good enough to put in the deck. With the arguments that you're using, I could apply those to something like... Hypnox!
Additional Win condition
Evasive
Million fucking mana to get through Counterbalances
Million fucking mana to stop those million fucking mana spells.
Plus, if it comes into play, you get to remove their hand from the game!
Dude, not trying to be mean, but just honestly asking a question. Do you see where I'm coming from?
Lol no I don't try to stalk you and figure out which deck you play(if this is who I think it is and your dam first turn moon effects suck.)But you are the only person who plays dragon stompy or breakfast at our location which in both instances I would change my sideboard to help to which one you played, you havn't played dragon stompy in a while, so I just assumed you were playing breakfast or your green stompy. If I would have realized that you were playing stompy, I would have taken out the 3 thoughtseizes and a crypt to add hydro and something else. From what I heard thou was that You wern't going to play stompy last night but changed your mind because I showed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
Referencing the win-conditions:
Plague Sliver, perhaps? He's essentially a Juzam Djinn at four mana (2BB) for a 5/5. Is getting to double black ever a problem?
Vexing Beetle? He's 5 mana (4G) for a 3/3 that can't be countered and if your opponent has no dudes, he becomes a 6/6. With all the removal you pack, that's not an entirely unimaginable scenario.
Stampeding Wildebeests? Cost-effective, big, and sets up really neat tricks with Witnesses (if you wanted to play more than one).
Quirion Dryad? With the various amount of colored spells you play, he could get big in a hurry.