There is no need for 3 force spikes, just run 4 disrupts like gooba in the board when you're on the draw swap them dazes out for those.
Printable View
There is no need for 3 force spikes, just run 4 disrupts like gooba in the board when you're on the draw swap them dazes out for those.
My meta is more or less the following:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenarius
At least 4 Goblins;
2 or 3 Burn (sometimes they go with Dragon Stompy);
1 CounterTop;
2 ANT (or TEPS, they are our Johnnies lol);
1 Rock;
2 Vial Merfolk (1 classical build, other with Dreadnought);
1 Dreadstill;
1 Enchantress;
1 Counterslivers (The guy who runs it went a day to a tournament with DonateIllusions and won it);
1 Ichorid (The guy who runs it sometimes go with Solidarity or Suicidal Black);
1 Imperial Servant.
So my meta is small, but very diverse (yes, sometimes we change decks so we are sometimes changing the meta, but the core is as I said in this post). In every tournament I have to match against at least 1 Goblins, so I'll give them an opportunity.
I don't think force spike or disrupt is so needed MD, maybe are usefull side cards against eva green or rock decks, but not for main deck.
About the mana screw/flooded problem, it's only a luck problem, last saturday in 7 rounds I mulliganed to 5 cards in the first match in 2 of them. I Losed the first match and in the second one I get flooded XD.
Another match I losed because I don't reserve a daze to cast FoW, I expect draw a blue card and I don't, so oponent played natural order into progenitus and winned the match XD.
The other matches I win without problems, its a very powerful deck. Sometimes an humiliating one:
Opponent its at 4 damage and plays ilusions of grandeur, in response I play bolt, oponent fetches and plays counterspell (3 damage). I played another bolt, oponent fows it, I played stifle to ilusions XD
"There is no need for 3 force spikes, just run 4 disrupts like gooba in the board when you're on the draw swap them dazes out for those."
Uhm, how can u even be sure about a card without testing it?
"don't think force spike or disrupt is so needed MD,"
Give Arguments?
I can continue giving arguments about the fact that Force Spike is the ideal card for the open slots, but u guys simply seem stubborn about changes, do you? You really should test the card before replying with the same sentence: I think or believe or There is no need .
Test it against:
Dreadstill/Landstill
Zoo/Goblins
Cb/top
ANT
You'll see that in all 4 different kind of matchup's the card shines.
Simply, In the firsth match I prefer to return 1 or 2 permanents I couldn't counter while I reach ThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh (RR), or have the 9th creature (vendilion).
In second match sure are better disrupt or force spike against some decks, but I will not quit this 2 cards, I will quit others.
I can't speak for others, the deck does not need anymore situational counters MB. It has a playset of 2 of the best ones based on the current state of the format. What it does need is a way to deal with permanents that we for whatever the reason were not able to counter. Both Rushing River and Wipe Away solve that issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenarius
Granted, in your testing or playing in tournaments there may have been times that Force Spike really shined, but I would also imagine there were times where you were wishing it was a bounce spell.
I think David (goobafish) says best --> "They are amazingly useful to end ground standoffs, or to remove pesky artifacts, enchantments and creatures that are out of burn range."
It continues...
Saying things without testing.
Don't you want to test new cards?
Vendillion Clique is pretty new. So why don't you want to test Force Spike?
Because (I Quote) it seems unnecessary?
Because (I Quote) you have to spend a mana on it?
Because (I Quote) you already have too much 1cc Counters?
Because (I Quote again) it is bad in lategame (kuch Daze)?
Because (I Quote yet again) it cannot bounce?
I mean searching for your bounce spell when a Moat or Humility is on the other side of the table is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Looking for an answer when a Cb/top is on the otherside of the table is like dreaming. Hoping that they won't counter your cantrips? Don't you think your opponent has enough time to find 7 counters already?
How can you guys be sure a card such as Force Spike is not the actual card that we (TT players) have been looking for as an answer to anything?
Hopefully u'll test it. I've got nothing more to say
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenarius
Yes?
We don't need anymore bad late-game counters. We DO need some bounce late game when something does manage to slip past our counters.
This is stupid logic. I could suggest Wild Research in this deck, and people would dismiss it without testing it. Why, you ask? Because some of us have played this game into the ground and designed so many decks that we can often envision, accurately no less, how a card is going to work in a deck to some degree without testing it. "Don't knock it until you've tested it" is pointless.
Your arguments are full of logical holes. Running two copies of something in a deck with eight cantrips isn't exactly a needle in a haystack. Furthermore, that Force Spike of yours will show up as equally rarely if you're arguing that Force Spike should be in place of the bounce slots.
What if your opponent leads with Chalice for 1? What good's your Force Spike going to do you then? Rushing River's the guy you want here. What if your opponent drops a Counterbalance when you're tapped out? Are you going to keep mana open at all times and not drop your threats? You don't have the late game for that. Here you want Wipe Away.
The problem with Force Spike is that for it to be useful, you have to leave mana untapped. This isn't generally something you want to be doing in a tempo-based deck. It's why Force and Daze are so ungodly good. If you've got Rushing River or Wipe Away, you have a backup plan. You don't have to live in constant fear of tapping out.
For example, I can go ahead and drop my Tarmogoyf turn two with River-or-Wipe/Snare in hand, generally without fear. If they drop a Goyf, a Survival, a Confidant, a Counterbalance, or whatever? I'll bounce it on their next end step and have the Snare ready. If instead I have Spike/Snare, I have to wait on my Tarmogoyf, hope to trap them with the Spike or the Snare, then drop the Goyf later. Personally I'd rather have the option of taking whichever approach feels more right for the matchup than being pigeonholed into the trap approach.
This is not true in this case, since, at least to me, it isn't obvious at all that Force Spike would be a bad card in this deck. I don't belive anyone in this threat has ever tested Force Spike in a deck that focuses on mana denial and Tempo gain. The card fits perfectly in this deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
Yes sir, it is a needle in a haystack. You've generally depleted alot of resources already once you encounter a permanent that needs to be bounced. From experience I can tell you I've never even once have encountered a situation in which the bounce would've won me the game and I actually was able to find it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
The second part is also wrong logic, since Force Spike fits a completely different role than bounce in this deck. You'll always hate to see bounce in the opening hand or in the first 3 turns. Force Spike is strong in both early and midgame, and it can be placed under the same category as Spell Snare.
Chalice on 1 on the play is going to fuck you over no matter what. I find it neglectible that I can use my bounce, which I just happen to find in my hand all of a sudden together with 3 land without a single cantrip at all. River is not what I want here, I want FoW. I know you're gonna tell me that that isn't the answer as you can't always have FoW, but River isn't the answer either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
If your opponent drops CB and you don't have mana open, you're playing the deck wrong and should lose to the card. You always keep mana open with this deck, always. There's no reason at all a tempo oriented deck wouldn't. Why do you think this deck is packed with reactive cards anyway? It's because reactive cards generally do more than proactive cards for a smaller cost. What gives us the tempo edge is that we can both play a Ponder/Goose/Brainstorm/Goyf AND counter the opposing spell. You generate tempo here since you're able to play more cards than the opponent.
Having to leave mana open is a really bad argument. We run both Stifle and Spell Snare as a 4-off. I'm not hearing anyone complain how these cards require open mana. I'm not convinced the effect of Force Spike is weaker than Spell Snare's at all.
Or instead, which would've been by far a more superior play, you actually could have left mana open, countered the Force Spike, played the Goyf next turn, while maybe even leaving mana open again, or being able to Waste a land. I don't see any reason at all to play a Goyf against a blind deck on turn 2, while you can do so many powerful things on their turn instead. There are very few decks that are able to fight through our counters and force us to drop a Goyf early, and then proceeding to play cards while we're outtapped. In other words, having the option is useless, since the above aproach is superior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
Your logic is wrong. You aren't counting the situations where the bounce was already in your hand. The point here is that Cards 59 and 60, regardless of if they're Force Spike, Rushing River, or whatever, are going to appear in your hand equally often at equally often times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamuth
Furthermore, your claim's a bit outrageous, as I've been playing this deck seriously for less than a month and have hit multiple situations where, whether starting in my hand or drawn, Bounce has won me the game. Rushing River's 2-for-1 has been fantastic for me.
Why not? You run just shy of one land per three cards in your hand. If your opponent drops Chalice for 1 on the play, you're on the draw and are going to see ten cards. If one of these is Rushing River and none of the opening seven were Force of Will, chances are slightly over 50% that you're going to curve out into a turn three River. This isn't a great best case scenario for not having the Force, but occasionally Chalice decks will stumble around for a couple turns after the Chalice, giving you a shot at least. Then if you've got a Snare or anything else useful, you can counter the Chalice when it comes back.Quote:
Chalice on 1 on the play is going to fuck you over no matter what. I find it neglectible that I can use my bounce, which I just happen to find in my hand all of a sudden together with 3 land without a single cantrip at all. River is not what I want here, I want FoW. I know you're gonna tell me that that isn't the answer as you can't always have FoW, but River isn't the answer either.
It's still philosphically a more aggressive strategy to have the option to tap out in certain cases. You are dead wrong in your assessment that you always leave mana open in this deck. More often than not? No argument. Always? Dead wrong. I could list thousands of common scenarios where tapping out would be the correct play. But if I'm packing double Dazes or not sitting on any Snares/Stifles, or if I'm packing 8-10 damage worth of burn in hand, I'm not going to hesitate to play aggressively if the situation is correct.Quote:
If your opponent drops CB and you don't have mana open, you're playing the deck wrong and should lose to the card. You always keep mana open with this deck, always. There's no reason at all a tempo oriented deck wouldn't. Why do you think this deck is packed with reactive cards anyway? It's because reactive cards generally do more than proactive cards for a smaller cost. What gives us the tempo edge is that we can both play a Ponder/Goose/Brainstorm/Goyf AND counter the opposing spell. You generate tempo here since you're able to play more cards than the opponent.
Having to leave mana open is a really bad argument. We run both Stifle and Spell Snare as a 4-off. I'm not hearing anyone complain how these cards require open mana. I'm not convinced the effect of Force Spike is weaker than Spell Snare's at all.
By playing Force Spike, you're further committing yourself to taking the approach you detailed.
I have. Extensively.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamuth
The problems with it and the advantages of bounce are well summarized in Tacosnape's posts.
Also, this:
If they didn't do anything, then I wouldn't be running them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamuth
I see that, but I don't see how it's relevant in this situation. I'll claim that Force Spike is generally more usefull than Rushing River. I'm not counting the bounce when it's already in my hand, you're right. It's just that I really never want to find a bounce in my opening grip to begin with. The card is almost always dead, be it because I don't have 3 mana, or because there's no reason to bounce anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
I wish I could share the same opinion. All I know is that I always hate having bounce in my opener and that it's generally a really bad topdeck, coming at random times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
This is basically a hopeless situation. You do not have any play at all in the first three turns, and you'll be still dependant on finding a counter after the Chalice lands again. By that time, DS will almost have killed you, or at least dropped a Moon to make any plans completely impossible, or Stax will lock you out completely by just Wasting one land. I'm not too interested in discussion unlikely stuff like Chalice at 1 on turn 1. Force Spike will be way superior on the play, River will be remotely usefull on the draw, given you meet like 10 requirements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
I don't understand what aggressiveness has to do with this discussion. We're playing Tempo, not aggro.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
Yes, you won't always leave mana open. You won't if you either have no shot at countering anyway, or if you're forced to drop a creature thanks to stuff like Lackey. Force Spike will almost always give you a shot, and actually a very reasonable shot at countering, which is certainly worth keeping mana open. Also, this deck will generally have 2-3 land in play. We can still play the game and keep mana open anyway. Tapping out is almost always wrong, barring the few cases I mentioned above. I still wouldn't tap out and play aggressive even if I have 10 dmg of burn in my hand, if I can wait a turn and counter my opponents CB or whatever.
Which is still not an argument for not playing Spike, as this is the best appreach this deck can take.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
I still haven't seen any arguments so far other than:Quote:
Originally Posted by goobafish
1) You have to keep mana open, which I just don't agree with, seeing that we run both Spell Snare and Stifle, which give exactly the same situation.
2) Bounce does stuff Force Spike doesn't, which is just unlogical, since Force Spike does stuff Bounce doesn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamuth
Quote:
...which is just unlogical...
Quote:
...which is just unlogical...
Umm... I think you meant illogical.Quote:
...which is just unlogical...
Anyways, Force Spike is just Daze 5-8. Does this deck want more Dazes?
Really? Unlogical isn't a word? Lol, that makes me seems stupid. Now that I think of it, I just translated it straight from Dutch.
Force Spike is really not more Daze, it's more like a Spell Snare with different conditions.
Spell Snare will still hit CMC of 2 if the opponent has 1 land or 5 lands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamuth
Force Spike will not hit spells if the opponent has lands open.
The spells are quite different and comparing them is illogical.
Sigh...Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
As I just said, the cards function the same, being a 1CC counter for which you're keeping mana open. The conditions for both cards are different. One will counter spell the other doesn't and the other way around.
Except that Spell Snare can still be useful later in the game, while Force Spike will still be as underwhelming as Daze in the late game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamuth
Furthermore, how will you deal with an enchantment like Humility that makes it through your counters?
I have tried a lot of different cards in those 2 slots and always came back to the bounce spells as a 1/1 spilt. I did replace the fire/ice slot for counterspells which worked out very well, but its a metagame call. In an unkown metagame, fire/ice seems to be the better call.
In the 2 open slots in the deck I have tried the following. I've added chain lightnings for more burn, trygon predator, krosan grips, engineered explosives, but always found the bounce spells were far more useful most of the time.
Maybe a lot of players don't realize how many different situations that the bounce spells are actually better than you give them credit for. I'm sure Kaplan can go over how many times his bounce spells won him or gave him a huge tempo advantage in the game.
I'm always looking for a suggestion on what the 2 cards should be for that slot, but as of right now it seems the bounce spells are the best.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
And this.Quote:
Originally Posted by nickrit2000
I also tested a lot of different configurations for the slots not set in stone. Tacosnape basically said what I am thinking about the topic, so there isn't much to add for me.
However, it's like it is with every other deck: those 60 cards which seem to work for most people won't necessary do so for others. If those Force Spikes get them where they wanted to be - so what?
I for myself finally also switched back to the 1/1 split of the bounce spell after playing several tournaments with either Clique or Predator instead of the Wipe Away. It works for me, so I am fine.