Quote:
Originally Posted by SillyMetalGAT
Only thing I can think of is that when animated the Monastery has first strike but that still won't always stop jitte.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by SillyMetalGAT
Only thing I can think of is that when animated the Monastery has first strike but that still won't always stop jitte.
I run the deck with 2 Island and 1 Forest. I dont maindeck my Monasteries, unless it's going to fully benefit me. Sad to say, my metagame is infested with Vial Goblins, and they run Wasteland. But theres also decks like The Rock, Angel Stompy, and The Mirror. Those were my reasons for the inclusions of Monastery in my Sideboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solpugid
Hi all,
On a recent legacy tournament (of course) I was burned (again) by sligh. With four price of progress MD. The 1st match is very difficult. But the second... It's so difficult too! I side worships and an Aegis of Honor as my only way to survive siding out the enforcers and mages... Do you tink that the BeB are strong enough? (they side tormod's and ReB).
This is my sideboard at the moment:
1 Meddlin Mage (3 MD)
2 Naturalize
3 Jötun Grunt
2 Worships
1 Aegis of Honor (I really hate that deck):mad:
2 Armageddon
1 Pithing Needle (2 MD)
3 Hail Storm
On the other side, what cards from time spiral do you think fit in the deck, MD or SB?
Aegis of honor is brutal against burn, but it's so situational. Though slow (and also situational), ivory mask does a good job of beating burn as well. Just counter enough to stay above about 10 life (so flame rift and flamebreak can't kill you quickly) and then drop a mask. Chances are if they run anarchy in the board, they won't bring it in against your 2 or less white permanents (though they may side it expecting worship...but you can counter it, right?).
I'm not sure what else mask could be sided in against. It's decent against black discard, but slow enough for it not to matter. It prevents tendrils or brain freeze from hitting you, but is usually only a slight speed bump. I don't know, you decide.
As another thought, I know how a lot of people on this board have a problem with 2/2s for 2, but I can't help but want plaxmanta in this deck. He's a counterspell at some times, a combat trick at others, and at the very least he can be played at the end of your opponent's turn if you don't need to counter or swords anything. I think I just love his random ability to keep bears alive, and then swing for 2.
Time spiral doesn't seem to have a lot of good stuff in it for this deck. Flagstones is good if you're running basic plains, though.
You should be able to beat Burn pretty easily without resorting to narrow sideboard cards. How close have the games been? Burn is really just a bad combo deck that can't fall back on storm to get around counters.Quote:
Originally Posted by elendil_es
When you're playing against Burn, you should be spending the early turns digging for counters and getting to threshold. He'll be throwing burn spells at you, but the first 5 or 6 of them are irrelevent. Feel free to Daze something, especially a 2nd-turn Flame Rift or PoP, since Daze won't always be useful later. You may also want to counter something if it would help you get to threshold faster. The nice thing about playing agaisnt Burn is that it doesn't really matter what or when you counterspell, since every card in the deck does the same thing. Just remember that your primary goal should be to set up a clock with counter backup.
If your hand is slow or creature heavy, tossing out a pre-threshed Werebear can be a good idea. If he fries it, then you've successfully "countered" another burn spell.
Flamebreaks and Crypts can be problematic since they draw out the game (Burn does have inevitability). Flamebreaks are easy to counter, but Crypts are more annoying. Normally I'd suggest sideboarding out Pithing Needles, but if you know he's bringing in Crypt, keeping them in may be correct.
Obviously, you want to pay attention to your life total. Burn will usually goldfish on turn 4 or 5, I guess (when it isn't losing to its own inconsistency), so be prepared for a "big" turn once you drop below 7 or so. He'll have a few cards left, and will throw them all at you in the hopes that enough of them resolve to kill you. Since you've been holding counters, they won't be enough, and then he'll be stuck in topdeck mode while you beat with creatures and use your far superior draw engine to find more counters. There is usually another little skirmish the turn before you kill him, which is when you can lose if you were unable to find more counters, but generally you should be able to deal with the 2 or 3 spells he topdecked.
Note that if you have a threshed Werebear in play, Swords to Plowshares is a relevant card. Gaining 4 life will trade with at least one of his cards, so it is essentially another counterspell, although it has the drawback of hurting your clock.
Blue Blasts are absolutely amazing in this matchup, since they act as additional (and super-efficient) counterspells. They also double as effective Goblin hate, so I'd go overboard on them before using narrow cards like Aegis of Honor.
First, thanks for all your thoughts. I have to say that the matchup is tougher than burn because has some of the sligh cards inside (wastelands, jackals, scroll, lavamancer). So the pithings are very useful. In that matchup I stabilize at 4-6 life, and he topdecks before I kill him. But this is a particular deck. I'm asking for a red solution. Burn-Sligh-Goblins solution. The Hail Storms seems amazing to me vs goblins. But the worships seems too mana expensive... I side them only vs red decks.
Sligh: -3 meddling mage -2 Mystic Enforcer, +1 pithing +2 worship +1 aegis of honor +1 jotun grunt
goblins: -3 meddling mage -2 Mystic enforcer -1 EE, +1 pithing +2 worship +3 hail storm.
Would you take out the worships and aegis for 3 BeB? Or something more for the fourth BeB?
If you are worried about burn you can put 2 (maybe 3 if you are really worried) Misdirections in the SB. They can even be used as FOW's 5&6 in a control match up, can redirect burn to their grill or their creatures. It also has the nasty habit of occaisionally sending hymn to tourachs back at your oppoent, and redirecting all sorts of creature kill and random jank.
My meta is quite janky and the MisD has won me a lot of games.
Classic Pup Sligh, eh? That deck should be even easier to beat, since he relies on creatures to do at least some of the damage, but Blue Blasts would still be nice to have. Take out the Worships and Aegis for them, since trading cards efficiently will let you answer his opening hand and then simply outdraw him in the midgame.Quote:
Originally Posted by elendil_es
Another card that would be absolutely busted against Pup Sligh is Temple Acolyte. It's basically a strictly-better Bottle Gnomes, which have been hosing Jackal Pups since they both saw print. Acolyte is even decent against straight Burn, but it isn't amazing against Goblins, so Blue Blast is likely still the way to go.
Well said (and the rest). I never take my version of Thresh out with any less than 4 Blue Blasts for the inevitable Sligh, Burn and Goblins match. And BEB/Hydroblast is exceedingly strong against all of these decks. Hell, I've even sided them in to have more blue spells against IGGy and where StP would be crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ob Freely
I had to resort to this play the last time I played against burn in a tourney and went on to win the game because of it. Luckily, I had two threshed Mongeese on the board to seal the deal the turn after I would have died if not for StP'ing my Werebear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ob Freely
Going back to last week...
Well the 17 vs 18 lands is more of personal preference than anything else. I'd rather have a little too much land than too little since you can use your skill to play out of mana floods but can't do shit when you're stuck on one land.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Zur
Also, from experience, you take less mulligans with 18 land vs 17 land.
As for Predict, yeah, I was reaching there--I don't care for that card at all. Otherwise the first place DFD deck is mine with some minor tweaks
Off my list:
-1 EE
+1 Pithing Needle
-1 Meddling Mage
+1 Enforcer
-1 Mental Note
-1 Daze
-1 Serum Visions
-1 land
+4 Predict
The Predicts aside, Bennett's list is the I've been posting since the spring.
A little bit more on the Meddling Mage debate, since it just kinda died without resolution.
Well an obvious benefit of using Mage in the maindeck is to free up room in your sideboard. But I like Mr. Nightmare's comparison to Pithing Needle. Without testing it, or taking the word of others, Pithing Needle looks like a sideboard card at best. But when you run it in the maindeck, it does some amazing things and I believe we're all running them now.Quote:
[re: Meddling Mage] None of this matters. We're talking about the maindeck, which means game one.
I remember being dismissive of the value of the Needle when it was first spoiled but was slowly won over after testing it in the sideboard, and then I saw many people playing it in the maindeck and though "that can't be right..." But it was.
I had the same reservations about Meddling Mage being a maindeck card as well, but was eventually won over--due to its amazing versatility--and it even swings and blocks (unlike Needle). The thing about Mage isn't the big and game-breaking stuff it does (naming High Tide against Solidarity or Tendrils against IGGy Pop). It's the sheer versatility of it.
I remember playing against something almost identical to Chang's U/G Madness list a few months ago and by turn 3 I had a Needle on 'Moeba and Magi on Wild Mongrel and Arrogant Wurm. Game. Or being able to name Fireblast or PoP against Slight/Burn. But it's a difficult card to use optimally and is definitely the most skill-testing card the deck runs. Which is another reason I like it. That and it conserves your counters and removal for other threats and strands powerful and dead cards in your opponent's hand.
That's pretty much what I want to say about Meddling Mage: run it, don't run it. Apparently it doesn't seem to matter.
So, you're running (essentially) 2 basic Plains in the deck? That just can't be right. Is that for Armageddon? Flagstones seem "cool but bad," like a ton of other cards that don't fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solpugid
But really, I started this post because I wanted to debate Jotun Grunt vs. Loaming Shaman. I don't think this has been discussed here yet.
Each of the SCG DFD IV (Day 1) Top 8 decks ran one or the other.
For those who don't know.
Loaming Shaman
2G
When Loaming Shaman comes into play, target player shuffles any number of target cards from his or her graveyard into his or her library.
3/2
It's kind of like a Tormod's Crypt with legs that leaves behind a 3/2 body. Seems excellent-ish, along with Jotun Grunt--but you don't want to run both.
Thoughts?
No Bardo, what I meant was that flagstones could replace a maindeck plains, not in addition to it. I understand how my comment was confusing though. I personally don't run basics besides islands, but with flagstones instead of plains you are more resistant to armageddon (like you said) and no less vulnerable to wasteland (if they waste it, get a tundra...yay!).
You can't fetch a Flagstones though, which could be an issue...
It seems like the "gravy play" of Geddon + Flagstones doesn't compensate for the general vulnerability of Blood Moon, Back to Basics and Price of Progress. Not to mention, when you drop 'Geddon, you should be winning in short order anyway.
And, you know, if your opponent Wastes your Flagstones, and then you fetch a Tundra, you're gonna feel kinda dumb when they Waste your Tundra. And then with Crucible... Well, it just doesn't seem worth it. Though I like the art, FWIW.
I think you are right,it's really a question which of those cards is suprior to the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bardo
The advantages of both of them: They can't be shut down by Pithing Needle.
Now,let's see:
Jotun Grunt:
Advantages:
- Undercosted beater, 2 Mana 4/4.
- He is a beater who's independable of Threshold
- NQGr needs 2 burnspells to handle him,so he's also a kind of Hymn to Tourach.
- NQGw needs Swords to Plowshares. Meddling MAge onto Swords to Plowshares will make Jotun Grunt nearly invincible.
- He Will definetley pull a counter out of the opponents hand.
Disadvantages:
- He can also be shut down by StoP/Removal before he removes anything.
Loaming Shaman:
Advantages:
- He "removes" the Opponents Graveyard instantly as he resolves.
Disadvantages:
- compared with Jotun Grunt,he's NOT a beater. Against NQGr he could be chumped by Burning Tree Shaman for example.
- The opponent could still recover with Mental Notes. Jotun Grunt would contineously "remove" the cards,Loaming Shaman just once.
Imo Jotun Grunt is superior to Loaming Shaman. So if you play NQGw,throw in Jotun Grunt,when you are playing NQGr,you are forced to play Loaming Shaman.
Loaming Shaman dies to opposing grunts/werebears, were the Grunt drags them with him. The Grunt allows you to enhance your deck (whenever you got 7+, start reshuffling threats/EE). The last fact has been crucial for me in a couple of mirrors. Sure, loaming shaman does that as well, but only once, and it doesn't allow you to wreck the opponent's grave as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adan
As soon as LS does his thing, Werebear, Mongoose and Enforcer are going to look pretty pathetic. My point being that a 3/2 is going to trump 1/1s for a few turns.Quote:
Loaming Shaman dies to opposing grunts/werebears, were the Grunt drags them with him. The Grunt allows you to enhance your deck (whenever you got 7+, start reshuffling threats/EE). The last fact has been crucial for me in a couple of mirrors. Sure, loaming shaman does that as well, but only once, and it doesn't allow you to wreck the opponent's grave as well.
A lot of times, Grunt is just going to trade with Werebear, since he takes a few turns to get going if he comes any later than turn 5 or 6 or so. Grunt also gives you time to find an answer (StP, EE). Shaman gives you no such opportunity. They both seem really good.
We should probably also compare Tormod's Crypt with this equation.
I like just running tormod's crypt myself. Its speed and power seem really key (though you sacrifice the "body" factor).
Between the two creatures, I like grunt a lot more. His lower cost and bigger body, to me, make up for the few turns needed to get him going.
I haven't really had a chance to test with Grunt, but I have played against him. I know that he is wicked annoying. I like that Loaming Shaman doesn't die when there is nothing to remove. I also like that he hits right when he comes into play. it's hard for me to speculate which is better. I am going to test with both. Grunt may be a 2cc but do you really want to play him on turn 2 if there is only probably 2 cards in each graveyard?
I played in a tournament, and I would like to say, I would much rather have Loaming Shaman over Grunt.
I was playing against RGSA, and somehow, he resolved a Masticore, and got the engine going with Genesis recursion. They got their engine going. I topdecked a Grunt, and took a deep breath. He played a Duplicant on his turn, and grabbed my Grunt before it did it's job.
... Anyways, I think we need a tool to combat Midgame decks, and I would also like to point out that Loaming Shaman is better than Grunt because it's instant speeed.
Loaming shaman also serves the purpose of bringing back all YOUR cards from yard to library. This is especially good against forms of heavy control, where you might simply run out of threats and cards.
Jotun Grunt does that too. He can even do that AND remove the opposing graveyard. But, you don't even want to sideboard a Shaman vs control... Nor Grunt..Quote:
Originally Posted by lillelassie