2 thopter in a surrounding with lackey???
do you try goyf? with enforcer they should be solid threatens
Printable View
2 thopter in a surrounding with lackey???
do you try goyf? with enforcer they should be solid threatens
I'm not quite sure what the last few posts are all about. Are you guys really serious when suggesting Tarmogoyf in Affinity? He is a very good creature that Wizards printed, but why would you run it in Affinity. I would consider a lot of other creatures before I would ever consider him.
It is best when going with your own personal build of Affinity to focus on the aggressive side. I believe if you make the deck to be as aggressive as possible will lead to the best results in the Legacy format. I really believe the format is too fast for players to get cute with affinity and go more in the aggro-control route.
Lets have some serious suggestions on optimal deck lists or some sideboard deck for metagames in your area.
Please.
you should be a frustated player to be agressive like this...
if you liked affinity and if you tested it, you would see that there's a lack in affinty: it needs something more solid and constant, and goyf bring it.
The way with atog+bersek is completed against all the aggro-control decks (********, fish, etc.) which pack 4 FOW, 4 daze, sometimes counterspell.
Maybe you didn't test enough to consider new build or solution
which one? tog and confident, that's all (moreover, confident makes you cut enforcer that's not very good)Quote:
I would consider a lot of other creatures before I would ever consider him
In my opinion, Tarmogoyf in Affinity is a mistake. It contributes nothing to the all-important artifact count (hence reducing consistency rather than improving it) and it doesn't look particularly sexy wearing a hat since it can be chumped by anything and everything. We even suck at getting him reasonably big... sure, our opponent might help but we could do much much better.
Tarmogoyf is not a card for affinity (at least not maindeck, and frankly, I can't even see it sideboard). Goyf is in the wrong color for affinity, and more importantly, affinity generally wants to be winning before any cards are in the graveyards.
Gofy is designed for an aggro-control deck (with varying proportions of both aggro and control elements). It requires that things are hitting the GY on either side of the table. This is not the aim of affinity.
There are much better creature choices for affinity already: Enforcer, Confidant, Flyers, etc. You either are using synergy cards, evasion, or card advantage in this deck.
In my mind, vial affinity did one thing well: you wanted to see every card you drew. The synergy was fantastic, and the deck had options. By splashing or adding dissynergistic cards, affinity waters itself down. We should be careful in how we change the core of vial affinity. For every non-affinity type card you add (FoW, Confidant, etc.), you are removing an affinity-type card that had innate synergy with the overall deck. After reading this thread, I'm finding a lack of justification for some of the suggested substitutions.
I think a lot have just been "tweaking" affinity to make it seem like they added something innovative, when in reality, plain vial affinity was just stronger. Now, this doesn't mean there aren't innovations to be had... =)
peace,
4eak
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddn
I have tested various builds of Vial Affinity, and came to the conclusion that the build I currently play to be the best based on my own results. I'm not saying that my build is the best build possible, but it does put up results. I have talked with many different players about possible cards to add to the deck, but the general principle is that you can't play too many non-artifact cards.
I found out that the usually mix of non-artifact color cards to play is about 8-12. I currently play 11 color cards in the main deck that are not lands. I believe if you go above this general rule, you start to get inconsistent results during game play. The main reason this deck did very well in standard, was not only was it very fast, but it also was very consistent during the coarse of a tournament.
There is not another deck that I have play tested more then this one. I welcome new innovations into the deck, but I believe the general principles behind the deck must be followed in order to achieve success.
So in the course of exploring options within that 8-12 card limit, why can't green be explored? Goyf is going to be large, we might as well accept that because if your opponent has no graveyard that means either A) they aren't casting spells - which means you're winning or B) their board is so much better than yours that you are in trouble anyway. Green also brings options such as Rancor & Berserk, which I don't believe have been fully explored. BG Affinity could be quite exciting, it could be mediocre, it might be a complete bust...but until it has been explored no one here can say with final authority. Isn't that one of the hallmarks of what makes this format great - the ability (hell, the necessity) to constantly re-evaluate based on what gets added every four months?
Pierre Canali won the Pro Tour at Colombus with 20 non artifact cards in his deck...
20 non artifact cards is really the maximum IMHO
A.) is the very definition of 'win-more' and B.) is the very definition of poor card choice. Goyf does nothing to help affinity win games it normally wouldn't win, and it weakens the synergy of the deck as a whole. Goyf belongs in an aggro-control deck, not an aggro-combo deck like affinity. If any viable creature is going to be large, it will be so because we are using flyers, modular, affinity-creatures, and plating to get the job done.Quote:
Goyf is going to be large, we might as well accept that because if your opponent has no graveyard that means either A) they aren't casting spells - which means you're winning or B) their board is so much better than yours that you are in trouble anyway.
I'll be an authority on it then. Affinity should not be running green. Rancor and Berserk can be good cards in the right deck, but affinity is not that deck. Affinity is an aggro deck, but it needs very specific aggro cards to maintain synergy. Unfortunately, green does not provide affinity with the correct tools. If you run green, you'll eventually be sacrificing other colored spells in order to maintain an optimal artifact count. Frankly, Disciple, Shrapnel, Thoughtcast, and even Atog are all much, much stronger than anything green has to offer.Quote:
Green also brings options such as Rancor & Berserk, which I don't believe have been fully explored. BG Affinity could be quite exciting, it could be mediocre, it might be a complete bust...but until it has been explored no one here can say with final authority.
The hallmark of the format (supposedly) is that you aren't stuck playing any one deck and that the format is balanced without stagnation. Even if we are re-evaluating, that doesn't mean that optimal decklists (which won't include green for affinity) are wrong or need major overhauls. Affinity players will have to realize there is a very real hardcap to the possible innovations available to this deck. If anything, your point does more to show that affinity players are stuck with a more stagnant decklist and color wheel (even if they don't realize it) and they need to understand that this deck is a metagame call in itself.Quote:
Isn't that one of the hallmarks of what makes this format great - the ability (hell, the necessity) to constantly re-evaluate based on what gets added every four months?
The fact is: I could try putting every single card in the format in Affinity, but that doesn't mean these will be useful innovations. There is a difference between constantly re-evaluating a deck (being open to changes), and randomly trying bad ideas out in a deck. And, as much as I love the card, Goyf is one of those bad ideas for affinity.
From what I remember, this was an extended deck and a surprise win to many. This doesn't mean he played an optimal decklist (or that he played it correctly...as from what I remember, he made several play mistakes). This is certainly not good enough evidence to convince me that 20 artifacts is the pseudo-maximum. I'll admit, I'd be willing to test a deck with 20 non-artifacts if a proper explanation could be made for them. But, honestly, I don't see this deck going beyond 12-14 colored spell slots.Quote:
Pierre Canali won the Pro Tour at Colombus with 20 non artifact cards in his deck...
20 non artifact cards is really the maximum IMHO
peace,
4eak
Karsten and Maaten ran green in their Affinity lists, specifically for Berserk in the main and Natrualize in the sideboard. They have combined (checks)...267 Pro Points, and finished in the top 64 in the largest Legacy event in history. Green is a viable option in Affinity, although I personally wouldn't play it.
Canali's win was also based on his drawing the non-artifact cards at the times that he needed them, knowing that the core of Darksteel Citadel -> Aether Vial, go would carry the day against many opponents. Without Meddling Mage and the sideboard cards, Canali simply doesn't get to the Top 8. Chill and Engineered Plague won him the finals and semifinals, respectively.
Many players can play sub-optimal decks and still do quite well. How much of their success with affinity was playskill, luck, and just the raw power and synergy of the vial-affinity shell minus the green? I'm betting the green splash was not the reason they succeeded.Quote:
Karsten and Maaten ran green in their Affinity lists, specifically for Berserk in the main and Natrualize in the sideboard. They have combined (checks)...267 Pro Points, and finished in the top 64 in the largest Legacy event in history. Green is a viable option in Affinity, although I personally wouldn't play it.
Don't get me wrong, I love Berserk and Naturalize (I played them for a long time myself). They can be good cards, but that doesn't make them the best for the slot, and it doesn't make green a truly viable color for affinity.
It might be the case we disagree on the meaning of viable. Of course, I'm curious as to why you would choose not to play green in affinity?
peace,
4eak
They didn't run Thoughtcast in their builds, instead running Berserk, an extra land, and a Terrarion.
I wouldn't play green because I would prefer to have a more stable manabase while also including blue. Four colors is a little much, and you're playing Atog from red.
However, I'm actually not convinced that Thoughtcast is as insane in Affinity in Legacy, simply because 'Draw 2 cards' is most often underwhelming and the mana isn't the most stable. Berserk is pretty nice, actually, both because it finishes the game off and it can be used as removal in an emergency. I've both had turns where Thoughtcast off of Chromatic Star has led to something completely stupid happening, but the same turn in the next game just ended up wasting a great deal of time that I particularly didn't have.
so, what are the most common/competative color splashes in affinity?
I have seen color splashes from accross the spectrum in affinity do well,
a guy that used to frequent on of the local tournies I attend used to play affinity religiously and every week he would switch it up.
he ran BUW affinity with mages and therapy (and swords in the board), he ran straight red, straight black, straight blue and every other color combination in betwen.
I think he stopping comming for lack of ideas for it; dear god I hope he is not reading this, for fear he will now run green!
but seriously, green is unneeded, since in red you could run fling anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirdape3
I would just like the add that Geoffrey Siron got 10th at GP: Lille, and his list did run green for 2 main deck Berserk. I think green is a very worthwhile color to consider when playing affinity. I added green to the deck for main deck berserk and sb naturalize (now krosan grip). I went with the more aggro build of the deck and cut the card drawing spell in thoughtcast as I decided on running green instead of blue.
My main reason behind cutting blue for thoughtcast main deck, is that Legacy is a faster format where speed is more necessary in the deck then drawing 2 extra cards that usually ends up costing you a turn by not playing anything. I've ended more games by either berserking/Flinging Atog then my opponents would like to admit.
The sideboard options that green gives you is probably the biggest advantage that I like that blue doesn't give you. Your only playing blue for thoughtcast, which I just can't commit myself to do. I believe you have to go with 3 colors in a build of affinity. I would not run any more due to the fact of getting more inconsistent draws.
so if i hear you, meddling was a bad idea when Canali won the PT... But in fact, meddling was a good, clever and subtle innovation even if ther was not synergy with the other card.Quote:
The fact is: I could try putting every single card in the format in Affinity, but that doesn't mean these will be useful innovations. There is a difference between constantly re-evaluating a deck (being open to changes), and randomly trying bad ideas out in a deck. And, as much as I love the card, Goyf is one of those bad ideas for affinity.
on SCG, Karseten said that Roger Maaten had tested a lot the deck before the tornament so i don't think it was a sub-optimal deck... it seems that you think that only you have the optimal list of affinity so can you give us? it's a little bit pretentious to affirm that pro players played sub-optimal deck while implying you play optimal deck but without result....Quote:
Many players can play sub-optimal decks and still do quite well. How much of their success with affinity was playskill, luck, and just the raw power and synergy of the vial-affinity shell minus the green? I'm betting the green splash was not the reason they succeeded.
i really agree with nick for the first time!!Quote:
The sideboard options that green gives you is probably the biggest advantage that I like that blue doesn't give you. Your only playing blue for thoughtcast, which I just can't commit myself to do.
I've seen affinity piloted in legacy by some of the best players in the world and nothing has come of it. It seems to have alot of raw power but for some reason it just doesn't do well in large scale tournaments. Something has just changed though. Phyrexian dreadnought just turned back into a really good card especially for affinity. With dreadnought you can now do insane things like turn 1 vial turn 2 vial dreadnought into play and fling him at someone and it only gets even more retarded when you add berserk into the mix. Its actually possible to kill someone with dreadnought on about the same timetable as a combo deck kills someone. Not only does dreadnought give the deck much needed insane speed but if you choose to go blue adding stifle to get dreadnought into play more consistently then it also has the unintended advantage of shoring up the problematic combo matchup. No matter which way you choose to go with dreadnought in this deck it seems like a move in the right direction. I'll do some testing and come back when I have some results
You read my statement incorrectly. No straw-man please.Quote:
so if i hear you, meddling was a bad idea when Canali won the PT... But in fact, meddling was a good, clever and subtle innovation even if ther was not synergy with the other card.
I didn't say his meddling mages were incorrect for the extended metagame at the time. If you will please re-read what was written, you will see that when I speak of Canali I am referencing the viable quantity of colored spells in his deck. This does not imply anything about whether or not one should run meddling mage in his circumstances.
What you quoted was not even speaking about Canali, although it certainly can apply. What you quoted was initially concerned with the so called "hallmark of the format" and adding Gofy to affinity. However, the statement has much larger implications, even if you misread and/or misapplied what I've said.
Okay...so you don't think it was sub-optimal. You didn't provide any really good reason why it was optimal either. My point about a pro being able to win with a suboptimal deck still stands. It is very much possible that they didn't play a perfect deck and still did very well.Quote:
on SCG, Karseten said that Roger Maaten had tested a lot the deck before the tornament so i don't think it was a sub-optimal deck... it seems that you think that only you have the optimal list of affinity so can you give us? it's a little bit pretentious to affirm that pro players played sub-optimal deck while implying you play optimal deck but without result....
There are two types of 'correct' builds from which we can understand the meaning of innovation. The first is the mathematically correct universal build (if we tabulated all possible combinations of decks available in a format, and played them at maximal skill, the outcome and success of each would reveal the universally best decks possible), and the second would be a strict metagame build. The only reason the second is different is because the combination of decks that would be tested would not include every combination, nor does it say anything about the skill of the players. This is relevant because it would allow certain decks that mathematically weren't as universally as good to become artificially better based upon other metagame factors like human skill differences and a smaller combination of decks to test. Innovation is the revelation (not the book) of the best build according to either standard. We, of course, seek the universally best in general, but we metagame on the assumption that everyone else will not know as much as we do.
I certainly think that green was wrong on both accounts, but especially on the 1st (which is what I had hoped you had gathered). Again, a pro putting up tournament results simply doesn't mean that they have an optimal build for either lenses of universal or specific metagamed innovation.
As for my build and my thoughts on the cards...I'm about 10 pages into the article, so please wait.
peace,
4eak
44 people showed up @ this tourney: 4 SEA DRAKE TOURNAMENT 7/14/07 Hadley, Ma
Vial Affinity came in 2nd place. Below is the build which looks pretty typical. The one thing that does stand up is the low land count, only 17 total.
// Lands
4 Seat of the Synod
2 Blinkmoth Nexus
2 Darksteel Citadel
1 Glimmervoid
4 Great Furnace
4 Vault of Whispers
// Creatures
4 Myr Enforcer
4 Frogmite
4 Arcbound Ravager
4 Disciple of the Vault
3 Arcbound Worker
3 Ornithopter
3 Atog
// Other
4 Cranial Plating
4 AEther Vial
4 Chromatic Star
4 Thoughtcast
2 Fling
// Sideboard
SB: 4 Cabal Therapy
SB: 3 Engineered Plague
SB: 2 Sphere of Resistance
SB: 3 Tormod's Crypt
SB: 3 Pithing Needle
Affinity (Raffinity/Vial Affinity)
Affinity is an artifact-based aggro-combo deck. It uses fairly powerful tempo enhancing effects such as the affinity mechanic (the namesake), modular, and highly synergistic artifacts/spells to apply a great deal of early game pressure. The aggro element is powerful and versatile; it has so many combat tricks that the deck often appears to act as a combo deck in the last few turns as it can often bypass many control features presented by an opponent (removal, blocking, unmanageable disciple life loss, etc.). Some might say that affinity breaks several of the general principles of magic as it possesses the ability: to play multiple extremely undercosted spells, to dodge pin-point control too effectively, and to put more permanents in play within the first 3 turns than a normal deck should.
The pivotal strength (and what some may eventually find to be a weakness as this deck is limited in evolution) of affinity is the raw synergy and tempo that exists in the deck. Affinity rarely draws hands that it doesn't want to keep, and nearly every card you draw in the deck will have a positive interaction with other cards in the deck. Generally, everything in the deck is relevant to your current board position, and cards often have a multiplicative effect beyond their initial perceived relevance and power (artifact + disciple + ravager + modular + affinity factor + etc.). Essentially, the whole is much greater than the sum of the parts. When played correctly, the high average card relevance, synergy, and well-abused tempo mechanics gives affinity resilience and speed that is rarely matched by other aggro decks.
This strength, however, can act as a weakness. There is a common misconception about the deck and how affinity can evolve in a format. Many people fail to realize the problem with a deck that requires every single piece in the deck to maintain synergy. The problem with affinity is that it is very difficult to change the deck without impacting the synergy of the deck itself. So, for example, to add 4x Cloud of Faeries and 4x Somber Hoverguard, while subtracting other relevant artifacts, acts as a barrier not only to a proper mana base (and the abuse of it), but it waters the deck down, eliminating the very strength of its synergy. If you cut artifacts for non-artifacts, you decrease your average card relevance in terms of the average progression of your gameplan itself (aggro-combo). Even cutting certain artifacts for others can demonstrate a decrease in synergy. Affinity exists in virtue of its synergy. Watering the deck down only prevents affinity from doing what it does best. This means that Affinity has very limited sideboard options and few evolutions available. Admittedly, this misconception is fairly widespread because it is difficult to see the web of synergy interactions that each card helps to compose.
Taking into consideration this synergy issue, affinity will fail to evolve away from a very specific type of aggro-combo. For example, affinity, unfortunately, cannot be properly built as an aggro-control deck. To add control components is to weaken its architecture as an aggro-combo deck. Even further, removing an aggro card for a control card is more than just a 1 for 1 substitution in affinity. There is more than a 1 for 1 proportional change in functional effectiveness when switching from aggro to control. The change forms a much larger loss in the aggro-combo functionality of the deck than merely 1 card (as synergy multiplies an aggro card’s relevance), while there only remains 1 control card to be gained. Some may argue that the disproportionate loss is worth it. All I can say is: you have misassigned your role as the affinity player.
To the dismay of some, this two-edged synergy means that Affinity will never be an aggro-control deck, it only has one direction to continue evolving: aggro. Now, surely, some might point me towards some AfFoWnity decks and the like, but that doesn't mean these decks are optimal, nor as good as straight Aggro affinity.
You lose a lot more than you gain by choosing to use non-aggro cards in affinity. But, it isn’t just using aggressive cards, affinity requires a very specific type of aggro card. So, while Jitte may be a fantastically aggressive card to use (and versatile), Jitte is such a tempo sucking whore that the deck cannot afford to use it.
Affinity should continue to specialize and develop as an aggro deck if it wishes to further its competitive advantage. Developing and modifying affinity requires a great deal of justification. It isn't as simple as, "the metagame would suggest we use X" to take care of Y. Adding and subtracting cards from affinity is innately more difficult and complex to do correctly. The opportunity cost of running one card and not another is difficult to measure in this deck. Now, that doesn’t mean there aren’t innovations to be had, but with a deck that revolves around so much synergy, the proponents of the status quo are fairly justified in denying the vast majority of “innovations and tech” that people prescribe. Just remember, it all adds up. All too often, modifications actually decrease the effectiveness of the basic shell of vial affinity.
Affinity is at a disadvantage in terms of how it can evolve. The deck structure is extremely rigid, and, unfortunately, that prevents affinity from becoming much better than what we already have. Throwing Phyrexian Dreadnought and Stifles, Fling, etc. into this deck does not make it better than what it once was, and admittedly, that is difficult for many to see. Innovations will be small for this deck. It is a deck to fine tune, not revolutionize.
As some will not fully recognize there are diminishing returns and limits to substitutions in this deck, I will clarify a fairly universal principle for those individuals who wish to innovate and evolve affinity: There is a difference between a deck that can win a game and an optimal deck. Most every build posted can win a game or two, but some builds will win more than others. Optimal builds will have the best chance of winning (not just 'some chance'). Winning some is not the same as winning the most possible, but many fail to see this fact. This makes it difficult for many people to see why their tech is suboptimal or flat out sucks. They still win games in spite of their tech, not in virtue of their tech.
Assuming that affinity is built and played correctly, this once dominating force is really hindered by only two things in Legacy: 1.) Combo, and 2.) Amazing hate available. Each of these contributes to affinity becoming strictly a metagame deck. A metagame deck is one that can never be tier 1, but given the right metagame is very viable.
Affinity does suffer from the classic aggro problem of not being able to disrupt or race Combo effectively enough. Affinity does not defeat well-played and well-built combo decks in Legacy. You can run CoTV, FoW, SoR, and Therapy, and you’ll still get owned by a competent combo player. Watering your deck’s strategy down puts you turns and turns behind on the board (on average), while your disruption simply delays the inevitable. Even if affinity can curb the losses in the combo department, it will usually require major sacrifices against other archetypes, negating the reason to play affinity at all. In environments flourishing with combo, you probably shouldn’t be playing this deck.
The other reason why Affinity could never be Tier 1 in Legacy is due to the amount of hate available -- affinity simply can't live through it. For example, Energy Flux, Shattering Spree, and Pernicious Deeds are just a few exceptionally deadly tools against Affinity. Combined with several other cards, sideboards prepared for affinity would impose insurmountable barriers.
Affinity, at best, is a metagame deck. You choose to play the deck because you know your opponents are not packing enough hate and that they can't outrace you with combo. However, with that said, if the metagame does not anticipate the deck (and it currently doesn't in many areas), it can be a very powerful ‘rogue’ deck. Affinity is a deck that is underestimated by many, and in part, this is why the metagame would allow for affinity to be a viable competitor. Affinity can play like a tier 1 deck, it simply can’t afford to play in a metagame that anticipates it.
As a metagame deck, affinity can be tailored somewhat. For example, in many cases Atog is brokenly good, and in other matchups it can be terrible. This goes for a few cards. Keeping in mind that the deck should be slightly tailored (even if it can never be revolutionized), here is the basic vial affinity shell:
Basic Vial Affinity Shell
24 Creatures
4x Disciple of the Vault
4x Arcbound Worker
4x Arcbound Ravager
4x Frogmite
4x Myr Enforcer
4x Ornithopter
18 Spells
4x Aether Vial
4x Thoughtcast
4x Cranial Plating
3x Shrapnel Blast
3x Chromatic Star
18 Land
4x Seat of the Synod
4x Vault of Whispers
4x Great Furnace
3x Blinkmoth Nexus
3x Glimmervoid
In a vacuum, you’d want to start with the above shell. Darksteel Citadel and Atog are also very viable components of a basic shell, but their inclusion may require more justification. Again, given a specific metagame, adjustments should be made. Cards outside the card pool I’ve mentioned have yet to be properly justified.
The basic gameplan is to drop your hand in 3 turns, laying down the beats. Use your non-creature spells wisely to force a dominant position. Usually the game is won by an unblocked creature with either modular’ed counters on it or cranial plating, the use of the Disciple/Ravager combo, and often Shrapnel to seal the deal.
Card explanations from the Basic Shell:
Disciple of the Vault---I still can’t believe this card costs 1cc. 1 for 1/1 is fair. His ability is brokenly good. His obvious synergy with Arcbound Ravager (and Shrapnel) can turn his 1 mana cost into massive amounts of damage. I am not surprised to see his 1 mana cost turn into my opponent’s 10 life loss. This card is excellent in multiples.
Opponents often forget about disciple both in the deck/hand and in play. This gives you an excellent information advantage that will often surprise the opponent as they didn’t properly anticipate the effects of Disciple. Generally, it is best to hold back on playing Disciple until mid to late game if possible. While he is a lackluster 1st turn play, his late game vial-into-play can flat out win games on the stack. Top-decking this card can turn losing-board positions into winning ones.
Additionally, mass board sweepers can become deadly with disciple on the board, and it often forces control players into pin-point removal before they can sweep the board.
Arcbound Worker—A truly underestimated card. This is a high synergy card. He enables combos, enables affinity, and greatly assists ravager-based board positions. His power level is much closer to Aether vial (the other amazing 1cc) in this deck than most would think.
At 1 for 1/1 on the table he is fair. But, his artifactness and modularity allow him to do some extraordinary things for his cheap casting cost, making this card much better than 1 for 1/1. The death of Arcbound worker is not the death of 1/1 on the table (as long as you control another artifact creature). Not only can you get disciple triggers, but the modular ability allows your 1 mana spent to continue being damage on the board. To assume his removal or sacrifice is to assume that you spent 1 mana for 2 consecutive 1/1’s with multiple synergies in between.
For example, it is common for him to be sacrificed, and for the saccer to gain the advantage of the +1/+1 counter (Ravager) or 5 damage (Shrapnel), while the Worker’s modular can enhance another creature.
Arcbound is definitely a combat tricks creature with excellent synergy.
Arcbound Ravager—A card I feel has been overhyped at the perceptual expense of the other components of affinity (don’t get me wrong, I know this card inside and out, and I love it). Ravager is good, in part, because of the rest of the deck. With that said, this card more than pulls his own weight; he is arguably the core of the deck (although, the artifact lands would be a runner-up). He is much like Psychatog, only he is an artifact-board-based tog. He converts permanents into resources that are transferable (often unblocked) damage while abusing Disciple of the vault. Ravager channels your board position into damage based tempo. Assuming you don’t need your permanents after you’ve won, ravager make the most of your board by efficiently sacrificing into stronger board positions than any normal deck has the right to boast. The card should have cost 4-5 mana for what it does.
The stack tricks with this card can be as basic as sacking to live through a bolt, to sacking out for disciple triggers and putting modular on an unblocked creature, or even much more complex tricks on the stack. He gives the deck versatility. Ravager allows you to overcome a great deal of control elements in the game, negating the effectiveness of removal and blocking, while simultaneously creating a huge threat on the board. I would compare this card to Morphling (a card which I know well in MUC) in terms of its utility and power-levels.
Frogmite—Bread’n’Butter. You never play this for 4. Usually he drops for free, but once in a while you’ll pay the 1 or 2 to put him into play. 0-2 payed cost for a 2/2 Artifact creature with a very high actual CC is excellent (CC-based removal have difficulty with him). Frogmite is to your 2nd turn as what Arcbound Worker is to your 1st turn. This is a solid play, and it is part of bricks and mortar that binds this deck together in synergy.
Myr Enforcer—He is a fattie in Legacy and an aggro-control slayer. He is a clock, and he becomes castable generally on 3rd turn. He is a threat that the opponent cannot ignore. Myr Enforcer is to the 3rd turn as what Frogmite is to the 2nd turn. Enforcer comes into play earlier than a 4/4 creature should, and this is exactly the sort of tempo advantage that an aggro deck seeks.
I am amazed at the number of people that opt not to run him. He is an awesome drop 3rd turn or 10th turn, and multiples are certainly a good thing. When you find yourself in board positions that do not seek to sac out to ravager, Enforcer is the largest and often most relevant creature on the board. Enforcer can be seen as a stabilizing aggro card in this deck, allowing affinity to reach critical mass.
Enforcer does require a high artifact count in play, but this doesn’t make him not worth running. Just look at the efficiency of this card:
7 artifacts- 0cc for 4/4 artifact creature
6 artifacts- 1cc for 4/4 artifact creature
5 artifacts- 2cc for 4/4 artifact creature
4 artifacts- 3cc for 4/4 artifact creature
3 artifacts- unplayable.
At any point you would cast this card, he is mana-efficient. A turn 2, 3, or 4 enforcer will often win games. Think of Enforcer as being similar to Arrogant Wurm in UG madness, only better.
Ornithopter—Sometimes an underestimated card. 0/2 for free not only gives you early game artifact-factor, but it gives you something even more important: evasion. Ornithopter is damage over the top, and affinity desperately needs good ways to maximally abuse modular and cranial plating. This creature will win you countless games that non-evasion non-artifact creatures could not.
Aether Vial—Probably one of the strongest 1cc cards in all of Legacy, and affinity can abuse this card better than most. I’d call this the best 1st turn play in affinity. Paradise mantle is a joke compared to this card. Aether vial is a true tempo card (as demonstrated in several decks), it offers:
Uncounterable creatures
Mana Color Smoothing (no black/red mana available? Vial doesn’t care)
Mana Acceleration (each use beyond the first is all gravy)
Playing Creatures as instants (most importantly Disciple/Ravager tricks)
It is an artifact…and a first turn play at that.
Remains relevant from start to finish.
Thoughtcast—Card advantage, straight up 2 for 1, usually for 1 mana. This is 2/3’s of an Ancestral recall at sorcery speed. It remains in the top 3 card drawers in Legacy (at its affinity-based cost) as it doubles the efficiency of the 1 mana for 1 card draw ratio. While this isn’t a cantrip, primarily because it is played after turn 1 (usually around turn 3), it is extremely undercosted card advantage. Several people do not advocate the card, and I cannot stress enough: learn to trust your card advantage. Too many people don’t see the relevance of drawing in affinity.
It is easy to see where you don’t like Thoughtcast. The color and affinity factor are definitely constraints on its playability. And, you may even say, why waste the slot when I would rather have a threat in my hand than a thoughtcast? The difference is that Thoughtcast allows you to run only the most relevant threats, increasing your average card relevance like a cantrip, while also giving you a much stronger mid-late game because of card advantage. It is both card quality and card advantage. Thoughtcast is very similar to Ringleader in Goblins.
Card advantage is not mere card advantage in affinity either. Card advantage in affinity often translates into immediate tempo advantage as well. While other decks might be tapping out or expending very important resources to even draw cards, affinity can pay one mana, and in most cases will still have resources left to play what it drew. For example, drawing an enforcer and a land off a thoughtcast and playing them that turn has immediate effects. Most other decks will not experience tempo advantage in the same turn that they gained true card advantage. Affinity gets the best of both worlds with Thoughtcast.
This card is so powerful that it alone makes blue the most relevant color to have on the table in affinity (although black comes in a close second). If I drop a first turn land (assuming I might lose it), and if I have a choice, it will never be a blue producer. Resolving thoughtcast is that important.
Cranial Plating—The “other ravager”. While it can be mana intensive, this card wins games. Like the ravager, it turns each artifact on the table into 1 damage. Unlike the ravager, you don’t have to lose your permanents to reap the benefits. This card is so central to the aggro theme that it is an auto-4-of.
Cranial plays a similar role to Atog in that the equipped creature is a definite threat, one that often functions as a bluff-card or forces your opponent into less preferred positions. You will often equip your weakest creature (Arcbound Worker/Ornithotper), forcing your opponent to pin-point control the least of your creatures, while other cards like Frogmite and Enforcer swing through. And, like Atog, a single connect from an equipped creature might be the end of your opponent.
Additionally, cranial can play as a defensive card, making your blocker of choice lethal. This is a versatile card.
The instant equip is often overlooked by an opponent. It can switch to unblocked creatures before damage is on the stack, and that gives you an upperhand. Double black can be difficult to come by, however, Chromatic Star and Glimmervoid greatly aid you in reaching this color requirement.
Shrapnel Blast—Good affinity players know that this is not card disadvantage in a relevant sense. It is mana-efficient, niche-filling, and extremely aggressive. Generally, this card is used as a late-game finisher, but it performs finely as removal (taking out damn near anything).
To understand this card better, let us look at the mana and efficiency:
1R + Permanent= 5 damage
You spend two cards to get that effect. That is equivalent to something like adding these two together:
Lightning Bolt for 3 (R + Card cost of Shrapnel itself)
1 + Permanent for 2
Lightning Bolt is already good. But let us evaluate the last factor.
1 + Permanent for 2 could be compared to Shock. You spend 1 card and 1 mana and you get 2 damage. The difference is that this is colorless mana (and that is very relevant to a deck that can barely manage double color). Otherwise, it would look like RR for Shrapnel. A colorless shock is already very good. But, I think this card is even better.
When you use shrapnel you will generally choose the least relevant artifact on the board. How much is that artifact worth to you? That 5th land might be a dead card to you, right? That creature that is taking lethal damage on the stack might be irrelevant to you, right? The 3rd Aether vial could be useless. When you choose to sacrifice irrelevant cards, you are technically not even spending a full card. Or, the better way to phrase it would be: shrapnel’s colorless cost effect increases the relevance of the least useful artifact you control to become as good as a colorless shock. This is very, very good. It increases your overall deck’s average card relevance.
Beyond the general increase to card relevance and super mana efficiency, Shrapnel is to be seen as a true finishing card. 5 damage on the stack is 1/4th of an opponent’s starting life total. This card forces through lethal damage. Often, sandbagging a Shrapnel blast or two can be very powerful. An opponent will often underestimate the value of the cards in your hands, and will misplay without realizing you hold a lethal set of damage in hand.
Chromatic Star—1cc artifact factor with mana smoothing and triggered card draw (definitely an upgrade to sphere, except against leyline) is excellent. The ability to use it as artifact-factor and sac it later without activating for draw makes it a 1 colorless for 1 card (which is excellent). Add in the ability to smooth the mana curve, and you have a very powerful artifact. It can do some tricks, including announce thoughtcast->sac for blue, and even blind digging for the spell you need. Like thoughtcast, this is a relatively efficient card drawer that fills in the niches. Glimmervoids and Chromatic Stars are aiming to do the same thing in the end (although, they have different secondary characteristics), and star is a solid choice. In affinity decks with lower colored spell counts, this is a stronger card than glimmervoid, and the opposite for affinity decks with higher colored spell counts (12+).
This card shines against things like Blood moon and LD. I also love having another 1cc artifact to play first turn. But, do not be deceived: this card is not another land. It functions as a resource transforming device and artifact factor exclusively. Running 16 lands and 4 stars is suboptimal. Affinity decks should be running both Star and Glimmervoid.
Land-- The landbase is often misunderstood. The artifact lands in particular are fundamental to the deck's construction. You can run no less than 12 artifact-type lands (preferably 15-16 including man-lands).
What is an artifact land to Affinity?
-1CC of up to 12 cards or a -0.2 shift in the average CC of the deck (this is tempo)
+1/+1 Counter
1-4 Disciple Triggers
1-4 +1/+0 Cranial Plating
A very strong late-game target for the additional cost of Shrapnel blast.
People who play affinity with the mindset of running the fewest possible lands with the most spells possible are missing the point. The artifact lands might be subtle, but they are extremely powerful in this deck. So, while you can certainly win games with only 1 or 2 land in play, you will often fail to recognize what those 1-2 lands really did for you during the game. The best part about land in this deck is that land is never a dead draw. Land can always be put to use beyond mana production. This means that affinity, just in virtue of its land, has a higher average card relevance than would be initially expected. Don’t be afraid to run 19-20 lands in this deck.
Seat of the Synod, Vault of Whispers, Great Furnace---These are the holy trinity of affinity. They make the deck work. Darksteel Citadel and activated-artifact lands (Blinkmoth Nexus) are also useful in this calculation, but only the trinity is a guaranteed in every affinity deck.
Blinkmoth Nexus—An underused card. I can’t see an affinity deck playing less than 2 of these. Like ornithopter, nexus offers us important evasion. The activated abilities offer several combat tricks as well. It is important to note that Nexus is actually fairly difficult to remove, can keep counters on it even after losing its manhood end step, and was free to play (costs only a land drop). Additionally, nexus can be activated to increase artifact-factor.
Glimmervoid—Like the nexus, an underused card in affinity. Affinity, problematically, can be color-starved. While Aether Vial curbs the mana color inconsistencies to some degree, affinity is still reliant upon other chromatic mana producers.
You don’t want to be sitting on Disciple, Atog, Shrapnel, Thoughtcast, and instant equip Cranials because you don’t have the color available. In fact, without a proper mana-base to produce the rainbow, you actually decrease average card relevance in this deck. It is absolutely essential that affinity has the ability to use every single component of its hand as soon as possible.
The arguments against Glimmervoid would be that it has a condition to keep in play, it isn’t an artifact, and wasteland eats it. However, even with these negatives, the need to smooth your mana color curve is so great that Glimmervoid is still a worthy pick.
Glimmervoid smoothes your mana color curve very effectively and it can be used several times (unlike Chromatic Star). 1/5th of your deck is going to be colored spells, and you can’t count on having a Chromatic Star everytime you need one, but you can almost always guarantee that you’ll have an artifact in play. Additionally, it costs almost nothing to put Glimmervoid into play, unlike the star, and that means you can be using that mana to cast game winning spells. This is a minimum 2 in affinity, and 3 if you run something like Naturalize in the side.
The other staples:
These remain somewhat interchangeable with other components of the basic shell.
Darksteel Citadel—Depending on the metagame, this can be a solid choice. In a vacuum, this card is subpar. It would definitely be quite possible to see 3 of these in affinity given the right metagame.
Atog—The other, other ravager. +2/+2 per artifact makes him the fastest clock available, but at a huge risk. Often times, this card is a bluff card. People are forced to block him, while your other creatures do the business. Atog becomes better and better against decks with less and less creature removal. Because of the ability to use instant removal in response to pumping, the more removal in the game, the weaker this cards becomes. It is a severe let-down to sac out 3rd or 4th turn for a lethal atog, only to eat a bounce or StP before damage goes on the stack. You need to be very careful how you use this card, and you should be careful in what metagame you run him. If you don’t mainboard him, he is definitely a strong sideboard choice. 3 is the max in this deck.
Other Card Considerations:
Fling vs. Shrapnel—Fling is an interesting card. While shrapnel blast converts your least relevant artifact on the board to deal 5 damage, Fling has the problem often doing the opposite, and usually sacrifices one of your more relevant artifacts on the board. Fling can function like ravager/disciple at the end of the game, acting as another disciple. In so many cases, Fling is forcing you to lose your aggro-advantage on the board, and is thus strictly a finishing card. Shrapnel is much more versatile.
In my experience, flingm like Berserk, has been a win-more card rather than a card that will win you games you normally wouldn’t win. Usually, when I am in positions in which I have flingable creatures, where fling is going to be much larger than shrapnel as well, I’m already winning, and I would possibly be put in a losing position to even use the card. Shrapnel can be used in much different situations and its costs are much, much lower.
This is a fun card, but it is very suboptimal.
Dark Confidant—definitely a favorite of mine, but not in affinity. The card may be overhyped to some extent, not because it isn’t amazing, but more because it requires the right deck to work. Building a deck that abuses this card correctly is difficult. Dark confidant is really not a win-now type card, it does best in a deck that can abuse a one-sided howling mine. Affinity, which is a win-now deck (aggro-combo), is not a deck that should be running Bob. Affinity does not want the game to last long enough to make a real use of this card. Confidant, in my mind, has competed with 3 different slots in this deck: Myr Enforcer, Thoughtcast, and the possible Atog.
Beyond the lifeloss from a technically high CC curve, the fundament problem with Dark Confidant is a.) he is subject to removal and b.) he takes up the fundamental turn 2 (2 mana) slot. Affinity wants to be dropping its major aggro pieces turns 1, 2, and 3, not confidant. Confidants not kept in check can certainly give affinity a better late game, however, removal is a major aspect of the metagame, and affinity could have been using that mana to have just won now instead of later.
As much as I value card advantage, confidant is a liability and usually a loss in tempo for all too often minimal card advantage. Confidant’s advantage requires 2 turns. It will be, bare minimum, turn 4 before you netted card advantage. Compare this to Thoughtcast which can play for 1 mana on turn 3 (possible turn 2). Thoughtcast refills your hand when you need to refill and keep steamrolling (as you’ll have 1 more mana to work with, which is a major concern in the first 4 turns).
Myr Enforcer is a pure aggro card that comes down nearly the same turn confidant does on average (considering the color cost). 2/3-4/4 PT difference (depending on whether confidant can even swing or whether control would knock it out) on the board at any point in the game makes enforcer a stronger choice. Again, this is an aggro deck that should be forming aggressive board positions. Affinity is an instant gratification deck, and it cannot afford to let the opponent live even a few more turns.
Confidant may also compete with atog for slots. Atog, like enforcer, fills the role of creating an immediate board threat. Deal with it or die. Confidant cannot do this.
Somber/Cloud of Faeires—Non-artifact creatures that cost mana to get into play (even cloud requires it, so you can’t always just drop it off a thoughtcast). Thopter and Nexus are free, and they are artifact. No questions here.
Paradise Mantle—What about this card is aggressive? Oh well, a free artifact is nice. You have limited slots, and Glimmervoid and Star fulfill this role much better.
Umezawa's Jitte— Affinity has much better things to do with its mana, and the deck should be winning before Jitte becomes relevant enough to matter.
Chrome Mox—Bleh. I love fast mana and free artifacts. You’d initially think this is a shoe in for affinity. Play a few hundred games with and without this card, and you’ll see why affinity shouldn’t run it. The 1st turn tempo gain is not worth the 2nd turn (and beyond) tempo losses incurred by both card disadvantage and poor topdecks. Remember: Card advantage in this deck translates into immediate tempo advantage in most cases. Card disadvantage is essentially tempo disadvantage for this deck, and Chrome mox has a snowball effect in the losses it creates.
Essentially, affinity plays very well with very little mana. I’d argue that it is the least mana intensive deck in the format. It can accept mana losses rivaled only by Goblins. Tempo--using cards in your hand before you intially should be able to use them. If it cost 5 mana to cast something, and you cast it with only 4 land or less (or even no mana used), then you used some form of tempo-enhancement to play that spell—affinity does this sort of thing all the time. Resource trades (CA for Mana) aren't necessary for affinity to maintain a high tempo. You don't need tMox or Petal to accelerate your way into massive early threats, the mechanics of the deck allows you to do this already
As for sideboarding, I’m not in a position to say what each persons metagame looks like. Please consider the following:
CotV
Therapy
Engineered Plague
Tormod's Crypt
Pithing Needle
Winter Orb
Sphere of Resistance
Atog
Mana Leak
Naturalize/Disenchant
Affinity is an odd deck. Half the magic players I know hate the deck (they remember its domination in T2). Why? Not only does it do unfair things (and it still can), but it appears that affinity can win without skill. For those who still believe this, you are correct if you are referring to how good this deck was back when it was T2 Legal. When it was originally created, a newbie or a pro could pick the deck up and destroy half the field with it. Legacy, however, is different.
The deck can be complicated to play, and the correct line of play is not as obvious as it would seem. Affinity is constantly evaluating the board position, its manabase, and card quality like a combo deck. However, instead of doing everything in one turn like many combo decks, affinity is forced to think over several turns. Good players do think several turns ahead, and combo decks, by nature, are constantly thinking: what card do I need to complete the hand to win? Affinity, however, often requires even more thought than that. Due to the decks power and versatility, there is a larger quantity of hand and board positions to be evaluated as it works over several turns. Affinity has to consider less redundant hands and board positions more often than most other decks I’ve seen in Legacy, and it is here that the pro is separated from the less experienced. When you run into new situations, being able to calculate what is best (rather than working from wrote memory) is invaluable, and affinity will often require such experience and skill. So, while you can definitely win with affinity without a great deal of skill, there are many, many circumstances in which a good deal of skill and experience is required to calculate the correct line of play. For affinity to be competitive in Legacy, it does need to be piloted a fairly skilled player.
Overall, a skilled player can feel comfortable playing this deck against any deck in the format with the exception of combo. In what is largely a creature based format, affinity is explosive, powerful, and yet versatile enough to have a way to win if you can find it.
peace,
4eak
I sleeved up a list very similar to yours a couple months ago and started playtesting it. In those couple of months I've come to the following conclusions:
1. Myr Enforcer just sucks.
2. Atog + Fling is the freaking NUTZ.
3. Thoughtcast isn't good enough to justify running a third color.
With those things in mind, my deck has evolved into the following:
4 Great Furnace
4 Vault of Whispers
4 Darksteel Citadel
2 Blinkmoth Nexus
2 Glimmervoid
2 City of Brass
4 Aether Vial
4 Arcbound Ravager
4 Arcbound Worker
4 Frogmite
4 Ornithopter
4 Disciple of the Vault
4 Dark Confidant
4 Atog
4 Cranial Plating
3 Chromatic Star
3 Fling
It's very consistent and fast.