Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
markbris
I'm going back and forth on stingscourger. What do you see as problems with my decklist?
I don't see any problem. It's just a list different from my approach.
Actually, not running 1 Sting might be a problem, and running only 15 R generating lands, being 1 of them Wastelandable might be one too, but might work.
I don't like and don't understant the 2/2 Chieftain/Warchief Split.
If your argument is: "one is better in some situations, the other is better in others", then I'd say that sometimes you'll be sad to draw one, and sometimes you'll be sad to draw the other. If you don't want to run more then 4 Haste enablers, we should decide which one is better in what matchups, calculate what MU's you're more likely to see, and tune the deck towards beating them. In a list with 3 Piledrivers and 3 MWM, I'd go with 4 Warchiefs.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
I agree, in ur list 4 warchief are a lot better than the split. u can run chieftain as matrontarget on top
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ScatmanX
I don't see any problem. It's just a list different from my approach.
Actually, not running 1 Sting might be a problem, and running only 15 R generating lands, being 1 of them Wastelandable might be one too, but might work.
I don't like and don't understant the 2/2 Chieftain/Warchief Split.
If your argument is: "one is better in some situations, the other is better in others", then I'd say that sometimes you'll be sad to draw one, and sometimes you'll be sad to draw the other. If you don't want to run more then 4 Haste enablers, we should decide which one is better in what matchups, calculate what MU's you're more likely to see, and tune the deck towards beating them. In a list with 3 Piledrivers and 3 MWM, I'd go with 4 Warchiefs.
Agreed on the warchiefs. I really just wasnt sure what I wanted there. The land count I just need to test and stingscourger as well
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Hi guys,
I just wanted to comment on some things regarding deck lists and ideas being put forth, but I will start with a little background about my self.
As an avid Goblins player and Primer writer for over a decade, and having a long list of wins at local and out of town events with this archetype (including a Top 64 Finish at GP Columbus 2007 which was defined and won by "Flash Hulk") I feel I can share some insight based on a multitude of matches and experience.
Though I prefer other archetypes in current competitive Legacy meta's, I feel Goblins is positioned the same as it ever was; a deck very capable of making Top 8's and pulling down wins.
So, on to some thoughts and analysis;
What does Goblins do? How does it work?
Goblins aim is to establish an overwhelming board presence, and deliver a quick alpha strike(s), via cheating. Yes, cheating. The whole premise of the deck, and what was and is the nucleus of the archetype, is cheating mana costs, in an otherwise extremely greedy, mana hungry aggro deck.
Taking the aforementioned into account, I was stunned to see such disregard for Goblin Warchief, and the argument for exclusion of Aether Vial.
I can not stress enough, Lackey, Vial, & Warchief, are the most broken cards in this archetype, as they fulfill and enable the player to cheat mana requirements. I would never consider piloting a Goblins build in Legacy with out these 3x cards as a 4 of.
With the relegation of Mogg Fanatic, and the printing of Warren Instigator, the core aim of the deck has the tools to more aggressively achieve a quick and consistent victory.
Dilution of deck effectiveness
One thing I have seen, tested, and debated ad nausea over the years is what non-creature cards can be run main (aside from Vial), that benefit the deck enough to warrant cutting other Goblin creature cards.
The answer is almost always, none.
Unless you are playing in a meta that is polarized by one specific archetype (much like GP Columbus 2007, where I ran MD Pyrokinesis, for example) there is no reason to play a diluted deck with bad cards like main deck Tarfire, Chalice, Bolt, etc;
If a card does not have a direct synergistic effect to your board position, or the ability to help establish a fast aggro clock, it's bad.
Combo, stop dreaming...
People have been trying to crack the combo match up for Goblins, since the archetype was created, and it cant be done.
You have bad game against combo, accept it, and move on. Trying to fill your SB with hate against combo is pointless; firstly, you will end up using SB slots that could otherwise be more effectively used, and/or changing your main deck into something it should not be. Secondly, if your meta is combo heavy, Goblins is not a good choice if you plan on winning.
That being said, I will share with you a secret on how to consistently beat combo decks; ATTACK. The key to winning is establishing a kill clock ASAP; combo has zero board presence, and hates a fast clock, not your "hate".
Back at GP Columbus 2007 (god I feel like that "living in 82" guy from Napoleon Dynamite....) I got paired against Stephen Menendian playing Hulk Flash.
Game 1, I rolled him by dropping dude after dude, forcing him to FoW and Daze, setting his clock and options back, while setting up a 2-3 turn kill clock.
Game 2 & 3, I sided in Pithing Needles and REB's. Now, in both these games I made the mistake(s) that I see many Goblin players make time and time again. I stuttered my board growth, in order to have REB(s) open. After quickly losing both these games, I had a chat with Stephen, after showing him my hand at the end of game 3. He looked at the creatures in my hand, and said; "wow, you had me, easily". He explained the obvious, but which is not always so, that by trying to hate out your opponents plan while not playing yours, is a fundamental error.
The point is, against combo, stick to what you do well (aggro), an do not focus on what you do bad (counter/hate); rather use/play hate as a supplementary aid, NOT a solution.
That being said.................
NO PILEDRIVER, WTF?
.........I cant believe the lists cutting Piledriver. This guy is a beater that got even better with the printing of Goblin Chieftain.
8x Lord, haste, alpha strikes? Yes please. Protection blue in a increasingly blue Delver environment? Yes please.
Nothing available to Goblins in establishing a fast and consistent clock is better than this guy.
My List
Here is my current list, that I have piloted to victory in two events, and Top 8'ed a few others, all 30+ player meta.
Lands
9 Mountain
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Wasteland
Creatures
4 Goblin Warchief
4 Warren Instigator
4 Goblin Chieftain
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Ringleader
4 Goblin Lackey
4 Goblin Piledriver
3 Gempalm Incinerator
2 Siege-Gang Commander
1 Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker
1 Stingscourger
Spells
4 AEther Vial
Sideboard
3 Grafdigger's Cage
3 Pyrokinesis
3 Blood Moon
2 Tormod's Crypt
1 Goblin King
1 Tuktuk Scrapper
1 Gempalm Incinerator
1 Goblin Wizard
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
@Deez_Naughts
Good and insightful ideas and an interesting list. Definitely agree on your point about combo. Dredge is the only "combo" we have a shot of beating with hate.
One question about your list though. Does your meta lack Stoneforge Mystic? How do you cope with an active Jitte? I feel like you're missing a lot by not running main deck artifact hate.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
@Deez_Naughts
It is a very old topic but Fetchlands in a one color deck are wrong.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Hi can't you beat reanimator with hate too ? With cards like faeris macabre
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
@Deez_Naughts:
Thank you for your valuable post comment.
Although I do not agree with you on everything you wrote, I find it wonderfully refreshing that we have a old-school-aggro-hardliner who reminds us of what our beloved Goblins really are about: speed, cheating, aggro.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
@Deez_Naughts:
Thanks for the post, I can appreciate your enjoyment of Goblins and the knowledge you bring. However I would never recommend any new player to read what you wrote. Its outdated, and reinforces ideas that are becoming increasingly detrimental. Metas change, as should goblin lists. Its simply naive to think one stock list for goblins is the best build every single year. You can point to recent success in your local small tournaments, but it is much more likely because you are so much better playing your deck then they are. When new players try your deck in a normal meta, they will get crushed. In an era dominated by stoneforge builds, a deck with no lighning bolt or scrapper is just asking for trouble.
I did like what you wrote about combo, that is pretty much spot on. Fixing the 'combo' match-up is pretty much not going to happen.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
@Deez_Naughts
1. Awesome name.
2. Thanks for joining our little thread on the Source.
3. Diluting the Deck: I notice that you run Pyrokinesis in your sideboard. I used to also, until I realized that I was siding it in for like, 80% of my MUs. Why not just MD it and open up some SB space? You aren't diluting your deck (anymoreso than you've already indicated you're willing to by SBing this card), you're just playing a MD that's tuned to beat 80% of the field. And why don't you like Tarfire? It kinda kills every relevant creature our there right now.
4. Combo: 4 Aether Vials, 3 Gempalms, 1 Stingscourger. 8 cards you can easily side out without affecting your deck's explosiveness in any relevant way against combo, but which can be replaced by Mindbreak Traps, Chalice of the Void, Thorn of Amethyst, whatever. It seems to me that you can easily account for fighting combo while still have an explosive build.
5. 4 Piledriver, 4 Warchief? Sounds good.
6. The list: You've obviously gone with an aggressive, explosive, and above all, consistent deck. I can see this being good against slow combo and control, but it doesn't look like it can beat a Batterskull. I'm not saying it can't, but i would like to know how you approach playing against Stoneforge decks when you don't run artifact hate and have limitted removal.
7. Fetchlands are awesome, and they do help Ringleaders get there in long games.
8. Goblin Wizard blows. I've only ever been disappointed when I've played him. I was very surprised to see him on your list.
9. Thanks!
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jrw1985
7. Fetchlands are awesome, and they do help Ringleaders get there in long games.
Fetchlands are crap. They are basically mountains that cost you 1 life. Plus:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoboLord
Ringleader either stacks lands and Vials on bottom of library and/or provides us with more Goblins. For those reasons we should better try to hold Ringleader back until our hand is (nearly) empty and/or all shuffle effects (Matron, fetchlands) are used. Otherwise the lands and Vials we stacked on bottom of library are reshuffled into our library and the chance to draw goblins is decreased.
Using fetches after your Ringleader stacked (often useless) non-Goblins on bottom is just bad.
The reason FOR running fetches would be that they can mess with Jace's fatesealing ability (which is hardly relevant).
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GoboLord
Using fetches after your Ringleader stacked (often useless) non-Goblins on bottom is just bad.
But what you're positing presupposes that you've already played a Ringleader and it blanked. The idea with the fetches is that you crack them before you drop your first ringleader, reducing the chance of it blanking. That's what I see as their inherent value.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wert
There is a topic I had been thinking of for sometime. There is a number of goblin cards that are not errata as Goblin. I wonder if there is a chance of that happening.
wert's post actually made me look for old cards, and remembered Goblin Arsonist.
Do you think he is a better Mogg Fanatic? I mean the text clearly states that he deals 1 damage after he dies, so he can still do the old tricks that we used Fanatic before.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
raindrainxi
wert's post actually made me look for old cards, and remembered
Goblin Arsonist.
Do you think he is a better Mogg Fanatic? I mean the text clearly states that he deals 1 damage after he dies, so he can still do the old tricks that we used Fanatic before.
You can't sac Goblin Arsonist at will which can be an issue when facing cards like: Lavamancer, MoR, Confidant, etc.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jrw1985
But what you're positing presupposes that you've already played a Ringleader and it blanked. The idea with the fetches is that you crack them before you drop your first ringleader, reducing the chance of it blanking. That's what I see as their inherent value.
You drop your first ringleader either with 4 lands, which means that you have fetched 2-3 times, therefore chances have been increased by a minimum-or which is more likely you have cast vial and it has 4 counters on it. That way you might be sitting on 2 lands, while maybe wasted one of the opponents' lands and just cheat him into play.
Your statement also indicated that you don't go fetching after your first ringleader or each ringleader after the first one is getting worse.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GoboLord
Fetchlands are crap. They are basically mountains that cost you 1 life. Plus:
Using fetches after your Ringleader stacked (often useless) non-Goblins on bottom is just bad.
The reason FOR running fetches would be that they can mess with Jace's fatesealing ability (which is hardly relevant).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigBopper
You drop your first ringleader either with 4 lands, which means that you have fetched 2-3 times, therefore chances have been increased by a minimum-or which is more likely you have cast vial and it has 4 counters on it. That way you might be sitting on 2 lands, while maybe wasted one of the opponents' lands and just cheat him into play.
Your statement also indicated that you don't go fetching after your first ringleader or each ringleader after the first one is getting worse.
I've been advocating running fetches basically since I started playing Goblins. While drinking my Saturday morning coffee and watching cooking shows on PBS I decided to finally put my money where my mouth has been and crank out the numbers.
Here's the setup:
You have 60 cards in your deck. 34 are Goblins. 26 are non-Goblins (22 lands, 4 Vial). You are on the play. On turn 4 you have played 4 lands, you have drawn 10 cards. There are 50 cards left in your deck. 22 are non-Goblins.
I wrote a spreadsheet calculating the odds of revealing non-Goblin cards off of a Ringleader reveal. I calculated the odds for 0 - 4 fetches revealing 0-4 non-goblin cards.
The Results!
*I don't know a way of posting an Excel Spreadsheet to the Source, so bear with me.
Chance of revealing 4 Non-Goblins off of...
0 fetch = 0.031762918
1 fetch = 0.028247654
2 fetch = 0.024899784
3 fetch = 0.021730721
4 fetch = 0.018751724
No surprises here. Fetching more lands out of your library reduces your chance of completely blanking on a Ringleader. But, blanking is highly unlikely regardless of fetches. You will notice, not that it matters, that 4 fetches gives you a 40% better chance of NOT blanking than running 0 fetches. But basically this just shows that having fetched less increases you chance of revealing 4 non-Goblins.
Chance of revealing 3 Non-Goblins off of...
0 fetch = 0.187234043
1 fetch = 0.175763182
2 fetch = 0.164045637
3 fetch = 0.152115045
4 fetch = 0.140012869
There's no significant difference here. Your chance of only drawing 1 goblin off of Ringleader is pretty low regardless of fetches. Still, having fetched less increases you chance of revealing 3 non-Goblins.
Chance of revealing 2 Non-Goblins off of...
0 fetch = 0.379148936*
1 fetch = 0.374653099*
2 fetch = 0.369102683*
3 fetch = 0.362391725*
4 fetch = 0.354407574
* most probable outcome of calculations
Having fetched less increases you chance of revealing 2 non-Goblins. Fetching 0 or fetching 4 doesn't really change the odds too much. However, if there have been 0-3 fetches, revealing 2 non-Goblins is the most likely result of a Ringleader trigger.
Chance of revealing 1 Non-Goblins off of...
0 fetch = 0.312948328
1 fetch = 0.324699352
2 fetch = 0.336725254
3 fetch = 0.348969809
4 fetch = 0.361356742*
Did you catch that?
If you've been paying attention you've noticed that the highest likelihood of revealing 2, 3, or 4 blanks has come from playing fewer fetches. Now the trend is flipped. The higher likelihood of revealing 3 Goblins off a Ringleader comes form running More fetches. In fact, if you've played 4 fetches you are more likely to reveal 3 Goblins than 2 Goblins.
Chance of revealing 0 Non-Goblins off of...
0 fetch = 0.088905775
1 fetch = 0.096636712
2 fetch = 0.105226642
3 fetch = 0.1147927
4 fetch = 0.125471091
Once again, you are more likely to reveal 4 goblins the more you fetch.
Now for some adding.
Chance of revealing 0, 1, or 2 Non-Goblins off of...
0 fetch = 0.78100304
1 fetch = 0.795989163
2 fetch = 0.811054579
3 fetch = 0.826154234
4 fetch = 0.841235408
Chance of revealing 0 or 1 Non-Goblins off of...
0 fetch = 0.401854103
1 fetch = 0.421336064
2 fetch = 0.441951896
3 fetch = 0.463762509
4 fetch = 0.486827833
So there you have it. Each fetchland you activate increases your chance of hitting 3 or 4 goblins off of Ringleader by 2%.
I've found that generally in Legacy game-state is much more important than life total. Drawing more cards is well worth a loss of life associated with it (Sylvan Library).
The field is still completely open for debating whether playing fetches are worth it. At least now we've got a concrete definition of what their benefit is to Ringleader.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
So.. went to my first tournament today, going 3-3.
Canadian
He starts: Delver, and my first 3 Lackeys/Instigators are getting bolted/countered, afterwards I'm stuck on 2 lands. Finally Delver flips and kills me.
Second Game: Just like the first one, only 3 Moongose (all 3 topdecked!) instead of the Delver.
Deadguy Ale:
2 Swords & 2 Hymns later, my board is empty and my topdecks can't win vs. Batterskull, Jitte und 2 Bitterblossoms.
Second Game: Start Hand: Vial, Sparksmith, Sharpshooter, Matron, Scrapper, 2 Mountains.
Mountain, Vial, go - Inquisition on Sparksmith.
Land, go - Hymn
Go - Hymn
..
Funny games..
3. Round - The Gate
First game, he starts but I overun him before he can land an Obliterator.
Second game: Dark Ritual, Ritual, Obliterator & Thoughtseize. He's getting me fast.
Third: He can't handle first turn lackey and 2nd turn Instigator, he dies.
4. Round - Lands
Starting with Vial, he plays Maze 1. -> Waste. Another Maze, another (topdecked) Wasteland. I'm getting there fast.
He leads with Exploration & Maze, I with Vial (in case of Standstill), afterwards he gets another Maze, while I get 2 Instigator & 1 Lackey, he cant handle these 3.
5. Round - Rock
I make a huge mistake. I've got a slow hand (2. Turn play Sparksmith, 4 lands) and know he's on Rock as such I mulliganed for a faster hand, gaining nothing.. mull to 5 for a medium hand. Getting Vial out, a Hymn hitting 2 Ringleaders later I lose.
With the first Hand I'd probably won.
Second Game: He cannot handle my army, winning on the 4th turn.
Third Game: "Pretty long" game (my longest this day (~15Min^^) Looked quite good, till 1 Ringleader totally blanked, a deed killed all my stuff and I'm topdecking lands & lackeys which don't help versus his knight.
6. Round - TES
He mulls to 4 and dies on the 4th or 5th turn.
He keeps his 7 just like me (Lackey, 2 Chieftain, 2 Mountain, 1 Faerie Macabre (had to many cards with no use vs combo and thought maybe for an Ill-Gotten Gains), 1 Ringleader). Anyway, he Chant-Walks me twice but isnt doing anything else out of playing 3lands. No cantrip, nothing. Im getting there while drawing really good (Instigator & SGC).
Pros:
-First tournament^^. And it was quite fun.
Contra:
Only quite fun because nearl each of my games were over really fast. Turn 5-6 I could easily tell if I was about to lose or to win and knew only godly draws could save me/him. The games were really one-sided because of bad drawing.. I mean come'on deck.. first match 2 times stuck on 2 lands for the rest of the game? Sucks =/.
Also I couldnt really play this deck. At least it felt like this. In all games together i played/vialed.. 2 maybe 3 Matrons, never had them (or the few times I had the got discarded), mostly won thanks to Lackey, Instigator & Chieftains, helped by 2 SGC and Chieftains. Scrapper.. a single time for an Batterskull. Kiki, Sparksmith, Sharpshooter, Incinerator..never. =(.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
So I've only been playing the deck for about a month, and I've run into an interesting question. I don't know if this was ever debated before in this thread, and obviously it's a very hard question to answer, but in general:
If you're on the play and have the choice between dropping Lackey and Vial, which choice is correct?
My first thought is that Lackey is correct because it's explosive and you want to get in with it before they play blockers. But on the other hand Vial is not vulnerable to removal, and turn 2 Vial feels really slow.
Does it change depending on Match-up? What's been best in everyone's experience?
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1337erhosen
So I've only been playing the deck for about a month, and I've run into an interesting question. I don't know if this was ever debated before in this thread, and obviously it's a very hard question to answer, but in general:
If you're on the play and have the choice between dropping Lackey and Vial, which choice is correct?
My first thought is that Lackey is correct because it's explosive and you want to get in with it before they play blockers. But on the other hand Vial is not vulnerable to removal, and turn 2 Vial feels really slow.
Does it change depending on Match-up? What's been best in everyone's experience?
Yes it depends on the match-up. Versus blue I would play Lacker first; hoping to draw out their Force of Will. Turn two I would drop second land and play the Vial. Making it Daze proof in the progress.
/edit: if they don't answer the Lackey, chances are you win anyways.
Re: [Deck] Vial Goblins 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jrw1985
John's interesting post
Thank you for those calculations. If you don't mind I'll try to replicate what you did and check the results.
I'm really interested in this topic myself and I want to work out a clear answer that settles this issue once and for all.
