[Discussion] Melting Pot For Thoughts On Extirpate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin

So, Adan can't count (Extirpating a card that you might draw is as good as Stifling a fetchland that's in play? Really?)

---

In my scenario is it since extirpating his Tropical island will dispose all of his green manasources. Stifle only generates speedadvantage, but won't prevent him to draw further green sources to which we would have to count the remaining Fetchlands because they are also able to get further Tropical Islands into play with which they can cast Goyf, Loam, Deed.

Stifle counters a fetchland and might be able to neuter a landdrop, therefore it's a 1to1 trade with speedadvantage aka. tempo, but Extirpate removes 4 cards from he game which is already a 1 to 4 trade. Now if we consider that the loss of those 4 green manasources result in the inability to cast 9 green cards (Loam, Witness, 4 Goyf, 3 Deed) and making a 10th worse (Etched oracle's Sunburst), it's virtually a 1 to 10 trade.

Quote:

---

but Extirpate removes 4 cards from he game which is already a 1 to 4 trade.

---

Elaborate. (hint: see below)

Quote:

---

in the inability to cast 9 green cards (Loam, Witness, 4 Goyf, 3 Deed) and making a 10th worse (Etched oracle's Sunburst), it's virtually a 1 to 10 trade.

---

Suppose none of these green cards get drawn?

Also:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by me

The best reason to play Breeding Pool has got to be the look on the other bastard's face when he Extirpates you and you show him Pool, Deed, kill your board next turn. Bonus points if you needed the shuffle for Top.

(I haven't actually done this yet, but I'm pretty eager for it to happen)

---

Yeah, Extirpate is +9 ca. Contract from Below, lookout!

This conversation is a farce.

@Nightmare: Although I see your point that you don't like Extirpate, why are you posting in the melting pot thread if your response to questions is, "I don't run Extirpate and will never run Extirpate?"

You could at least humor the other posters by answering their hypotheticals. It's not like you lose any face by saying, "I'd play Extirpate in the Landstill mirror" or something.

It's really hard to have a conversation/debate if people only argue semantics or ignore each other's arguments. I do see your point (and it's valid), but in favor of keeping the debate going, just humor us. We're trying to have some fun here.



@Deep6er from a long time ago: I've played Extirpate (and been very happy with it) in: Tog as Wish target, UB Fish as sideboard (although I don't like it too much), Suicide Black as maindeck 2 copies, sideboard 2 copies, and in Landstill sideboard as 3 copies. I'm working on actually getting Survival now, and I'm probably going to run it, if only for financial reasons I don't want to trade for more random sideboard cards.

I've toyed around with it in other decks, but I've found that you need Countermagic and Wasteland or Peek Effects+Wasteland to take advantage of it to the point where it's actually a really good card. I liked it in Landstill only because Landstill runs so many cards that are dead against non-creature decks.


The sideboard scheme: It doesn't go in against Aggro, usually goes in against control that I have dead cards against, and almost always goes in against combo, regardless of whether they use the graveyard or not (because against the non-GY ones I have dead cards anyway). This sideboard scheme is pretty constant for all the decks that I just listed, but I can go into more specifics if you'd like.


The four cards that jockeyed for that position were: Extirpate, Crypt, Planar Void, Jailer, and Leyline, probably in that order.

I usually try to devote a healthy 6-8 slots for the Night Shift. This would leave about 4-6 slots for problem matchups and 3-5 slots for utility sideboard (cards which come in to handle a wide range of decks, but usually only trade 1:1 or so).

I found that I liked my sideboards more when I ran about 6 or 7 slots of Graveyard duty when 3 or 4 of those slots were Extirpates and would function double as removing dead cards against other matchups. I would then run about 5 other utility cards like Swords, Krosan Grip, uhm... you know. 1:1 cards. The last 3-4 slots would be dedicated toward real problem matches that the deck faced. This combination means that games 2-3, I never have dead magic. I usually beat Ichorid, even if I lose G1, and the sideboard is really well-rounded to dealing with random decks.

If I wanted to free up more slots, I could drop some Ichorid percentage by running 4 copies of Leyline or 4 copies of Planar Void (so cutting GY hate to 4 cards from 6), but then I would lose effectively 4 utility cards. I decided that although Extirpate is not the bomb I always want out of my sideboard, I run 50% more Ichorid hate than most people.


Anyway, that's why I run it. I usually sideboard to fill holes in my deck instead of to fill holes in problem matchups. I'd rather see 12 dead cards become 12 useful cards than 8 dead cards and 4 bombs. Usually after enough iterations, I come to the same conclusion about my sideboard as other people (or they eventually come to my conclusion), but it seems like two different sideboard philosophies came up with two different answers.

I think that the metagames are varied enough that specific hate is less effective than guaranteeing that you have 60 cards that work together for the back two.

A lot of times I do wish that my Extirpates were Cabal Therapies or that my Extirpates were Leylines or Crypts or (especially often) that my Extirpates were land. I have even played a few games where I wished Extirpate was the card I boarded out for it! On the whole, though, it's won so many games by consistently being able to handle the transformational sideboard or stealing endgame inevitability against a number of decks that rely on specific cards to win the game in the end.

It also is extremely strong against Ichorid, Loam, anything with a graveyard, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frogboy

Suppose none of these green cards get drawn?

---

Even if they get drawn, what are they useful for if you can't cast them...???

If Gearheart or any other ITF player is going to maindeck Breeding Pool because of THIs debate, I will... laugh?

Anyway, my argument is still that Extirpate is not only useful as graveyardhate but also as a useful tool to handle things you usually could not (Loam, Wasteland-lock) and to win resource-battles by taking certain solutions out of your opponent's deck.

Quote:

---

Even if they get drawn, what are they useful for if you can't cast them...???

---

what if they don't get drawn?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frogboy

what if they don't get drawn?

---

Then the deck fails at applying any pressure to actually WIN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adan

Then the deck fails at applying any pressure to actually WIN.

---

That doesn't make any sense at all. Because your opponent doesn't draw those cards, the deck fails at applying any pressure to win? I get the feeling Extirpate is some kind of pet card for you, Adan. You remember all the great times you've had together, but yet you forget all the bad times. Nightmare hit it on the head, you cannot measure the things you don't have. Just because you've removed X copies of a card, doesn't necessarily mean you've improved your position.

I've got grrreat Extirpate stories, too!

One time at the Fuddrucker's tournament in Annandale, I'm playing against Sean Park and I get one of his 'goyfs in the 'yard. I Extirpate his 'goyf and he's got two more in his hand! WOW! Then I won 20 turns later because I'm playing Landstill.

This other time, at the Running GAGG, I'm playing against A Legend and he's playing Aluren. He tries to go off, but I suspect he has a Force of Will in hand for my Swords to Plowshares. So I Extirpate the Force of Will in his 'yard and get the one in his hand so I can use my StP to stop his combo! WOW! Then I won 20 turns later because I'm playing Landstill.

Adan, you're missing the point that you can't qualify Extirpate's removal of cards in the library as card advantage. That's not how Magic works.

If you seriously subscribe to that belief, then you should play things like Denying Winds or Traumatize. But you don't, because you're not retarded (hopefully).

Read what frogboy's trying to say. Reading comprehension dude. I'm not trying to be a dick, but you're definitely missing the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by URABAHN

WOW! Then I won 20 turns later because I'm playing Landstill.

---

I'm not sure what that punch-line is supposed to mean.


In related news, this thread has tons of views but comparatively few posters, and most have been resolved supporters either for or against. I'm curious to see if those people who can't be bothered to enter the fray have an opinion about this, and if so, what that is. I added a poll to satisfy that curiosity (and please don't use it as evidence for either side, it would be pointless and unproductive).


In unrelated news, URABAHN, your post gave me a deja-vu of an Asian girl with big tits. No idea why.

The poll needs to differentiate between sideboard and main deck in my opinion. I don't see very many scenarios where Extirpate would be even a passable main deck card, however I see a bunch where it has value in the sideboard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoolofaTook

The poll needs to differentiate between sideboard and main deck in my opinion. I don't see very many scenarios where Extirpate would be even a passable main deck card, however I see a bunch where it has value in the sideboard.

---

I meant anywhere in the 75. Edited for clarity. Should anyone need to change his vote on this, PM me.

I remain undecided, however I will say this;

Being able to get four Extripates out of one copy of Extripate is great.

I'll chime in, but I can really only repeat what has already been said.

Extirpate rarely diminishes your opponent's resources beyond the removal of a single card in his or her graveyard. The cards it takes out of your opponent's deck are usually irrelevant, because cards in the library are not a useful resource, and most well-constructed decks will still function without a given playset of cards.

Corner cases, such as combining Wasteland with Extirpate against a deck with only Tropical Islands to produce green mana, and managing to do so before your opponent fetches two Trops, or plays all of his green spells, or even just wins the game, do little to make up for the fundamental problems with a card that otherwise does nothing to improve the game state in your favor.


So, what we're left with is an argument over whether Extirpate is acceptable as a sideboard card, aimed specifically at graveyard-based decks. In the current metagame, the only major graveyard-based decks are Ichorid and Aggro Loam. Now, while Extirpate is certainly effective against Loam decks (especially if you have some way to stop Burning Wish from resolving), it is considerably weaker than the alternatives against Ichorid. Conversely, several cards that are much better against Ichorid, such as Tormod's Crypt, are still perfectly serviceable against Aggro Loam, and most non-Landstill decks don't want to board graveyard hate against Loam, anyway.

Ultimately, I don't think Extirpate is worth looking at unless you're playing a late-game deck in a metagame full of Aggro Loam.

I think that everyone realizes that Extirpate isn't CA. That's established, but that hasn;t stopped us from playing other cards. Extirpate is powerful because it gets rid of one key card forever. It is going to be more relevant than Crypt against a variety of different decks. I would like to never see Life from the Loam because that's a key part of a deck. Same goes for Tarmogoyf, Physchatog, Vedalken Shackles. I don't want to see these cards more than once. I think the "what if" arguments are bullshit because we can all run in rhetorical circles. What if the deck never drew the card that I would want to Extirpate? Does that make Extirpate bad? I don't think so. If they have 12 business spells, now they only have 8, that's better percentages for you of winning the game. Crypt stops Loam but not until they topdeck the next one. Then you're back where you started.

I play Extirpate to remove a card from the GY and with it, all other cards in my opponent's GY, hand, and library. It also has Split-Second.

Being serious, I use Extirpate because it is such a versatile tool. Taking out recursion engines, hate cards, and things to win the long game (Swords, Humilities, Factories, etc.). This alone gives me the justification to play the card. This isn't even factoring in that it is still good against Ichorid, one of the best decks in the format right now. Using Extirpate in conjunction with Crypt or Leyline is an effective GY hate package.

I don't look at Extirpate as game winning or crippling, but it does help me win the game by doing all of the stuff said above. I don't expect this to be as powerful as Haunting Echoes or Cranial Extraction, but those don't cost one mana.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rack

Extirpate is powerful because it gets rid of one key card forever. It is going to be more relevant than Crypt against a variety of different decks. I would like to never see Life from the Loam because that's a key part of a deck. Same goes for Tarmogoyf, Physchatog, Vedalken Shackles. I don't want to see these cards more than once. I think the "what if" arguments are bullshit because we can all run in rhetorical circles. What if the deck never drew the card that I would want to Extirpate? Does that make Extirpate bad? I don't think so. If they have 12 business spells, now they only have 8, that's better percentages for you of winning the game. Crypt stops Loam but not until they topdeck the next one. Then you're back where you started.

---

It is difficult to break this down more fundamentally than it already has been. You are simply wrong. There is little to no value in removing a specific card from your opponent's deck "forever." You have spent a card, which is a measurable, tangible resource, without immediately impacting your opponent's resources. As somebody mentioned earlier, it isn't as if your opponent will magically skip draws later in the game, when they would have drawn a Tarmogoyf; they will instead draw some other threat, and you will have to answer it while still being a card behind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jak.

Being serious, I use Extirpate because it is such a versatile tool. Taking out recursion engines, hate cards, and things to win the long game (Swords, Humilities, Factories, etc.). This alone gives me the justification to play the card. This isn't even factoring in that it is still good against Ichorid, one of the best decks in the format right now. Using Extirpate in conjunction with Crypt or Leyline is an effective GY hate package.

I don't look at Extirpate as game winning or crippling, but it does help me win the game by doing all of the stuff said above. I don't expect this to be as powerful as Haunting Echoes or Cranial Extraction, but those don't cost one mana.

---

You are making the same mistake as The Rack in evaluating the cards Extirpate removes from your opponent's library, and I suspect you are also overvaluing the card against Ichorid. If you're playing the sort of deck that has to mulligan for hate in that matchup, you can't really keep hands with Extirpate, unless they also have Crypt or Leyline in them. Extirpate just isn't enough on its own.

Obfuscate: You are saying that you wouldn't want to spend one B mana and one card to never see a Tarmogoyf for that game? I would rather have them draw a non-Tarmogoyf card and I can be absolutely positive that they won't. I am not simply wrong and won't accept that as a good justification. If you rid the deck of a good card that's 3 less good cards you have to worry about it. Why is that so hard to understand. You play fetchlands to thin out your deck to improve the chance of getting nonland cards. By Extirpating Tarmogoyf or some other 4 of business spell, you are increasing the chances of them drawing a land card or a card that isn;t as useful as the card removed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rack

Obfuscate: You are saying that you wouldn't want to spend one B mana and one card to never see a Tarmogoyf for that game? I would rather have them draw a non-Tarmogoyf card and I can be absolutely positive that they won't. I am not simply wrong and won't accept that as a good justification. If you rid the deck of a good card that's 4 less good cards you have to worry about it. Why is that so hard to understand. You play fetchlands to thin out your deck to improve the chance of getting nonland cards. By Extirpating Tarmogoyf or some other 4 of business spell, you are increasing the chances of them drawing a land card or a card that isn;t as useful as the card removed.

---

It's hard to understand because it's wrong. The fundamental mistake you're making is confusing Extirpate for Cranial Extraction. I'll concede that Extirpate is amazing if you run into RelentlessRats.dec, but outside of that scenario, if Extirpate ever removes 4 cards from an opponent's library you should probably call a judge. Extirpate can't remove Tarmogoyf until your opponent has drawn a Tarmogoyf and it's died. It can't remove Wrath of God until they've drawn a Wrath and it's gone to their yard. And ditto to DoJ, and ditto to Pernicious Deed, and ditto to Tendrils of Agony. A lot of these cards have already done the damage the first time they hit the yard. The other 3 copies aren't as relevant then.

So, no, when you say you can pay B to never see Tarmogoyf, that's factually wrong. If you never saw the Tarmogoyf, you couldn't use Extirpate on it to begin with. You have to see and deal with a Tarmogoyf before that card even does anything.

Ugh, rhetoric shouldn't be your only defense against Extirpate. I meant to say 3 copies and I'm pretty sure you knew that but since you didn't have another argument to say might as well point out my brain lapse right?

I think we all agree on that the decks that should be running Extirpate in their SBs are most likely running discard, removal, or countermagic. That's not a far stretch to say am I correct? I think more often than not they will counter the business spell and then Extirpate it to be done with it. I'l edit my other numbers in the post above.