Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dontbiteitholmes
Not that I don't agree with Grip being worse than other answers to Survival, but your example is one of those, "Best possible draw," Kind of examples I hate to see in threads like this about how good a given card or decktype is. I mean, that is really the dream draw for them and it's going to happen maybe once or twice a tournament if that.
Survival has been successful in Legacy before. In fact it was a deck to beat for the first several years of the format and has popped up again a couple of times since then. The UGW list has had a fair amount of success in the past year, it was 3rd in Nashville and even before Vengevine came out it won several large events. Again, that doesn't mean it's too strong, just that we have been here before.
The aforementioned isn't necessarily a gold fish draw. Most Survival decks are designed to have a turn one accelerate into a Survival on turn two. The reason being that it blanks Daze for the most part since forcing them to pay an extra mana to keep it on the table is pretty horrible when they're still going to get 4 activations the next turn and the player who cast daze is back a turn on land development (again why Grip is not good). The GBu list from the recent 5K was running 5 main deck one drops to accelerate and I would venture a guess that will become the norm in the future since any redundant draws can be used to activate Survival later or trigger a Vengevine recursion in addition to being a great first turn play.
I would agree Survival has been around before and its even been a DTB before. However, its never been in the discussion of the best deck in the format. Nor has it even been so "dominating" that it has drawn out calls for banning it or has it needed dedicated Sideboard hate.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
It's currently the best deck - and it is quite beatable.
To beat it you must first acknowledge that it simply beats certain startegies - then adopt a strategy that trumps it or at least has a 50% match.
I think this metagame is quite acceptable & balanced:
Madness Survival
Aggro Survival
Storm
Tempo Control
Fish
Eva Green/Deadguy
And this is just what has already been proven - not what lies on the horizon of a new metagame.
Challenge?
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SMR0079
It's currently the best deck - and it is quite beatable.
To beat it you must first acknowledge that it simply beats certain startegies - then adopt a strategy that trumps it or at least has a 50% match.
I think this metagame is quite acceptable & balanced:
Madness Survival
Aggro Survival
Storm
Tempo Control
Fish
Eva Green/Deadguy
And this is just what has already been proven - not what lies on the horizon of a new metagame.
Challenge?
I think that people are demoralized just because their CB/Top control decks can't win as easy as before. That's why people cry so hard.
They have their petdecks with CB/Top, Thopter combo etc. and simply don't want to take another deck and play it. Therefore they scream for a ban of Survival of the Fittest.
Too bad, this is what makes good magic players, adapting to a meta shift when it occurs and even change deck completely... Face the facts, these Blue control decks that takes forever to set up a complete dominance of the game doesn't cut it anymore.
I can nothing but agree with all previous poster that say that we must adapt our decks. That's what happened when ppl started to play CB/Top based decks. Ppl started to pack Krosan Grips in SBs, they adapted the CMC curve of the deck, playing enchantment hate such as Wickedbough Elder just to be able to dodge it.
But when the opposite players has to adjust, they're up in arms just because they want to play their pet decks on their own terms...
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hawdes
I think that people are demoralized just because their CB/Top control decks can't win as easy as before. That's why people cry so hard.
They have their petdecks with CB/Top, Thopter combo etc. and simply don't want to take another deck and play it. Therefore they scream for a ban of Survival of the Fittest.
Too bad, this is what makes good magic players, adapting to a meta shift when it occurs and even change deck completely... Face the facts, these Blue control decks that takes forever to set up a complete dominance of the game doesn't cut it anymore.
I can nothing but agree with all previous poster that say that we must adapt our decks. That's what happened when ppl started to play CB/Top based decks. Ppl started to pack Krosan Grips in SBs, they adapted the CMC curve of the deck, playing enchantment hate such as Wickedbough Elder just to be able to dodge it.
But when the opposite players has to adjust, they're up in arms just because they want to play their pet decks on their own terms...
+1. I love you.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
The point is, do we want a metagame that consists of Survival... and decks that are metagamed to beat Survival? Sounds like a tepid format to me, but whatever...
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
keys
The point is, do we want a metagame that consists of Survival... and decks that are metagamed to beat Survival? Sounds like a tepid format to me, but whatever...
And a format filled with CB/Top variations ain't tepid? I can't go to a tournament without seeing atleast 6 different decks using CB/Top soft-lock and they're not even that much diffrent from eachother. These decks top8-top16 way back, in every tournament. But hey, then we adapted our decks to fight against CB/Top. It's the same thing all over again, but now it's about survival.
Adapt your deck, and it'll be fine.
We didn't scream for a CB ocr Sensei ban did we? I didn't atleast, I just tweaked my deck to actually be able to face the massive force of the CB/Top soft lock (which in my book takes time to play against since they most likely have no clock). They make rounds go to time. They stall the game too 50 minutes each round if you don't scoop, since they have 2-3 win cons.
Now that's an unhealthy meta in my opinion... We should be glad that some innovative people made a deck that simply crushes these decks, making them unviable in tournaments. Saving all other people time of agony when waiting for the CB/Top player to actually find a win con.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hawdes
And a format filled with CB/Top variations ain't tepid? I can't go to a tournament without seeing atleast 6 different decks using CB/Top soft-lock and they're not even that much diffrent from eachother. These decks top8-top16 way back, in every tournament. But hey, then we adapted our decks to fight against CB/Top. It's the same thing all over again, but now it's about survival.
Adapt your deck, and it'll be fine.
We didn't scream for a CB ocr Sensei ban did we? I didn't atleast, I just tweaked my deck to actually be able to face the massive force of the CB/Top soft lock (which in my book takes time to play against since they most likely have no clock). They make rounds go to time. They stall the game too 50 minutes each round if you don't scoop, since they have 2-3 win cons.
Now that's an unhealthy meta in my opinion... We should be glad that some innovative people made a deck that simply crushes these decks, making them unviable in tournaments. Saving all other people time of agony when waiting for the CB/Top player to actually find a win con.
In CBTop's heyday it was still rock paper scissors with no single deck having 60% win percentage against the field. There were also plenty of people who wanted SDT banned, but this isn't Team Counterbalance versus Team Survival, so you can go home.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hawdes
And a format filled with CB/Top variations ain't tepid? I can't go to a tournament without seeing atleast 6 different decks using CB/Top soft-lock and they're not even that much diffrent from eachother. These decks top8-top16 way back, in every tournament. But hey, then we adapted our decks to fight against CB/Top. It's the same thing all over again, but now it's about survival.
Adapt your deck, and it'll be fine.
We didn't scream for a CB ocr Sensei ban did we? I didn't atleast, I just tweaked my deck to actually be able to face the massive force of the CB/Top soft lock (which in my book takes time to play against since they most likely have no clock). They make rounds go to time. They stall the game too 50 minutes each round if you don't scoop, since they have 2-3 win cons.
Now that's an unhealthy meta in my opinion... We should be glad that some innovative people made a deck that simply crushes these decks, making them unviable in tournaments. Saving all other people time of agony when waiting for the CB/Top player to actually find a win con.
we did actually, it never came.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
keys
The point is, do we want a metagame that consists of Survival... and decks that are metagamed to beat Survival? Sounds like a tepid format to me, but whatever...
The hate you bring in against survival will hit NH, dredge, combo and half the format. It won't be like vintage with 7 cards dedicated to the ichorid match.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
median
we did actually, it never came.
The hate you bring in against survival will hit NH, dredge, combo and half the format. It won't be like vintage with 7 cards dedicated to the ichorid match.
Why do people keep pretending sideboards make a difference? The deck has been public for almost 3 months. It still puts up the same win %.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
keys
Why do people keep pretending sideboards make a difference? The deck has been public for almost 3 months. It still puts up the same win %.
What's so hard to play Pithing Needle on turn 1? The rest is just a strong aggro deck with a little counter-suit. C'mon, if you don't prepare for Dredge it will roflstomp you much harder while Survival at least gives you a fighting chance.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
keys
Why do people keep pretending sideboards make a difference? The deck has been public for almost 3 months. It still puts up the same win %.
Are you one of those people who plays with 60 card decks and never brings a sideboard?
Sideboards do make a difference. You just have to do it properly. I think I've lost once to a survival variant at a tournament since the GP, admittedly drawing none of my sideboard hate while Iona got there. Since then I've beaten both Bant and Madness versions without much trouble playing everything from Dragon Stompy to LED-less Ichorid.
Just a matter of adapting, playing the right board, sideboarding in a fashion that doesn't gimp your deck, and most importantly knowing how and when to Mulligan.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
I'm not saying sideboarding is hard, I'm saying: show me the results.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fossil4182
For example, If I'm playing against the Survival Player and I keep a hand that has three lands, 3 business spells and a Grip, I'll decide to keep. The turns play out like this
T1 (Survival Player): Land, Noble Heirarch, Pass
T1 (NO Bant Player): Land, Top, Pass
T2 (Survival Player): Land, Survival of the Fittest (NO attempts to Force of Will, which Survival Player counters with FoW), pass
T2 (NO Bant Player): Land, Counterbalance, pass
T3 (Survival Player): Land, activate Survival four times, bring back 2-3 Vengevines (Depending on the build) and swing for 8-12
T3 (NO Bant Player): Krosan Grip?
If you're playing against a Survival player, why the deuce are you tapping out on Turn 1 when you could hold up mana for Spell Pierce/Snare? Who's the beatdown?
Re: Survival of the Fittest
It's funny, because I've always been a Survival proponent in Legacy metagames but everytime I brought a variant of the diverse Survival decks out there in my meta, I do well AND bad. I was at the point where I spoke out "It's so sad that Survival is just a tier 1.5 deck at best" and you can find such similar quotes on most of the Survival variants here on N&D and established. People who tweak and improve lists all agree that Survival just couldn't cut it to tier 1. It will always be out-beat by combo in a big tournament. Turn 2 Survival, turn 3 hate-bear is still TOO slow against combo.
Nothing has really changed. And now, the deck that I love the most (well card actually ie Survival) is doing well and I'm happy for it, because I think it deserved to do well, however it is doing TOO well but playing the deck and its variant years ago has made me realized that Survival IS capable of putting out top8 results, but in general could not do so before. Why? Take a look at the pre-MTutor ban periods. Fast combo was quite popular. ANT was easy to pilot and was fast. Survival could never be a dominating force in those meta, even if Vengevines existed. Turn 2 Survival turn 3 hate-bear Vengies beat still cannot race Turn 1-2 MTutor ANT combo. Those were the bare facts.
Post MTutor days, combo has slowed down, and the combo deck of choice is either TES or DDFT the latter being less played due to harder skill decisions and piloting. However, a good example is my meta which has a dedicated storm SI player. Who the fuck plays SI? No one in the right mind would play SI in a big tourney. But I force you to reconsider, about dissing a deck without taking account of the meta. For the very same reason, Survival (even with Vengies) could not have been a strong tier 1 deck preMTutor era due to an existing popular deck that beat it consistently and was resilient past a 4xFoW protection. Post MTutor era, combo slowed down, Countertop/control variants started to creep up in dominance, JAce 2.0 showed up making control lists go even slower. Zoo is evolving towards bigger creatures after seeing how the meta has shifted to a slower pace and focus more on inevitability or cheating big dudes that won despite almost losing. That was the huge change in post MTutor banning. Decks diversified, jank decks penetrated, one of which being UG Madness. Soon enough, people caught on, and realized that UG Madness, Vengevival beats most of the aggro deck out there, and had an inevitable win-condition even if Survival was neutered i.e. having VV in graveyard is as potent in the Standard environment as it is in Legacy.
For the first time, Survival could be a tier 1 deck. Why? The main weakness of Survival aside from shutting down its engine, were faster decks that beat it faster. The great example being combo. Despite the loss of MTutor, TES today can still outrace Vengevival consistently, but since most people would rather play a non-combo deck (I believe there're in general more non-combo players than combo players) Survival would remain the deck of choice to pilot.
Now in my meta, we have a TES and SI pilot. Who the fuck plays SI? However, it IS the FASTEST deck, so any, ANY Survival broken.dec still could not beat combo, because it simply did not have the speed nor disruption. Turn 2 Survival Turn 3 lock/win is still not strong enough. Turn 2 Counterbalance lock is also not strong enouhg, Turn 3 Emrakul/Iona is also not strong enough. Why? This format has the answers, this format has the resources. People mention Survival is still storming through the top16s strong. But ask yourselves honestly. Look at the Sideboards, how much dedication IS there REALLY for this archetype?
I'm going to strongly argue that a good deck that will take the meta by surprise now is:
- Affinity
- SI/Belcher
Why? No one is preparing against such archetypes. Affinity has some new tools, no one has the courage to bring those list to a big tourney to put out results. Caleb did what we would not have seen today, taking a 'jank' UG madness deck, putting out results, lists are being discussed, and the deck is storming while the meta is still unprepared, and still in the process of solving existing problematic evolutions: SnT/Emrakul/Iona. Those archetypes are now being wrapped up and solutions are solidifying, but Survival went in and took the meta by surprise and the meta was unable to react, or more accurately react CORRECTLY to it.
Let me just say this. People who board in GY hate when I play Survival variants (Welder/Bant/Squee etc) are wasting slots/time. As much as it stops the advantage engine, and is perhaps more relevant against Vengevivals, I always feel that boarding in GY hate is the weak choice unless your deck has no other ways to deal with Survival. Much stronger choices are:
- Pithing Needle (FFS play this card already. Stops vials/Jace/Survival/Wastelock/EE/wtf everything for :1:)
- Meddling Mage (against UG Survival, this is actually a very strong card that isn't explored)
- Ethersworn Canonist (beat me with baskings?)
- Leonin Arbiter and other janky cards not being explored.
- Peacekeper
The above cards are all in general utility cards that are not dead outside the Survival matchup, and don't even care about the GY. You will always have 4 slots dedicated in GY hate against Dredge and Loam etc, but from the above, pick 2-4 more slots that serve a dual purpose against other matchups e.g. MM against combo/Survival/Loam, Ethersworn Canonist against combo/Enchantress etc, Arbiter is quite solid, Peacekeeper against Emrakul/Survival/Merfolks etc.
Quit bitching seriously, start adpating.
And from SC2, "Hell' it's about time"
It's really about time Survival gets its dominance in the metagame. For years I've been waiting for this archetype to shine. Elf Survival/Bant Survival took some spotlights, but for the first time, Survival archetype has been as feared as a Counterbalance-Top, Goblin lackey, and ANT/TES archetype. People laughed at Survival, it was too slow. Is it too fast now? I don't think so. Turn 2 Survival, Turn 3 lock/win. Nothing has really changed. So start pulling out your dusty binders and think of how a sideboard isn't just 15 cards, but rather 15 card choices that can be spread out across various matchups to improve your weaknesses. Look at those 15 cards, and think which cards hurt Vengevivals without sacrificing your other matchups. It's really not that hard. And if it's too hard? Then just pick a different deck ffs. There's no best deck in Legacy. I dare you to bring Affinity and Belcher right now to the meta, and I think they'll do VERY well with this meta right now, Affinity especially.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
In repsonce to the above posts calling for the banning of survival and pointing to the recent results - your reasoning is flawed becsaue you are focusing too much on past performace rather then how to exploit the current metagame with Survival at the top.
Specifically , Survival only beats "60% of the metagame" when that metagame has failed to adjust to it's presence and consists of decks like countertop and Zoo.
You want results? Then how about you start testing with a group of people that have half a brain and get ahead of the curve rather then looking in the rear view mirror and whining for WoTC to ban the format back to some nostalic past. While your at it look up some articles on the flaws of being result orientated.
The funny thing is we don't even have to look far for alternative that beat survival - they have been around at different times in the past and now they simply need up dating, or will now represent larger portions of the metagame. You can't just keep the same deck and change some sideboard cards and expect to keep winning. As the format changes so should your deck choice. Sorry if you can't keep playing your pet deck endlessly by only changing a few sidebaord cards.
This is called format evolution - it's one of the elements that keep the game exciting.
In repsonce to the notion that the metagame will be Survival and decks designed to beat Survival. Okay, so is Storm "designed" to beat Survival? No, it beats survival by default becsaue it has strategic superiority. Controling decks on the other hand, by defintion, are designed to beat the defining decks of the metagame, so there should be no issue there.
Tempo Control has a good Survival match and beats & Storm but has a tough time vs Merfolk and Eva Green. This represents a well balanced metagame, although I would like to see Zoo find a way to fit itself in there as well. How is that fundementally different then Countertop-Zoo-Merfolk?
There are always going to be defining elements to the metagame - Counterbalance was one of those factors for a long time - now that appears to be changing. I would now say that the Survvial engine and Storm are the 2 defining strategies - whether enough players will see this has yet to be determined.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Meekrab
If you're playing against a Survival player, why the deuce are you tapping out on Turn 1 when you could hold up mana for Spell Pierce/Snare? Who's the beatdown?
Most decks in the current format don't play either of those cards in the "stock" builds. Merfolk has only recently started to run Spell Pierce and there is still a fair number of decks that play Daze over Spell Pierce. Tempo Threshold has been noticeably absent for a while (nice to see a recent top 8) which was the only deck that ran Spell Snare with any consistency. The only other deck I can think of that plays Spell Snare is UBG Landstill (which also plays Spell Pierce). I think they're both great cards, but they aren't "standard" in a lot of decks. My guess is they will be in a Survival world.
As an side, why do people assume its bad that there is a deck in Legacy that now people have to metagame for? Standard has been doing it for years with decks that are far more dominate than Survival is in Legacy...
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Spell snare is usually always run in any landstill list as at least a 2 of. Tempo threshold has always played the card as a 4 of whether it's UGr or UGb. People started packing spell pierce in merfolk ever since Saito won GP Columbus and that was months ago since he decided to MD the card because it is simply put a very good card spell pierce hits numerous things from vial to counterbalance to removal spells. It also hits survival aka public enemy number one it seems at present.
People, adapt to fight survival for crying out loud there's a card that costs 1 mana called pithing needle. USE IT and you will do well and not just against survival it also works against cycling lands in loam to some degree, sensei's divining top, fetchlands, maze of ith....the list goes on. Hell against enchantress it hits sterling grove. And it is also very good against aether vial which is quite significant in the metagame. Pithing needle is a swiss army knife to put it bluntly.
And if you play black I suggest you pack extirpate in your board since it eats vengevine survival for breakfast. And the nice part? It isn't card disadvantage if they pitch vengevine to get vengevine EoT because you EoT extirpate the vine after the survival activation has resolved because the survival player often goes turn 1 accelerator turn 2 survival with a mana left open to start the survival chain.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
It's easy to play around a needle, simply keep a mana open, pitch for cat or orangutan.. The table is turned once Survival hits play, the best way to fight it is to not let it resolve. Or play a faster clock.
To hold Survival back, the meta needs to adjust by at least playing Force of Will, Spell Snare, Extirpate, Duress, Thoughtseize, Cabal Therapy, Hymn to Tourach. A majority of legacy decks including DTB are not able support at least 3 of these.
Currently, non-blue/non-black tier 1 decks being pushed aside by this Survival madness is an issue. Because switching to a U-B shell in Legacy isn't always as cheap as in type 2/1.X.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Agree with a lot of what's been said already. The banning of Survival of the Fittest and Mystical Tutor before that would and has been a reactionary response. Magic is lauded as a rock/paper/scissors game and, with legacy being the most wide open format, one would think Wizards would be excited to let a little laissez faire be introduced to prove as such.
I remember a lot of people calling for the banning of Tarmogoyf because of what a shift he made in the format. Seems silly now.
Don't ban survival, ban vengevine. Don't ban vengevine, unban Mystical Tutor. Magic and it's players will sort itself out.
Re: Survival of the Fittest
Quote:
Originally Posted by
death
It's easy to play around a needle, simply keep a mana open, pitch for cat or orangutan.. The table is turned once Survival hits play, the best way to fight it is to not let it resolve. Or play a faster clock.
To hold Survival back, the meta needs to adjust by at least playing Force of Will, Spell Snare, Extirpate, Duress, Thoughtseize, Cabal Therapy, Hymn to Tourach. A majority of legacy decks including DTB are not able support at least 3 of these.
Currently, non-blue/non-black tier 1 decks being pushed aside by this Survival madness is an issue. Because switching to a U-B shell in Legacy isn't always as cheap as in type 2/1.X.
You're talking about Zoo, right? Every time in Legacy then Zoo can't beat a certain matchup there's s large wave of guys calling for a banning. Same with reanimator and ANT. I realized it's near always that corner of the metagame crying first.
Zoo and most pure Aggro Decks dismiss disrupion but is it fair to cripple strategies because some design concepts are unwilling/unable to adapt? Should we ban everything in Legacy until mono Red burn is viable? I think that's exactly the route you're willing to go ... If a single color (or even 2) has no answer, ban the threat
