Griselbrand didn´t get banned... is that good for us?
Printable View
Griselbrand didn´t get banned... is that good for us?
I don't think we really care either way. Reanimator and Sneak and Show are certainly welcome to go to low life totals trying to draw into the win, it just makes our job easier.Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroFilipe92
I think our game plan is the same as it always is - keep playing threats and chipping away at their life total. We're more than capable of racing a big fat demon.
What's potentially more interesting is the unbanning of Land Tax. It seems like Wizards completely forgot Maverick in their "top decks" analysis...but I'm not sure Land Tax is something G/W wants anyway...
I'm skeptical tha Land Tax will do anything in Legacy. It doesen't do anything in decks that already exist, like Mav, that run 2-4 Basic Lands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davran
Let's wait and see what deck innovators have to offer us.
i believe there will be a resurgence of Enchantress and Mono White Control in the near future as people try to break Land Tax. This benefits Enchantress quite a lot actually.
This made me laugh. Not because I think you're wrong, but because a "resurgence of enchantress" conjures up a mental image of 2 guys playing it at the next tournament instead of just the one. I know it can be a pretty terrible match up for us, but to be honest I'm not all that worried about it achieving popularity on the level of Maverick or U/W.Quote:
Originally Posted by movingtonewao
I suspect we'll see some sort of brew that uses Land Tax to do something silly, but I think we're pretty well positioned against a deck that spends its time trying to stay behind on lands while not dying to our goblin horde.
On my last tournament (~50 Players) there were 7 ! Enchantress.. I dont want to see it rising in population here ;D.
That's awesome. Just board 2 or 3 Anarchy and win every match. It's a gift when your meta clearly defines your sideboard for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Holly
why not? moat used to be hard to get, but now humility is a better choice with delvers around, so the deck is more accessible. plus, lots of people subscribe to the 'flavor of the month' thing, so who knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davran
Very true. It could easily become the next "hot" deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by movingtonewao
Humility is much better for us than Moat, so I'm hoping that if it does happen they go in that direction. All the more reason to grab a couple copies of Anarchy for our sideboards.
If you guys don’t mind, I’d like to get some advice on my mana base.
First of all to supply some context, I play 3 WInstigators main, as well as 3 Chieftains, so my red mana requirement is a little heavier than it would be with some other builds.
Currently I run 21 lands, which feels like the right number. At the SCG Invitational in Baltimore, before Cavern was printed, I ran 17 mountains and 4 wastelands (had to borrow 3 of them). Overall this felt fine, but I found myself misplaying with wasteland often in testing. It actually cost me a match against Maverick in round 6 of the invitational, which was the difference between 5-3 and 4-4—and a win would have put me into day 2. I have an itchy trigger finger with wastelands, and whenever I misplay with them, it always seems to be because I wasted something and then found myself short on land.
Now Cavern has been printed and I had to give back the 3 borrowed Wastes, leaving my current mana base as follows:
16 Mountains, 4 Caverns, 1 Waste.
So now I need to decide how many wastes and ports I want to run, and I want to make the decision before I trade some arms and legs for more than I need. I think this is what I want:
12 Mountains, 4 Caverns, 3 Wastes, 2 Ports
I think I need at least 16 colored sources, but I do want some of the mana denial as well. How many colored sources are necessary? The thought behind the 3-2 colorless split is that Ports are like Wastelands with training wheels. If I decided to tap something down in the wrong spot, it doesn’t cost me a land. It also lets me shift back and forth between mana denial and aggro, whereas with wasteland, once you waste, you can’t get it back. Besides a little testing on cockatrice, I have never actually played with Ports, so I would appreciate some insight on the card.
Also, I’m considering adding some Arid Mesas that are currently just sitting in my binder. I’m mono red, so colors aren’t an issue, but I thought the thinning might help. How many fetches do you really need before the thinning becomes relevant? I know this is somewhere in the depths of the thread, but admittedly I have not combed back through and looked. As far as the fetchland-Ringleader interaction…if you fetch before your first RL, you have thinned your deck and left yourself with some marginally better chance of hitting more goblins. If you fetch between your first and second RL, you remove a land but shuffle all the lands on the bottom back in. At that point, it seems like it could be either helping or hurting, depending on how the first RL turned out. Is this the correct analysis, or am I off base?
Any advice, insight, or constructive criticism is greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Manabase is hard to determine without the exact decklist. Generally you could argue that WI brings in some goblins so you play less lands. It's similar with Warchief, which lets you play bodies for less mana, you only need red mana then. So ports and wastes are free for mana denial of your opponent.Quote:
Originally Posted by woodjt5
I would always run the playset of wastelands-they are that expensive because they are that good. 2 Ports is a good number-if I would run more, then I would cut goblins, not mountains. But they work great with Cavern too. I love to put a vial turn 1 and port your opponent from that on until you just burst goblins onto the table.
In terms of fetches almost every player in this threat would advise you not to run them in a mono red build. Other than that jrw1984 calculated the amount of fetches to improve ringleader (thanks again for that man) and he came down to 4. Which makes it similar to sylvan library (trading 4 life for another card). As long as you don't splash a color stay with mountains. Don't care about the stife you're going to catch for that the tempo loss is much more relevant than a trigger on one of your creatures.
So if you wanna stay at 21 lands, I would suggest 4 Wasteland, 2 Ports, 4 Cavern of Souls and 11 Mountain.
Wasteland*Quote:
Originally Posted by woodjt5
* I am by no means an expert, but here's some thoughts
4x Wasteland is a critical part of our mana base for a couple reasons. First, a well timed Wasteland can and will win you games. Opponents sometimes keep sketchy hands that look great...if you have no disruption. If you can successfully keep them off of an important color, or below a critical mana count (I'll get to this in a second) you'll win a game you may otherwise have lost. Second, there are plenty of problematic spells and/or lands that Wasteland can be effective against. Take for example Wrath of God out of U/W Blade's sideboard. Wasteland can help you keep them off of WW and/or below 4 mana, keeping that Wrath safely in their hand. On the problematic lands side, Maze of Ith is the top contender in this spot, but there are plenty of others.
In terms of when to play a Wasteland, that really depends on a number of things. The most important of these is an analysis of the match up you're currently playing, and what you're afraid of. Let's say you're sitting down to game 2 vs. TES. You managed to pull out a game 1 win, and your opponent is on the play. He leads off with an Underground Sea, casts a Duress, and takes your combo hate card. It's now your turn. You have two options based on your current hand: Play a mountain and a Goblin Lackey, setting up for a Siege-gang Commander next turn off of the trigger, or use a Wasteland on his Underground Sea. Which is the better line of play? What are you afraid of here? If you cast the Lackey and he combos off using the Sea, you lose the game. If you use the Wasteland and he's holding a Gemstone Mine to combo off with, you lose the game. If you use the Wasteland and he needs to find a black source before going off, you may just stand a chance.
That said, I find that it is best to sandbag your wastelands for as long as possible. This forces your opponent to make decisions with fetch lands and other abilities that he may not otherwise make, leading to a blow out the following turn. Don't be afraid to lay them out if you have to, though.
Lastly, Wasteland tends to get less useful as the game goes on. There will come a point when your Wasteland is nothing more than a colorless mana, and that's perfectly fine. Don't feel like you have to use it simply because it's there.
Rishadan Port
Port is an interesting card for us because it can really bog down a game. It can be a pretty bad choice an aggressive build with lots of red mana requirements (like yours) simply because it cannot produce red mana. In a build with Warchief, however, it can open up some lines of play that may not have been possible before.
Port can be a pretty skill intensive card to use, but it's a lot like Wasteland. If you want them off of WW to prevent Wrath, then tap down that Tundra in their upkeep.
Cavern of Souls
I don't have any experience with these since I don't own any yet. If I did, I would likely run a playset without really thinking about it. There are quite a few match ups where it is very relevant.
Mountains
These should fill out the rest of your mana base. There really is nothing better for us.
Fetch Lands
I don't really see the point in running these in mono colored decks. First, the "deck thinning" argument is false. The statistics that prove this are out there somewhere, so I won't get into it. Second, it opens your mana base up to Stifle for no discernible reason, which is not a smart thing to do. Third, you're taking damage you don't otherwise need to take. Sure, it's only 1 or 2, but that can be relevant.
Land Count
The "norm" for goblins decks tends to be around 22. If you're running Ports I wouldn't go below that. If you're not, 20-21 is probably fine. It really depends on your curve. Your best bet is to play test at wherever you think is correct. If you're not seeing any issues, then you're probably fine.
**EDIT: Fixed some derp about Stifle.
That was a great explanation if you ask me... maybe something could be used on the primer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Davran
*the part about stifle being useless against s is quite wrong though, as people noticed below...
fetch is an argument in monocolored decks.....but surely stifle isnt a dead card against goblins!!!!!!!!! lackey, ring, matron triggers.!
Yeah, but ultimately, fetches doesen't worth it. there were several discussions about it on the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by akabidu
- 1 life matter. If you crack more, it matters more.
- The thining is near to irrelevant. I don't know the math, but seen it several times.
- Someone Stifling one of yo 2 or 3 lands on the game is way more problematic than having mana to actually cast a Ringleader, and having it's trigger stifled....
- Fetchlands may fuck up the bottom of your library after 1-2 ringleaders. Cracking a fetch may increase the chance of drawing a land next turn.
Those are the arguments I remember.
Stifle dead card versus us? Hmmm. How can you possibly win aganist RUG if not by some juicy ringleader? How can you kill delver pre-sb if not by gempalm (ok some of you plays tarfire), stifle is good aganist wasteland and almost every relevant card in our deck, not to mention you can always use it to something less relevant like piledriver, vial etc. so calling it dead card sounds little off to me...Quote:
Originally Posted by Davran
Thank you for the insight. It look slike 4 Wasteland is a definite, and now I just need to decide if 2,1, or even 0 ports are what I want. I'll post my exact list when I get home...I don't have it on me at work.
@ Stifle being dead vs. us.
I misspoke here. Stifle can be quite relevant against us when it comes to our creatures. What I meant to say is that opening the mana base up to Stifle for no reason isn't always a smart thing to do. I've edited my previous post accordingly.
At the beggining when I was building my deck I wanted only 2 ports, but friends avised me to put 4 because it was a game breaker. And I did put 4. I though it would break my mana more than it would help. It sometimes breaks your mana.....but goblins lose their force very quickly, and with ports you can control the game until you reach for a matron or a ring. If I were building a mono red I would put 4, minimum 3. But now I dont know, the Cavern seems to take the place of some of them.
Here's my list for reference when discussing my land question above (and just for the purpose of sharing)...I just typed it out at work instead of waiting:
4 Aether Vial
4 Goblin Lackey
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Ringleader
4 Gempalm Incinerator
3 Warren Instigator
3 Goblin Chieftan
3 Mogg War-Marshall
2 Goblin Warchief
2 Goblin Piledriver
2 Stingscourger
2 Siege-Gang Commander
1 Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker
1 Tarfire
X Krenko, Mob Boss (I think my build is especially well positioned to take advantage of him with 5 haste enablers, war-marshalls, and piledrivers. I want to cut Kiki-Jiki for one and possibly a second goblin for another.)
4 Cavern of Souls
4 Wasteland
0-2 Rishadan Port
11-13 Mountains
Board:
4 Leyline of Sanctity (Combo)
2 Chalice of the Void (Combo, random other matchups)
3 Surgical Extraction (Dredge/Reanimater, Cephalid Breakfast, anything else that uses the GY- Considering switching them out for Tormod's Crypts, and also considering adding a 4th piece of GY hate)
1 Goblin Sharpshooter (Lingering souls, Elves, Affinity, Ensnaring bridge, Moat)
1 Skirk Prospector (Dredge and any time Sharpshooter comes in)
1 Pyrokinesis (Elves, Merfolk, Maverick, Affinity, other Aggro
1 Stingscourger (Grisledaddy, Emrakul)
2 Tuk-tuk Scrapper (Jitte, Batterskull, Ensnaring Bridge, Sword of George R.R. Martin)
Again, thanks for all suggestions/commentary/ideas/constructive criticisms