[DTB] Vial Goblins

There are actually ways you can lose to Merfolk, it's a good matchup for you but you should not underestimate them.
a) They go Vial and you have no turn 1 play or they can counter your turn 1 play, then they follow up with Standstill.
b) A quick Jitte against you especially if Mutavault is carrying it and you can not block it with Piley.
c) They out tempo you, usually because they have Vial and you don't.

I bring in 4 REB to combat their Standstills and have an answer for a Merfolk carrying a Jitte, the Mutavault can be answered with Gempalm, Waste or Port. REB is also a great way to buy a lot of time by killing a lord and force a war of attrition thus having a counter against plan c. Pyrokinesis is a fairly good answer to both plan b and c as well so that's another option.

You are doing it wrong if you're losing a war of attrition against Merfolk, that should never happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shanghi Knights

No means is it a nessesity to have board spots to fight merfolk but it looked interesting to me none the less.

i see what most of you mean by boartusk being bad in the main deck, but a 3/4 trampler thats most likely going to be bigger due to having a king or a goblin chieftain already played a turn before. (dunno if anyones still using king or not).
is somewhat appealing.

---

I don't intend to flame you specificly, but to stop you and others from spamming this thread with ideas covered earlier.

Everyone:Read the thread, and play the deck before posting half-baked, likely allready suggested ideas here. Less discussion of attempting timmy-style tribal, or 'new' cards that have better functional printings. (Goblin Settler >> Goblin Ruinblaster) More testing results and decklists with 'gator, the only sure addition to every goblins mainboard.

My list pre-gator (generally successful, about half the events I've played it at I've at least top 4'd, though most of those were about 20-25 people in size):

// Lands
4 [R] Badlands
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [TE] Wasteland
1 [PT] Swamp (3)
6 [TSP] Mountain (1)
(was testing two gemstone caverns in place of two mountains)

// Creatures
4 [MOR] Frogtosser Banneret
4 [US] Goblin Lackey
3 [10E] Siege-Gang Commander
4 [M10] Goblin Chieftain
4 [7E] Goblin Matron
3 [MOR] Earwig Squad
1 [LRW] Mad Auntie
4 [AP] Goblin Ringleader
1 [LRW] Wort, Boggart Auntie
1 [MOR] Lightning Crafter

// Spells
4 [DS] AEther Vial
4 [MOR] Warren Weirding

// Sideboard
SB: 3 [LRW] Mad Auntie
SB: 3 [AT] Goblin Tinkerer
SB: 4 [FUT] Magus of the Moon
SB: 1 [ON] Goblin Sharpshooter
SB: 4 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus

The list was very mid-game, with a much different stratedgy than a mono red build. Squad was invaluable, and got there to win niegh-unwinnable matches against combo, echantress, decks packing moat, ect. I also love the everliving crap out of lightning crafter, and found myself tutoring for him about 50% of the time, which speaks highly I think considering he is the same CMC as ringleader. Bolting every turn while championing a matron or ringleader is not to be taken lightly. I would never, ever cut this card, but I doubt I'd ever run more than one. If you haven't tested crafter, I suggest you do, he warps everything from stalemates to stacks decks to the mirror and other tribal MUs.

The list I've been testing with 'gator:

// Lands
6 [DM] Mountain (2)
4 [TE] Wasteland
1 [7E] Swamp (3)
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [R] Badlands

// Creatures
1 [MOR] Lightning Crafter
4 [ZEN] Warren Instigator
1 [ON] Goblin Piledriver
4 [MOR] Frogtosser Banneret
2 [M10] Siege-Gang Commander
4 [M10] Goblin Chieftain
4 [US] Goblin Lackey
1 [EVG] Gempalm Incinerator
4 [AP] Goblin Ringleader
4 [7E] Goblin Matron

// Spells
4 [DS] AEther Vial
4 [MOR] Warren Weirding

// Sideboard
SB: 3 [AT] Goblin Tinkerer
SB: 4 [FUT] Magus of the Moon
SB: 4 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus
SB: 1 [ON] Goblin Sharpshooter
SB: 3 [LRW] Mad Auntie

So many things are wrong with this list that I can't begin to list them, foremost only 2 SGCs. I have allways felt driver was win-more, and can lead to some horendous turn - of -events, as if your opponent swords him with the trigger on the stack and blocks your warchief/chieftain with his goyf, (when you thought he'd have to block driver to stay alive) winning can turn into losing in a hurry. He also does nothing by himself, blah blah blah (further discussion of driver earlier in the thread) I dropped all the earwig squads, which I feel should have a place in Rb goblins somewhere in the 75 as an answer to shackles, plagues, winconditions in decks like enchantress, ect. I still feel like wierding is much more consistent and reliable removal than incinerator and/or stingscourger that I am hesitant to go mono-red balls-to the walls. I also feel that a 4/4 frogtosser/chieftain split is much better for your curve than 3/3 or 4/2 warchief/chieftain in mono red, as hands that dont contain a lackey or vial, (or games that don't involve them resolving) your game starts turn four at the earliest with chieftain, opposed to turn three with frogtosser. Wort is a godsent late-game, with recurring edicts/matrons->edicts, ect, but squad deprives your opponent of a late-game, and trades with goyf. I am unsure which if either of them deserves a tutorable slot MD.

In sharp contrast to all my self-loathing over cuts and slots for Rb gobos post-gator, gator has been the bees' knees. Goyfs quiver in fear with vial at two, explosive hands win much faster against combo on the times you ARE able to goldfish, and the curve seems healthier with 8 1 drops, and 9 two drops + removal. (as opposed to only 4 frogtosser and 4 edicts previously at two) I think gator is too good to not play as a four of, and my gemstone caverns testing has gone out the window with having to produce RR on turn two with 7 non-red sources in the deck was rough.

Thoughts? Results testing?

@Media:
Welcome to a public forum. The posters here are entitled to discuss what they think is relevant as long as they follow the rules of the forum. I might think it's relevant to discuss Goblin Ruinblaster, but this might not be relevant to you, just as Lightning Crafter has never interested me much. But I am open to discuss Lightning Crafter whereas you just dismiss Goblin Ruinblaster on forehand without giving any reason at all. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate your creative take on Goblins and I enjoyed reading your tournament reports but show a little respect to the other posters.

Anyway on topic:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Media314r8

(Goblin Settler >> Goblin Ruinblaster)

---

That is just not true, they both have their pro's and cons.

Goblin Settler can be Vialed in which is huge. Ruinblaster on the other hand allows you to apply a lot more pressure and thus take more advantage of the tempo generated by destroying an opposing land.

Warren Instigator hasn't been able to convince me just yet. If your opponent is holding their Goyf back because their fear a Warren Instigator coming from the Vial they just play bad. I mean if you have a Vial out and you will win eventually if the opponent does not put pressure on you. Furthermore, Instigator is hardly needed with Vial out as it's quite easy to overwhelm your opponent with Goblins if you have enough of them to cast.

I had talked about it a couple of pages back, but absolutely no one responded to it at all. I thought it was a viable idea, and I've been testing it a good bit and it's won me a good handful of games where I would have lost without it.

Daze.

This deck is constantly curving out, and Daze is free. It protects early Lackey's, whether it's against opposing creatures or removal. In fact, it protects early Vial's too. It allows crucial Warchief's to resolve early. It keeps curved out Firespouts, Engineered Plagues, WoG's, etc off the table. Combined with Waste/Port, it can be a hard counter all the way into the midgame.

It's been very good for me in testing. Like I said originally, I'm not stating that it's optimal, or the build itself is better than existing splashes. I'm simply wondering why it isn't an accepted splash.

For reference, here's the list I've been testing it with:

// Lands
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
3 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
3 [U] Volcanic Island
4 [BD] Mountain (2)
4 [MM] Rishadan Port
4 [REW] Wasteland

// Creatures
4 [US] Goblin Lackey
4 [ON] Goblin Piledriver
2 [PLC] Stingscourger
4 [EVG] Gempalm Incinerator
2 [M10] Goblin Chieftain
4 [EVG] Goblin Warchief
4 [EVG] Goblin Matron
4 [AP] Goblin Ringleader
2 [10E] Siege-Gang Commander

// Spells
4 [DD2] Daze
4 [DS] AEther Vial

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [SHM] Boartusk Liege
SB: 4 [AT] Pyrokinesis
SB: 3 [DS] Echoing Truth
SB: 4 [MR] Chalice of the Void

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayzonious

Has anyone else contemplated splashing white for STP?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ectoplasm

Have you read the thread? Splashing white sucks.

---

I just got done reading the top 8 for the SCG Legacy 5k Charlotte. 2 Goblin decks made the Top 8. Both were R/W.

-1000 Credibility points Ectoplasm

Once the deck lists are posted I guess we can discuss this further, hopefully without being ignorant. K thx.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanni

Daze.

This deck is constantly curving out, and Daze is free. It protects early Lackey's, whether it's against opposing creatures or removal. In fact, it protects early Vial's too. It allows crucial Warchief's to resolve early. It keeps curved out Firespouts, Engineered Plagues, WoG's, etc off the table. Combined with Waste/Port, it can be a hard counter all the way into the midgame.

---

Personally, the fact you curve out plays turn 1-5 is what makes Daze unappealing, setting yourself back a land drop is pretty undesirable, especially in the early game, where Daze is most relevant.

I guess pushing through the turn one play should mitigate the tempo loss, aka a connecting Lackey makes up for you having only 1 land in play on turn 2, but if they have the solution to the turn 1 play after you use Daze, it seems like you're completely buried. For instance if you play Vial, they counter, you Daze, it resolves then before it gets to 3-4 counters they Engineered Explosives it then you're back land drops and don't have a way to cheat guys in. Or if they have a second counter, or if they Brainstorm or Ponder into a Swords for the Lackey, etc.


I guess the other big question would be is this any better than Thoughtseize? Having discard either main or sideboard or both, can help you force through your bomb early game plays. Additionally it has the upside of seeing the opponent's hand so you can better map out the upcoming turns. Additionally it's in Black, which actually offers you good cards outside Thoughtseize like Warren Weirding, Cabal Therapy, Frogtosser Banneret, Wort Boggart Auntie, Mad Auntie, etc, probably not all would fit, but there are some other cards offered, unlike Blue which has no real playable cards that have synergy with the Tribe.

Daze... Daze? Then we could put FoW in the deck. We could probably run Counterbalance and Tarmogoyfs in the deck too.

They all seem like good cards.

I agree with you on all points made, Cairo. It does set you back a land drop; when Daze is met with countermagic in response, it does cause you to lose a little tempo. It does eat countermagic from them, which is a bonus, but I do accept that as a con of the card.

I also agree about the other benefits being in black (or green) gives. They offer more than just one spell.

In comparison with Thoughtseize though, the problem there is that it costs 1 mana, which sets you back in tempo just as bad as returning a land drop back to hand. Daze allows you to still curve out, and the land drops being returned to hand are still there to be replayed. Daze creates far more tempo as well; the opponent invests mana to cast the spell you Daze, thus burning up a turn for that opponent. Thoughtseize may pull 1 of the 2 StP's the opponent was holding, but they can still cast the other one.

As I said, I don't think the blue splash is a better version than other possibilities. What I do think is that it is viable, plays well, and shouldn't be dismissed right off. I've won several games now that I had no business winning because of Daze.

Quote:

---

Daze... Daze? Then we could put FoW in the deck. We could probably run Counterbalance and Tarmogoyfs in the deck too.

They all seem like good cards.

---

Nice one liner bud.

Daze is too situational of a card to spash a color for. Its not worth it to expose even more of your manabase to wasteland not to metion the tempo loss that accompanies it. I like the deck best as monored.

CounterTop decks operate under a different strategy than Goblins; they drop a threat and aim to protect it at all costs, the tempoloss Daze generates is irrelevant as their threat is already on the board. Previously, we didn't have enough threats that we could ride to town, just Vial and Lackey just isn't enough. Now with Instigator we may have reached that critical mass necessary for this strategy and make Daze worthwhile. However, the concerns raised by Cairo and Stall are real ones. Keep me updated on your testing results.

I'm sure this has been mentioned many pages back, but Stifle is another interesting card. It solves somes of the issues raised by other posters. While you expose your manabase to include Volcanic Island, but at the meantime this could be a bonus as Stifle on Wasteland sets them back. It also doesn't cost you a landdrop like Daze. My primary concern is that you need a blue mana and you often can not afford to do so. That means Stifle is probably not the way to go in the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanni

I also agree about the other benefits being in black (or green) gives. They offer more than just one non-goblin spell.

---

Fixed.
I wouldn't run daze for the same reason Landstill doesn't run it.
We usually aim at the mid-late game, where we have our draw engine going and it becomes difficult for the opponent to beat us.
Daze sets us down on land drops and this is just bad in a deck like this. Daze could be good in a more tempo build, a deck that really want to exploit the lackeys and the tempo tools of the deck (stingscourger..). I would not like that list, but i guess that being more Lackey-centric can work somewhere.

I know that Rancor was raised many many pages back as a potential way to force Lackey through. The idea was dismissed, mainly because a Rancor with no creatures isn't good.

I think it's time to reconsider 3-4 Rancors again in the MD and 1 Pendel Haven for RG builds with Lackey and Instigator.

A Rancor on an instigator would allow to push through goyf stalls. A Rancor on Lackey on turn 2 pushes through any 2 toughness creatures while trading with a 3 toughness creature.

If you consider the cases where you drop Lackey turn 1, the only issues where he doesn't connect is if your opponent:

- Counters him with FOW/Daze
- Removes him with StP/Bolt
- Plays a creature to trade e.g. Bob, Putrid Imp etc.
- Plays a Goyf to kill it.

Now, the current goblin list is doing all it can to really solve points 3 and 4. We can't use points 1 and 2 to argue for the badness of Rancor, so let's focus on points 3 and 4.

Rancor on Lackey kills through Bob, Putrid Imp and any toughness 2 creature, therefore Rancor enables point 3 to connect lackey. turn 2 Rancor on Lackey allows you to force and beat through a 1/2 Goyf, and if Goyf is 2/3 on turn 2, you still manage to force through a Goyf and solve the problem for the later turns.

I doubt there're cases where Goyf can be consistently 2/3 on turn 1. The best I can see is if you play Brainstorm turn 1 and fetches, so it's safe to assume that Goyf shouldn't be a 3/4 when Lackey swings in with a Rancor, so at the worst, it's a 1-1 trade.

Rancor also enables much more with Piledriver and Warren Instigator. On an Instigator, it translates to 6 power trampling, so it would take a 5/6 Goyf to completely stop the lackey-effect from comming into play. Turn 2 instigator, turn 3 Rancor is bad, but it's much achievable and smoothened with vial. Goblins has an interesting curve, and the innate flaw of Instigator is it's really a 2/1 for RR. No one is going to let it resolve and connect, so it's just an overcosted 2/1. That logic is flawed to some extent because it's equally fair for the goblin player to argue that "If you don't have a removal for my lackey, then I will most likely win". And this is the holy word of Goblins, to connect and bury your opponents in card and board advantage. Instigator provides that additional inevitability if he's unresolved. Instead on simply resolving Lackey and Vials, your opponent now has to deal with Instigator as well.

Therefore Rancor might have some potential now. It always had potential. The main reason is that Goblins can do absolutely nothing against points 1, 2. For points 3, 4, we have been running Gempalm, Weirding, Stingscourger to connect Lackey. Rancor doesn't solve both 3,4, but it solves 3 solidly, and in the process for just one green mana, and keeps coming back on more targets. It's drawback on point 4 is more justified now with the printing of Instigator, since on an instigator, you can pretty much connect safely. Rancor also has the benefit on pumping up Piledrivers for lethal instead on getting the poor dude chumped.

Thing is, if you're going to run Rancor, you won't add to the deck's strength. You're merely changing how it deals with situations 3 and 4, since you won't have enough space for everything. Nothing added, just changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crz87

Therefore Rancor might have some potential now. It always had potential. The main reason is that Goblins can do absolutely nothing against points 1, 2. For points 3, 4, we have been running Gempalm, Weirding, Stingscourger to connect Lackey. Rancor doesn't solve both 3,4, but it solves 3 solidly, and in the process for just one green mana, and keeps coming back on more targets. It's drawback on point 4 is more justified now with the printing of Instigator, since on an instigator, you can pretty much connect safely. Rancor also has the benefit on pumping up Piledrivers for lethal instead on getting the poor dude chumped.

---

If both the cards are solving only problem #3 and #4, why not running Stingscourger/WW, and have more goblins in the deck?

Also, you didn't notice that rancor plain sucks against #2 where the opponent might have a chance in 2for1ing you. This does not happen with WW and even Scourger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanni

In comparison with Thoughtseize though, the problem there is that it costs 1 mana, which sets you back in tempo just as bad as returning a land drop back to hand.

---

No.

Thoughtseize eats up mana for one turn. That mana is then available to use again on the following turn.

Daze would put us back a land drop for the rest of the game. The tempo loss is definitely not the same.


Daze is also a horrible late-game top deck and doesn't play nice with Ringleader.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snackfu

Daze is also a horrible late-game top deck and doesn't play nice with Ringleader.

---

Thoughtseize too, even if to a smaller effect.

I´ve done some testing with daze, bu not in a RU build, but Rbu, for weirdings. It can surely be done, specially with the new RU fetch, it just depend on your playstile. The deal is that opponents don´t expect it and, you can always side them out game 2 or 3, making them play around it for nothing.

It is really interesting and won me some games, countering gofs, counters, standstills, and more. The ´´Tempo loss´´ caused by it has never really turned it self into un issue in any game. If you try a 1st turn lackey, they daze it, then you daze, then they force it, awesome! they wont have counters for you Instigators or Weirdings.
Maybe, if I ever buy some Volc. Islands, I´ll try it o a champ.

Rancor would suck in this deck. If you were gonna lower the Goblin count you might as well play Rb or Rbg and play Terminate. Terminate gets Lackey through like a champ. Terminate isn't ever a dead card unless they have no creatures, in that case you prolly win. If you're in topdeck mode and have nothing in play drawing Rancor will suck ass. True story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by true story

Rancor would suck in this deck. If you were gonna lower the Goblin count you might as well play Rb or Rbg and play Terminate. Terminate gets Lackey through like a champ. Terminate isn't ever a dead card unless they have no creatures, in that case you prolly win. If you're in topdeck mode and have nothing in play drawing Rancor will suck ass. True story.

---

[Snip. Warning for flaming. - Bardo] Although I agree that rancor is not good enough and makes lackey/instigator too important. But rancor has been discussed a million times. Just like freaking terminate.

In other news, both the lists for the charlotte 5k are a little out of this world...one list has no wasteland, the other list is just...a little out there. Not saying they are necessarily wrong, but it looks to me like the raw power of goblins might have pushed them through in a heavy aggro meta, maybe some good matchups against merfolk or something. Any thoughts?

ETA: Hopefully they are members here and they can give us some insight on their lists...they are very strange indeed.

I don´t know.
Guess I´d never play any of those lists.
I mean, 4 ports and 0 Wastes?
3 Paths and 4 wastes on the other?
no Stingscourer on monored?

Is there anywhere we can see the Matchups?