Curious why you're off Turbo Depths now(?) That deck seems quite good right now - lots of great finishes and excellent against the most "meta" decks.
Is there something about Dragon Stompy that feels better now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNSolver
Printable View
Curious why you're off Turbo Depths now(?) That deck seems quite good right now - lots of great finishes and excellent against the most "meta" decks.
Is there something about Dragon Stompy that feels better now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNSolver
I can play whatever I want on magic online now that I've gone infinite off Depths. I like to have fun, and this deck is fun! <3
The only other time I've ever seen someone have an 80+% win rate is Zac Turgeon, playing red stompy of some sort or other. So why not pick this deck?
I might end up streaming a version of this deck next week.
Congrats Zac!
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...?DeckID=119282
ThanksQuote:
Originally Posted by Ace/Homebrew
Any interest in giving a tournament report or anything like that? Would love to know if you'd make changes to your list, especially.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZTurgeon
Also, how did the Open go for you?
There isn't a ton to say. I faced 6 good match-ups and 2 bad ones, and managed to steal one of the bad ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by korstructure
R1: Sneak and Show : W
R2: Death & Taxes: L
R3: Eldrazi Stompy: W
R4: Turbo Depths: W
R5: Infect: W
R6: Grixis Delver: W
R7: ANT: W
R8: Eldrazi Stompy: W
T8: Lands: W
T4: Lands: W
Finals: ANT: W
I can go into more detail if needed, but other than against Death and Taxes, it was mostly the same story. Either you bombard them with lock pieces until one sticks and wins the game, or you have an aggressive hand that throws out a ton of damage before they can defend themselves.
As for my individual choices, it's the same list I won the MTGO challenge with last week, except I swapped the 3 graveyard hate cards for 3 Sulfur Elementals. There are just too many BR reanimator decks online to go without graveyard interaction, but in paper I feel that the Elementals are more needed, and also have some matchup versatility, while I literally only bring in my faerie macabres for exactly reanimator.
If anyone wants to know specifics on things, I will be happy to discuss anything. I just have been playing this for so long that I no longer know what is obvious or not anymore.
Very much a fan of Scab-Clan Berserker as well. What other matchups than storm and delver do you board them in against?
I dont board them in against delver. I go bigger and become the control deck there.Quote:
Originally Posted by arj
But they come in against almost any combo deck, or deck that doesn't defend well on the ground, like Miracles.
Thanks for the rundown! And congrats again! I checked out your twitter and saw your recap of the Open.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZTurgeon
Listened to your podcast episode before continuing with any questions, as well.
Curious about the 2x Hazoret. Would you consider a split with anything else?
Also, curious about your Rabblemaster choice - it seems you have to defend this one a lot. Do you think that the 5-6x Walker version with Rolling Earthquakes is strictly inferior? Less of a chance to win in the expected meta? One thing I do like about Rabblemaster is that it gives Marit Lage decks less opportunities to find Krosan Grip and win. Along with your already solid explanation of reducing combo deck turns. I do think that, looking at recent Top 8's, combo decks may be less represented than usual. I wonder if the non-rabblemaster builds might be better in less-combo type of meta.
Next, in the podcast you talked about your win rate, your %'s. Is that something you could share? Would love to know what your matchup data looks like! Even if it's just your win/loss rates (without matchup data), I'd find that super interesting. DNSolver specifically referred to your win rate as being exceptional at times, yet I can't find that data on my own.
Lastly, could you share how you sb against each of the delvers? I think what to take OUT is the most interesting part, especially. Thanks in advance!
What would your sideboarding look like for death and taxes? With your list I would bring in the 2 kozileks return, 2 abrade, 3 sulfur elemental, and 2 spy glass. But what would you cut? I know the chalices definitely. Maybe some number of moons? I don’t like cutting too many moons because wasteland and port can be difficult to get around especially with a Thalia out.
Thanks for the thought out response.Quote:
Originally Posted by korstructure
On Hazoret: As of right now, I wouldn't consider any other split in my configuration. She is just so absurdly strong in some matchups, and does a good job of turning weaknesses into strengths. She converts your extra lockpeices and mana into direct, untargeted damage. She also fills the same rabblemaster role of closing the game quickly when you struggle to get a full lock in place. I used to run 3, but the P&K are similar on power level and provide some other needed options, so I guess 2 Haz, and 1 P&K is my "split" already.
On Rabblemaster: I would not right off the other versions of this deck. I think the sweeper version could be better in some more defined metas. For me, I philosophically design for an open meta. Sure, its weighted in some ways, but I don't like the concept of trying to shark a specific room. As such, I favor questions over answers in game 1. In the sideboarded games, the rabblemasters will often come out because I know what answer to be using. One thing to take note of is that what we see are the high end finishes of a tournament, not the whole room. Right now, Delver is the top dog. As such, less combo decks will find their ways to the top table, as Delver beats up on most combo decks pretty badly. But that doesn't mean that the combo decks weren't in the event. The two main reasons I have stuck with my version are closing speed and higher floor. Basically, if I am wrong with the medium planeswalkers and sweepers version, I am unable to close games as quickly, thus making the lock more important. Additionally, if I am playing the sweepers version, I can be extremely punished by drawing narrow cards like rolling earthquake that have great power, but limited scope. A rabblemaster on the other hand, has less of a chance of being a dead card in my eyes, and in a deck with no selection, that is important to me.
On Win Percentages: Sadly, I don't keep them anymore. I will start again. However, I can tell you that it is pretty high. If I had to eyeball it, I would say somewhere in the 70-80% range. However, the matchups play a large part in this. This deck has the most polarizing matchups I have seen in a "competitive" deck. I have 6 losses to RG Lands in 6 years of playing only this deck, and I have played that matchup a lot. Meanwhile, Death and Taxes and Sneak and Show are like 20% for me. And I don't mean that in a exaggerated way. I would say I roughly win 1 of 5 matches against D&T. Basically, I won the classic because I was able to win one of my worst matchups. I don't want to say it's fate or anything like that, but you are extremely likely to win your good matchups and extremely unlikely to lose your bad ones. That said, if I am looking at the top 25 decks listed on MTGGoldfish, I consider myself the favorite in 20 of them, even in 2 of them, and wildly unfavored in 3 of them. DNSolver said 80% more as a joke at me for the record. We play locally together, and he is just constantly commenting on how he never sees me lose. 80% would be over what I eyeball it at, though I hope to get some real numbers back soon.
On Delver: I board basically the same against most delver decks. They are different decks, but they interact with me on an incredibly similar axis. On the play, I board out 4 rabbles, 1 hazoret and 1 bridge and bring in 2 K-Returns, 2 Quicksmith Rebels and 2 abrades. On the draw I cut 4 rabbles and 2 chrome mox. This is kinda experimental at the moment. My reasoning that that I will never be able to play around daze when I am on the draw, so spending action cards into moxs to get things dazed is going to cost you the game often. So instead I just play a slower game and take advantage of the fact that even at a slower pace, almost every spell is a nightmare for them.
I bring in those 9 and also the two Quicksmith Rebels. I cut 4 Rabbles, 2 Trinisphere, 4 Magus, 1 Moon. I leave all the chalices in because my game plan is basically to build a house of cards. Chalice is very meh, but the ability to stop swords to plowshares is very important, as that card is there way of stopping sulfur elementals and quicksmith rebels. The matchup is bad, but you can steal games by soft locking them using some combo of bridge + chandra or chalice + Rebel/Elemental.Quote:
Originally Posted by SDBobPlissken
Wow, thanks for your responses. That's really helpful! And yeah, I didn't know your history with the deck until recently but I'm glad to get a bit of Stompy history through my research. Was cool to listen to your SCG Moggcatcher deck tech side-by-side with your recent podcast interview.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZTurgeon
Much like your opinion on Rabblemaster... I have many questions to ask, haha. Feel free to respond/not respond to any of the following:
I see what you're saying about Rabblemaster, that makes sense. I think it's close. I'm considering this deck for GP Seattle. With that said, though the combo decks DO exist in this metagame, might a prospective Stompy player seek to gain % points in matchups they would likely encounter in later rounds? Those decks being fair counterspell/discard decks. Further, I wonder exactly how much better additional walkers and Rolling Earthquake are than Rabblemaster in those matchups. Hm, more pondering to do here.
Your comparison of this deck to Charbelcher is spot on. The idea that you're an all-in deck that gets to preserve some resources after "going for it" is an amazing comparison. I feel the same way. To that end, I've sometimes thought of using a card like Defense Grid (taking a page out of SnS's manual). Have you ever considered it? It could be our Xantid Swarm. I recognize that this takes away from our Turn 1 plan, but slowing down by a turn may be OK if it means ANY spell resolves. Just starting some conversation to see if it's worth exploring.
Sulfur Elemental - DNT is definitely a tough matchup (though made better by Rolling Earthquake). You also mentioned that Sulfur comes in against Miracles to provide an additional threat. Do you think it still might be too narrow/not impactful enough? I agree that if it's not Sulfur, Faerie Macabre is a good choice in that spot.
Discard - Not having enough experience with this deck, I'm not sure how threatening Hymn and Thoughtseize are. What are your experiences like? I've seen some builds with 8x Leylines and I could see Leyline of Sanctity being an OK choice. Any thoughts here?
One thing that I've started to develop as I've played this deck is a feel for mulligans and sequencing. Watching your streams has been tremendously helpful to see/hear your reasoning behind keeps and mulls and sequencing. Would it be too big of an ask to prioritize how you evaluate hands?
Something like:
- The best hand can cast a t1 Moon effect with SSG for daze backup
- If not, it can cast a t1 Rabblemaster
- If not, it can cast a t2 Chalice, etc
And:
- Against an unknown opponent lead with Chalice on 1
- If not, then Blood Moon
- If not, then Rabblemaster
@Zturgeon congrats first of all! I love the deck and love your 75 but let me ask you about a couple of cards as I am pretty sure you have already considered them.
- Walking Ballista: have you tried it? I think it may improve Delver and DnT matchups while also attacking through a Bridge. Was thinking as a 1 of instead of Pia and Kira or the 2nd Hazoret.
- Sword of Fire and Ice: if the plan is to put pressure and go aggro while setting up our lock (blood moon + chalice, etc) I think this is an extra boost. Draw card + 2 damage is pretty sweet. I think we have enough threats to justify this (a simple Simian with this is pretty dangerous) and also fits well with Pia and Kira flying tokens. Maybe 1 instead of the 4th Bridge as in this aggro version Bridge is sometimes a dead card in hand (maybe 3 is just enough).
- Volcanic Fallout: why Kozilek's Return instead? I see it is easier to cast and can beat Mother of Runs, but against delver decks it should be way worst than Volcanic.
I think I know the answer to questions 2 and 3, but I do not speak for Zac :laugh:
All his non-lock/non-mana pieces need to apply pressure by themselves. SoFaI is a bomb, but does diddly without something there to carry it.
Death & Taxes is a terrible matchup for this deck, meanwhile Delver decks are something this deck preys on. Given that, it makes sense to prioritize a colorless sweeper over an uncounterable one.
Many thanks @Ace/Homebrew, it makes perfect sense to me!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace/Homebrew
He's right on questions 2-3.Quote:
Originally Posted by James_P
As for Ballista, I did try it, but it never did much. It's cute and does some cool things, but unfortunately it just gets pushed most of the time. This deck is very good at doing things like stranding pushes and other specific removal, and Ballista plays against that. I could see it as a 1 of, but p&k have been really good and you get enough for your 4 mana upfront that the game normally ends by the time walking ballista would surpass it in damage potential.
Discard normally isn't too bad. Obviously it will pick apart some hands, but you dump your cards so quickly that they have 2-3 turns to make you discard anything, and even then, you can normally peice together some type of lock or overwhelming board presence.Quote:
Originally Posted by korstructure
As for a flowchart of turn 1s, in the dark my options are as follows.
Moon with Chalice on 0
Magus with Chalice on 1
Moon
Magus
Chalice on 1
Trinisphere
Rabble
With all of the above, if you can also play Chandra, you should obviously do so. It only takes 5 cards to Chandra on turn 1 + chalice, so it happens more often than you would think.
Interesting cards for us from the Dominaria leak.
Damping Sphere
2
Artifact
If a land is tapped for two or more mana, it produces C instead of any other type and amount.
Each spell a player casts costs 1 more to cast for each other spell that player has cast this turn.
________
For how powerful the effect is I think it being a slight nonbo with sol lands hardly matters. We already turn them into mountains anyway. Hoses storm, elves, tons of decks. Even slows the tempo plan significantly if deployed early enough. Pyromancer therapy therapy costs 6 mana.
________
Karn, Scion of Urza
4
Legendary Planeswalker — Karn
5
+1: Reveal the top two cards of your library. An opponent chooses one of them. Put that card into your hand and exile the other with a silver counter on it.
−1: Put a card you own with a silver counter on it from exile into your hand.
−2: Create a 0/0 colorless Construct artifact creature token with "This creature gets +1/+1 for each artifact you control."
Damping Sphere: I think that our Elves and Storm matchups are already quite good. What we really need is some SNS and DNT hate. Being marginally good against Delver decks or other cantrip decks seems only... OK. I could be wrong about that last point.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkfrosting
Karn: What a sweet card. Unfortunately, I think Chandra, Pyromaster might be better. For the same CMC as Chandra, Torch, we only get some situational card advantage. The "win con" mode is a nonbo with Ensnaring Bridge, unfortunately. Though it might be OK if we need a 3/3 or 4/4 blocker?
Here is a more significant shift for this deck though...
Planeswalker Targeting Rule: This change makes it so that neither Fiery Confluence NOR Rolling Thunder can kill a planeswalker. Resolved Jaces, Lilianas, and opposing Chandras are now much harder to kill - we have to attack them or Spyglass them. I've never really tracked how often I do this, but it seems bad for us.
In light of this change, one potential card for us is a bonfire-type card:
Jaya's Immolating Inferno
XRR
Legendary Sorcery
(You may cast a legendary sorcery only if you control a legendary creature or planeswalker.)
Jaya's Immolating Inferno deals X damage to each of up to three targets.
This would require us to resolve and maintain a Chandra in play, and that might make this card strictly "win more" as a result.
Thoughts on how significant this change is for us?