Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attac...3&d=1390453342
That's a weird one. I doubt Burn would run it, even in the sideboard.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attac...4&d=1390453365
Can't see a reason why one would run it over Disenchant.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Barook
Burning Wish. Still just a reprint
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Revoke Existence is for Standard, so they have a way to deal with those indestructible gods.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Same with Gild.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Although with respect to Legacy, it might be worth a shot if your meta has a lot of Stoneblade in it since Academy Ruins can be a bitch.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2Rach
Although with respect to Legacy, it might be worth a shot if your meta has a lot of Stoneblade in it since Academy Ruins can be a bitch.
Good idea! Sure solves their Spell Snares, Spell Pierces and FoW in their hand and their Delver/TNN bashing your face! Evoke Existance's sorcery-speed isn't a problem for "eot Batterskull" or "in response: bounce Batterskull" either!
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
Good idea! Sure solves their Spell Snares, Spell Pierces and FoW in their hand and their Delver/TNN bashing your face! Evoke Existance's sorcery-speed isn't a problem for "eot Batterskull" or "in response: bounce Batterskull" either!
All of those are a problem for most other spells you'd use, taking a hit from a BSkull isn't the end of the game, and if they're at the point of keeping up 3 mana Disenchant won't do anything either. I said "might be worth a shot" against one deck if you're seeing a lot of it in your meta. I didn't say it was the second coming of christ. It has an upside that is worth at least testing out. Relax.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2Rach
All of those are a problem for most other spells you'd use, taking a hit from a BSkull isn't the end of the game, and if they're at the point of keeping up 3 mana Disenchant won't do anything either. I said "might be worth a shot" against one deck if you're seeing a lot of it in your meta. I didn't say it was the second coming of christ. It has an upside that is worth at least testing out. Relax.
Is was just pointing out, that the approach to deal with equipment after it entered the field is a losing strategy as we've seen since CAW blade ran rampant in Standard and you can notice today in Legacy despite all the Abrupt Decays and Manriki-Gusari around.
It's funny that such a large number of players dropped the best tools to fight SFM + TNN in favor of mindlessly following Owen's UWR Delver list, just to play the mirror all day, complaining that trading blows with TNN on each side of the table is boring and uninteractive.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
I really like that Satyr. I wish it was players, but too strong I guess... Turning everything to [card]Searing Blaze[/card] is nice I guess at least. Hard to say if he's better or worse than just searing blaze. I'll probably try him out in modern burn because of that insane creature control.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
It's funny that such a large number of players dropped the best tools to fight SFM + TNN in favor of mindlessly following Owen's UWR Delver list, just to play the mirror all day, complaining that trading blows with TNN on each side of the table is boring and uninteractive.
Perhaps you could consider the possibility that the deck gives them better EV to win a tournament. Also, TNN mirrors ARE boring and uninteractive, so that's true. If TNN was not a powerful card, it wouldn't be a problem for the format, but three months in, TNN is still dumping on the format, so people are taking the "join 'em" approach even if the mirror matches make them miserable.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ESG
Perhaps you could consider the possibility that the deck gives them better EV to win a tournament. Also, TNN mirrors ARE boring and uninteractive, so that's true. If TNN was not a powerful card, it wouldn't be a problem for the format, but three months in, TNN is still dumping on the format, so people are taking the "join 'em" approach even if the mirror matches make them miserable.
Just to make this clear: it's SFM + TNN what caused this misery and the whole thing disturbingly mirrors the Survival of the Fittest era. Rather than using their brain to combat that duo, they simply run it too, but complain that TNN + SFM is soooo overpowered and should be banned.
Seriously, complaining about those 2 cards and claiming that there are no solutions is as dumb as the whining about Survival was, not only because you can stop SFM with the same tools as Survival should have been hated out.
Boy, what's your EV of winning the mirror-match all day?
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
Is was just pointing out, that the approach to deal with equipment after it entered the field is a losing strategy as we've seen since CAW blade ran rampant in Standard and you can notice today in Legacy despite all the Abrupt Decays and Manriki-Gusari around.
It's funny that such a large number of players dropped the best tools to fight SFM + TNN in favor of mindlessly following Owen's UWR Delver list, just to play the mirror all day, complaining that trading blows with TNN on each side of the table is boring and uninteractive.
If that's your point then I'll just disagree with you completely. Should it be your only angle of defense against equipment based decks? Probably not the best way to go about it. But it's definitely a viable pillar of defense against such. If plan A always worked, plan B wouldn't be a concept.
Abrupt Decay and Manriki, while the more popular choices for tertiary-type destruction, have their own significant drawbacks.
One, Abrupt Decay literally can't destroy Batterskull. More than that, it is removal that needs to be shared between opposing creatures that are threats, so sometimes you can't wait for that equipment to pop up or it may not even be the main threat by the time it does. You don't always get to sequence your removal(lightning bolt for this, abrupt decay for that). It suffers from its own versatility.
Let's say Jimmy is building a BG/X deck and decides he wants enchantment/artifact destruction in the deck. He decides on four Abrupt Decays, versatile, gets widely played creatures and a myriad of other great permanents right? Jimmy thinks to himself "four cards that can naturalize something". This is wrong because of what I stated earlier. He'll need to share targets of Abrupt Decays, so 2 creatures die and another 2 art/enchs are destroyed with his 4 Decays. Now think if Jimmy decided not to add Abrupt Decay, or didn't have it as an option, he would need to fill the desired quotas of creature removal and of arti/ench removal. The way to do this of course would be to add 3-4 Doom Blades(ie) and 3-4 Naturalizes. In this case while objectively less powerful than Abrupt Decays would be, it enables the deck to have an actual 3-4 of each type of removal spell instead of the aforementioned split of 2/2(effectively).
Now, could Jimmy just have 4 Abrupt Decays and then add 2-4 more Doom Blades/Naturalizes? Yes, and this would be better. But some deck builders don't look at Abrupt Decay that way. They see four Abrupt Decays equating to four doom blades and four naturalizes even though this isn't accurate.
Manriki suffers from similar problems. Why do people play Stoneforge Mystic? To get good equipment. If you get good equipment with it you miss your opportunity to get Manriki. If you don't get Manriki your disenchant effect goes from an effective 5(1 Manriki+4 Mystic) to a 1-of. So while you might save room in your sideboard(1 Manriki vs 2-3 Disenchant effects), in an actual game it can be a liability. Another issue is that if you need something to destroy a resolved equipment(2 common ones which can destroy creatures, Jitte and SOFI), you're usually not the one in control atm. Meaning you might not have that non-summoning sick creature to put it on, might need a blocker instead of tapping it, they have removal for the creature so you can't equip and activate Manriki, or they have their own artifact removal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Just to make this clear: it's SFM + TNN what caused this misery and the whole thing disturbingly mirrors the Survival of the Fittest era. Rather than using their brain to combat that duo, they simply run it too, but complain that TNN + SFM is soooo overpowered and should be banned.
People who say that are wrong. TNN's warping the meta is soooo overstated.
Look at the last 2 top 16s. A good showing but not to much different than before TNN with other tier 1 decks. The decks that run it often run it as a 2-of. Some decks that can run it and that it might even be good for don't. BUG or UR or what have you. The adjusted meta even brought different decks like a couple Jund Depths to the forefront.
Uninteractive? Yes. Powerful? Yes. Overbearing? Not at all. It's just another great, power wise, card in the Legacy meta. A solution isn't needed more than normal meta considerations of any other tier 1 decks/cards.
EDIT:
And the comparison to Survival is ridiculous. Vengevine Survival of various types always took 3+ spots in top 8s and usually first(iirc). It was actually very dominating. Now I agree to some extent that people didn't fight it off as hard as they should have, but it was definitely tier 1 vs everything else being in tier 2. True-Name Nemesis doesn't hold a candle to it.
EDIT:
And before someone says "multiple decks with TNN in top 8," this card doesn't equate to an archetype.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
It transcends archetypes. Now you have multiple variations of UWx mystic control decks out there with the same plan A as each other with fairly different plan B's.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2Rach
People who say that are wrong. TNN's warping the meta is soooo overstated.
Look at the last 2 top 16s. A good showing but not to much different than before TNN with other tier 1 decks. The decks that run it often run it as a 2-of. Some decks that can run it and that it might even be good for don't. BUG or UR or what have you. The adjusted meta even brought different decks like a couple Jund Depths to the forefront.
Uninteractive? Yes. Powerful? Yes. Overbearing? Not at all. It's just another great, power wise, card in the Legacy meta. A solution isn't needed more than normal meta considerations of any other tier 1 decks/cards.
EDIT:
And the comparison to Survival is ridiculous. Vengevine Survival of various types always took 3+ spots in top 8s and usually first(iirc). It was actually very dominating. Now I agree to some extent that people didn't fight it off as hard as they should have, but it was definitely tier 1 vs everything else being in tier 2. True-Name Nemesis doesn't hold a candle to it.
EDIT:
And before someone says "multiple decks with TNN in top 8," this card doesn't equate to an archetype.
This is almost exactly like survival. There were 5-7 survival decks all playable, all of them doing pretty much the same thing, and all of them required you to be playing a specific set of cards or strategies to beat. The fact that most aggro decks are complete garbage right now proves that something wrong with the current format.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lavafrogg
This is almost exactly like survival. There were 5-7 survival decks all playable, all of them doing pretty much the same thing, and all of them required you to be playing a specific set of cards or strategies to beat. The fact that most aggro decks are complete garbage right now proves that something wrong with the current format.
Yep.
Sent from my Desktop computer using keyboard. Disregard the sarcasm.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2Rach
If that's your point then I'll just disagree with you completely. Should it be your only angle of defense against equipment based decks? Probably not the best way to go about it. But it's definitely a viable pillar of defense against such. If plan A always worked, plan B wouldn't be a concept.
SFM is cardadvantage if resolved; you can destroy it or the equipment (or at least try against eot Batterskull). Fighting Equipment while Delver and TNN beat your face is as pointless as hoping to -1/-1 a TNN while a DRS or SFM beat you with equipment. Playing mediocre cards like the one in question to cover an unused angle (Academy Ruins) is pointless either
Abrupt Decay and Manriki, while the more popular choices for tertiary-type destruction, have their own significant drawbacks.
One, Abrupt Decay literally can't destroy Batterskull. More than that, it is removal that needs to be shared between opposing creatures that are threats, so sometimes you can't wait for that equipment to pop up or it may not even be the main threat by the time it does. You don't always get to sequence your removal(lightning bolt for this, abrupt decay for that). It suffers from its own versatility.
you CAN kill the Germ token! What was your point in this paragraph?
Let's say Jimmy is building a BG/X deck and decides he wants enchantment/artifact destruction in the deck. He decides on four Abrupt Decays, versatile, gets widely played creatures and a myriad of other great permanents right? Jimmy thinks to himself "four cards that can naturalize something". This is wrong because of what I stated earlier. He'll need to share targets of Abrupt Decays, so 2 creatures die and another 2 art/enchs are destroyed with his 4 Decays. Now think if Jimmy decided not to add Abrupt Decay, or didn't have it as an option, he would need to fill the desired quotas of creature removal and of arti/ench removal. The way to do this of course would be to add 3-4 Doom Blades(ie) and 3-4 Naturalizes. In this case while objectively less powerful than Abrupt Decays would be, it enables the deck to have an actual 3-4 of each type of removal spell instead of the aforementioned split of 2/2(effectively).
Are you seriously pick up budget issues to prove a point here? Shall we discuss 3 Daze and 3 Foil as a replacement for 4 Force of Will next?
Now, could Jimmy just have 4 Abrupt Decays and then add 2-4 more Doom Blades/Naturalizes? Yes, and this would be better. But some deck builders don't look at Abrupt Decay that way. They see four Abrupt Decays equating to four doom blades and four naturalizes even though this isn't accurate.
you can run Decay + Maelstrom Pulse ... I don't understand your problem. Is it that there is no hate that kills TNN and Equipment?
Manriki suffers from similar problems. Why do people play Stoneforge Mystic? To get good equipment. If you get good equipment with it you miss your opportunity to get Manriki. If you don't get Manriki your disenchant effect goes from an effective 5(1 Manriki+4 Mystic) to a 1-of. So while you might save room in your sideboard(1 Manriki vs 2-3 Disenchant effects), in an actual game it can be a liability. Another issue is that if you need something to destroy a resolved equipment(2 common ones which can destroy creatures, Jitte and SOFI), you're usually not the one in control atm. Meaning you might not have that non-summoning sick creature to put it on, might need a blocker instead of tapping it, they have removal for the creature so you can't equip and activate Manriki, or they have their own artifact removal.
People who say that are wrong. TNN's warping the meta is soooo overstated.
Look at the last 2 top 16s. A good showing but not to much different than before TNN with other tier 1 decks.
you question that SFM + TNN established a supertype of Legacy decks?
The decks that run it often run it as a 2-of. Some decks that can run it and that it might even be good for don't. BUG or UR or what have you. The adjusted meta even brought different decks like a couple Jund Depths to the forefront.
check Deathblade; they all run 4
Uninteractive? Yes. Powerful? Yes. Overbearing? Not at all. It's just another great, power wise, card in the Legacy meta. A solution isn't needed more than normal meta considerations of any other tier 1 decks/cards.
EDIT:
And the comparison to Survival is ridiculous. Vengevine Survival of various types always took 3+ spots in top 8s and usually first(iirc). It was actually very dominating. Now I agree to some extent that people didn't fight it off as hard as they should have, but it was definitely tier 1 vs everything else being in tier 2. True-Name Nemesis doesn't hold a candle to it.
last SCG was 50% SFM+TNN in top 16. Check the numbers Arsenal presented.
SFM, Counterbalance/top and Survival all fold to Spell Snare and Pithing Needle. There are complaints about these 3 strategies during their time and still no one fucking plays Snare + Needle but rather whines in this forum and others. I do say, these 3 cards have a lot in common.
EDIT:
And before someone says "multiple decks with TNN in top 8," this card doesn't equate to an archetype.
No, SFM+TNN defines an archtype
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
In case people missed it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
SCG Columbus (342 players) -
http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12694
- 7 Blade Control/Deathblade/Patriot decks in the Top 16, 0 Jund decks.
SCG Orlando (239 players) -
http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12653
- 2 Patriot & 2 TNN UR Delver decks in the Top 16, 1 Jund deck.
SCG Indy (256 players) -
http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12597
- 4 Patriot decks in the Top 16, 0 Jund decks.
90 Duals Open HK (193 players) -
http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12577
- 2 DeathBlade decks in the Top 8, 0 Jund decks.
So in the most recent 4 tourneys that have 129+ players (following Bob's methodology), there were 17 TNN decks in the Top8/Top16 to Jund's 1. Even if you don't think Patriot or TNN UR Delver are "TNN-decks" (I firmly believe that Patriot is the premier TNN deck), then the number becomes 8 TNN-decks to Jund's 1. If that isn't Jund dropping off the face of the map, I don't know what is.
Lol at 2Rach telling people to look at the most recent Top 16s... "good showing" by TNN decks? The most recent Top 16 (SCG Columbus) had SEVEN TNN decks. If 43.8% of the Top 16 is only a "good showing", I want to know what dominance is. 75%? 95%?
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
I like how all three major variations of magical blacksmith chick w/swords and sneaky fish (UW, UWr, UWb) are performing relatively equally well.
But, I digress. This discussion should be relocated to the B/R topic.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lavafrogg
This is almost exactly like survival. There were 5-7 survival decks all playable, all of them doing pretty much the same thing, and all of them required you to be playing a specific set of cards or strategies to beat. The fact that most aggro decks are complete garbage right now proves that something wrong with the current format.
5-7? I only remember 2 that were dominating, unless you mean some of which existed before Vengevine was a thing. UG Vengevine and GB(/W?) Vengevine w/ Necrotic Ooze is what I remember dominating. Which are the rest?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
you CAN kill the Germ token! What was your point in this paragraph?
That usually doesn't work most of the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Are you seriously pick up budget issues to prove a point here? Shall we discuss 3 Daze and 3 Foil as a replacement for 4 Force of Will next?
you can run Decay + Maelstrom Pulse ... I don't understand your problem. Is it that there is no hate that kills TNN and Equipment?
They were examples, it wasn't about budget. It was about versatile cards and their expectations by the hypothetical deck builder. Abrupt Decay is usually carrying the brunt of non-creature removal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
check Deathblade; they all run 4
Yes, one deck. If it was all-powerful all the decks that could would run 4. The fact that there's a wide range of use, from 0!, to 2, to 3, to 4 means that it's not as bad as you all make it out to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
Lol at 2Rach telling people to look at the most recent Top 16s... "good showing" by TNN decks? The most recent Top 16 (SCG Columbus) had SEVEN TNN decks. If 43.8% of the Top 16 is only a "good showing", I want to know what dominance is. 75%? 95%?
They're not TNN decks.
UWR Delver was a thing before TNN. Did you call it a Geist of Saint Traft deck?
Stoneblade was a thing before TNN. Did you call it a Lingering Souls deck?
Deathblade was a thing before TNN. Did you call it a Dark Confidant deck?
BUG Delver was a thing before TNN. Did you call it an Abrupt Decay deck?
You're not following yourselves logically.
It's a good card with a wide range of uses. It's not a card that can be defined as an archetype.
But if we differ on this, let's just agree to disagree.
Re: [Born of the Gods] Spoiler Thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2Rach
They're not TNN decks.
Who cares what they should be called? They all run TNN and it's warping the meta towards decks with TNN / Anti-TNN decks / Decks that don't care about TNN (combo). Is that a healthy meta?
