Printable View
@Brael: I moved it to Nice-to-haves for a reason :wink:. I'm also under the impression it isn't really needed (I like to make sure I can get some form of lifegain from GSZ X = 1 through 4) but others feel differently, which is reason enough for me to take it seriously. It's just probably not a requirement that is solved by the SB itself but by the SB'ing tables we'll have to come up with at some point.
Just for my own curiosity, 1) how good has Tracker been for its advocates?
2) in what situation do you play him against each deck?
3) is it a (good but) situational card just like Nissa has proved to be? (This is what I think at the moment)
I admit that I am a boring person and that I often am narrow minded, and that is the reason I am asking, to broaden my orizons: I need to break my way of thinking, that is "Give me a good and valid reason to GSZ for this card instead of Rhino (or Sigarda)".
At the moment this way of reasoning has its only exceptions in card like witness (instant value, can instantly win the game) or teeg (hate-lock piece needed to avoid death the following turn) or Drs and ooze (hate piece against gy strategies).
I am obsessed by the "Rhino or gtfo" paradox. Help
That reason often'll be:Quote:
Originally Posted by rubblekill
- I don't have enough mana to GSZ for Rhino/Sigarda and I want to start pressing advantage now
- I have a fetchland in my hand and want to stock up on some gas
- I want to get this GSZ through that Daze my opponent is holding
- I suspect my opponent will FoW my GSZ if I cast it for Rhino/Sigarda so let's try X = 3
- I want to protect another card in my hand from their removal and preferably want to get something out of the exchange
- YOLO
Sounds right, thanks. I'll take note of thisQuote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
If that's the case, then I'm not sure what you're asking for. How is "need at least 10 cards for Storm" not pushing the SB in a certain direction? or "must have a card that answers cmc>3 enchantmens"? Are creature decks and graveyard decks not significant decks in the metagame we need to be prepared for, like Storm and enchantments cmc>3?Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not angry or having a go. I just must be clearly misunderstanding you, and I want to understand. I'm confused. Why is 10 cards for storm a must have, but two cards for graveyard decks nice to have? What kind of other requirements are you looking for?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
Draw spells or planeswalkers. Cards that are usually immune to creature removal that draw you more cards or give you continuous card like effects. Things that aren't answered by bolt, StP, decay, terminus or our own deeds. I can't really think of any enchantments/atifacts/creatures that fit that description, and mass removal spells don't draw you more cards or give you continuous effects, so I just shorthand to draw spells or planeswalkers. Maybe thats too narrow thinking for you though, so I just wrote "grindy card advantage effects" in case you objected :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
@Rubblekill, yea tracker has done its job very well for me so far, being a gsun target that can draw 4+ cards where a rhino would draw none. Whether thats an effect you think the deck needs is a different question :)
It's fine, I know you're not having a go or anything :smile:. The differense you ask about is rather subtle. 10 cards for the Storm MU said nothing of what the cards specifically should do, there are plenty of ways to fuck with Storm and all are valid as long as they meet that criterium. Under this requirement even Wasteland is a valid option, for example. And Storm really is a big, giant problem. We often maindeck some tools to battle creature and graveyard decks. Dredge for example already is pretty even G1 since we tend to run DRS, Scavenging Ooze, Pernicious Deed, sacrifice effects and PtEs (exile their Ichorids before they enter their main phase and watch the deck fall apart). Even Cabal Therapy on either LED or Breakthrough is a valid play. Not all MUs're 50/50 or better, but few are as bad as Storm and even less are as hated as Miracles. Besides, thorough GY hate can be considered as anti-Storm card, so it's not that you can't run it. I just want to focus more on "What fucks with Storm" and less on "What fucks with a GY, b/c fuck graveyards". We might come up with exactly the same SB, but with a different mindset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
The main reason I accepted the must kill enchantments/artifacts > 3 mana requirement is b/c it is a card that will also surely see play vs. Miracles. I know it says "Thou shalt play at least 1 Qasali Pridemage or Reclamation Sage in your 75" :wink:.
Oh so your aim for your requirements was specifically for miracles and storm? I didn't realise that. I think that's off for two reasons:
1) because you still need cards for other matches? Why not change my points to "2 cards for graveyard decks", "2 cards for creature decks". Its a given that those cards might (will) overlap, just like you said the miracles and storm cards will overlap.
2) Also I don't understand why you're worried about storm so much. I've never been a dog against storm. I've always found the match up to be 50/50 and don't really need to revolutionise my sidebaord plan to "fix" it. The plan being, abundance of 1 cmc discard, Gsun into teeg, backed up by minor lock pieces like extractions, other hate bears and sweepers for their backup goblins plan. I play against storm regularly online and have a good friend who pilots both versions.
I didn't realise other people were having such trouble with it. Is it really a big problem here for everyone? Maybe because your curves are higher, and you run less discard?
Edit: just checked my notes and I haven't lost to it online, but I'll still call it 50/50 because my notes only cover recently.
Some people struggle with Shardless BUG, others find Grixis Delver difficult, ANT/TES is my nemesis (partly b/c one of the worlds best Storm pilots just happens to frequent our LGS and also helps other Storm pilots there hone their skills). My record vs. that archetype is truly beyond dreadful. And I run the same amount of discard as anybody else. I've only recently acquired my Canonists though, so that might help the next time I face ANT/TES. Mind you, I've managed to lose after opening with T1 DRS followed up by T2 Surgical his cantrip (to look at his hand), Therapy on Infernal Tutor, flashback Therapy on Chain of Vapor, Gaddock Teeg (yes, that was my T2).Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
I guess the focus on those 2 particular MUs is b/c those are the ones I want to improve most and b/c there are very few other things I fear to face (ergo don't want to spend specific sideboard slots on. I'm fine with just having splash damage for those MUs). But just trust me on this one - the demanded overlap in the current requirements model is quite likely to fill in the nice-to-haves automatically.
Against storm I board in: teeg, 2x canonist, 1-2 discard spells (depends on how many ts i play main, usually 1-2 for a 3 ts total in g2-3), 2x surgical, 3 games.
If we count games as dedicated storm hate i board in 9-10 cards.
Do I pass the exam echelon?
With a gold star, good sir!Quote:
Originally Posted by rubblekill
Before I had my Canonists I boarded in Teeg, 3 Duress, 2 Surgical Extraction, 1 Rest in Peace and 2 Golgari Charm. It just wouldn't do.
Next time (based on my current SB) I'll probably board in Gaddock Teeg, 2 Canonist, 3 Duress, 2 Surgical Extraction and 2 Golgari Charm. If that doesn't do it I'm bringing lighter fluid and a match as my next SB.
I seeeeee, I didn't realise this process was so focused on your experiences :P I also disagree that cards in the storm matchup can not be 3 cmc simply because you will end up boarding in 3 cmc sweepers that answer goblin tokens to completely nullify one aspect of their strategy. But I guess ignoring those two outlying slots, cmc 2 or less is a good rule of thumb.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
Also I thought the point of adding more requirements was to narrow us down to cards that can then only fit those requirements? Otherwise, I don't think anyone can think of any more requirements so we should move on to the next step?
There're also 2 CMC sweepers that do the same and also have function in the Miracles MU :wink:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
The point of adding more requirements was to narrow down what functions we want a set of cards to fulfill, not to narrow down what cards we want to run :smile:. We want to narrow down those functions as much as possible while putting as few restrictions as possible on the cards we use to perform those functions. SE boils down to specifying what functions a solution should be able to perform without specifying what the solution should be (let this one sink in for a second).
I'm fine with moving this to the next step.
Golgari charm isn't good against miracles (if only terminus said destroy instead of tuck :( . Savvy players side our their counterbalances, and it's not like we need more answer to balance between decay, deed and our Gsun enchantment hate target. Also golgari charm doesn't kill flipped delvers, drs, most eldrazi etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
And I guess I still don't get it then. Should our sideboard solution not function against graveyard decks, creature decks and midrange decks? Is that not a requirement of our sideboard solution? If you are only building a sideboard to deal with Miracles and storm, then I guess I'm not interested and will bow out of this particular discussion.
I'm not saying it shouldn't function vs. those decks, I'm saying that those decks will likely get enough splash damage from the set requirements to fullfill the nice-to-haves (that include those decks) and I'm not including them as hard requirements to prevent us from spending too many SB slots on already at least 50/50 MUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
Am I making any sense?
As for Golgari Charm - its value is dependant of your opponent as far as the Miracles MU is concerned. As for Delver and DRS - I don't care about those and sure as hell don't feel the need to board in more answers vs. those things. Resolve a Rhino (or two) or your own DRS/Scavenging Ooze and ignore those things. As for Eldrazi - is paying 5 life to get rid of something that just smacked you in the face for 5 damage really where you want to be..? Life is a resource, but that way you run out of it really quick.
Here it seems that you didn't lose by lack of cards against storm, but by misplaying them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
Starting with surgical may be OKish, but not great. I assume you were OTP? Was the cantrip preordain (in which case I believe it was a misplay to surgical it), or a ponder (in which case it is a good play to surgical it, but only if they did not shuffle)? If it was a BS, the only reason I can see for an ANT player to cast on their turn a T1 BS is to kill t1, and you can immediately name LED, saving your SE.
But the real misplay here is to flashback this therapy. You had an excellent grave control with SE + DRS, and you lose it all. You also lose half of your clock. Was there something threatening in the hand? If yes, flashbacking on it could be a better idea. If not, why not just use Teeg + DRS to put a clock while shrinking the grave, and flashback it a couple of turns later?
It was a Preordain, I wasn't particularly happy about it either. I had to flashback Therapy then and there, he had both the Tutor and a way to get rid of Teeg (the Chain of Vapor) in hand with a bunch of gas to back it all up.Quote:
Originally Posted by dte
I fell for the old Cabal Therapy trap - I forgot it's OK to miss when you name the card you fear most since that means they don't have it either way. On a blind Therapy I would've named Infernal Tutor anyway. Anyways - the Storm pilot in question came up with an even more beautiful solution. I also had 3 GSZ in my hand at the time so after the T1 DRS I should have cast GSZ for X = 1, get Veteran Explorer, cast and flashbacked Therapy, Surgicaled his Infernal Tutor and dropped Teeg with the lands from Veteran Explorer. Oh, hindsight. It was a good learning experience.
From my understanding of magic theory written in many articles/books/podcasts, it's usually better to spend a few slots in your sideboard to up the 50/50 matchups than to dedicate many slots against decks you are a dog against. I think people have even done some math on it, google: science of sideboarding. I guess we shall agree to disagree and let you move on with your process.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
Regarding deluge/charm... you use it on the little guys (mimic, small endless ones, reshaper, displacer, revoker etc) so you can save your targeted stuff for the 4/4s and 5/5s, but yes in dire straits it can get the big guys too. ie, options/influence where golgari charm would have none. Same applies to the tribal decks where charm doesn't kill much. Securing 50/50 matchups. There are other reasons too, like midrange, but I guess again we can agree to disagree and move on.
Edit: Regarding your storm matchup, I guess I have to question your opinion on the matchup if you're supporting your argument with examples of clear misplays :/
Edit 2: I'm just going to stop haha, apologies, you keep doing what it is you want to do, and I'll avoid the criticisms otherwise we will be here all day.
I can hate it b/c I suck at it, lol! Maybe I'll just make a SB consisting of 4 Orim's Chant, 4 Silence, 4 Mindbreak Trap and 3 other cards and then face anyDelver.dec all day long. Or, you know, 4 Thoughtseize, 4 Duress, 4 Hymn to Tourach and whatever tickles my fancy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
I'm perfectly fine with your criticisms, feel free to continue good sir.
Concerning the SB stuff - it'll work out in the end, just bare with me :smile:.
Okay, cool.
I guess what I'm driving at is that the SE fit build was designed from the bottom up as a general all purpose new look at the deck for everyone to learn from.
For this sideboard you seem to be building it entirely for yourself and based on your own experiences. That's not much useful for the rest of us. Maybe it will be in the end, but it isnt from your starting objectives, which is unlike the SE main deck build. Hence the confusion.
I get your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
I want to keep the SE SB as simple as possible. When you try and expand it to address every MU known to man we'll either start fumbling on "But it can't be done" or the complexity becomes bigger than the attention span the average forum can hold and it all falls down to people blasting through the entire process in a single post (as happened earlier this week).
On one hand this SB addresses a couple of MUs I hate but at the same time do I rarely run into those MUs (especially since some people in the LGS might be on Eldrazi right now to push those decks out even further) so what do I really gain from it? Heck, that's probably a good part of my problem. I don't face them enough to learn how to properly deal with them. I guess I'll have to convince my usual punching bag to switch from Grixis Delver to ANT/TES/Miracles.