Ponder is better than Preordane. Preordane is sometimes better with Top, Brainstorm, and Jace, but not always, and Ponder is better on its own.
Printable View
Ponder is better than Preordane. Preordane is sometimes better with Top, Brainstorm, and Jace, but not always, and Ponder is better on its own.
The argument of Ponder over Preordain has always boiled down to Ponder is better at finding the single good card you need, and Preordain ups overall card quality as you can keep the good cards and bottom the rest, and not be stuck with blank cards. I think having better overall card quality is better than finding a specific card in a deck like this where your goal is to get to late-game on the back of your superior spells.Quote:
Originally Posted by YamiJoey
I guess..?
Let's walk through each case:
Scry 2; keep both. You get one of the cards, you only know the next card, vs the next two. This is suboptimal for fetches and Ponder is strictly better in this scenario; especially if card 3 is preferable to card 2.
Scry 2; keep neither. Strictly worse than Ponder
Scry 2; keep one. You dig two cards, get one that you want and have no other knowledge. By keeping one and getting rid of one you got the card you would've with Ponder while getting rid of the one you didn't want; however Ponder would give you an extra +1 card to see; and you could've swapped these cards. This is the case you mention, and Preordain seems mildly better but only on the back of your ignorance of your next draw. If it was terrible, you kept a bad card on top while getting rid of one card, where Ponder could've shuffled two bad cards away if you weren't desperate for said answer.
So in 2/3rds of cases, Ponder is strictly better (higher dig, better information.) In 1/3rd of cases I'd say it's debatable. I'd rather have a card that is better most of the time and debatably worse some of the time than a card that preys on my ignorance of topdecks to feel good.
Ponder will always have the higher skill cap because having more options and more knowledge means a better player can outplay the problem better than a worse player can substitute a card.
It's nice for you to do analysis and all, but shouldn't we factor in the fact that draw a card without the knowledge of top-card will always be a risk of drawing unwanted Miracle cards? Didn't we discuss this earlier?Quote:
Originally Posted by tescrin
I think Ponders are only better against midrange creature decks, which are half the format at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnziD
I think the real reason ponder is better is that it is far better with top, allowing you to see a potential 6 cards versus only three when it really matters. Furthermore, Ponder lets you delay a miracle for an extra turn over preordain, which is also highly relevant early game.
I don't see any real advantage over preordain. The only thing preordain does better is let you filter through 1 card when you know 1 card is good and 1 card is not, or filter through 2 when the third card is good. In these cases Ponder would force you to get 1 good and at least one bad card. But, you always have the extra shuffle effect, which is huge. Plus the upside of Preordain when you consider also the usefulness of fetches with Ponder becomes significantly less. I really can't actually see any reason why you would want preordain over Ponder. Yes, there are a couple situations where Preordain might be exactly what you need, but such cases are very small considering that Ponder most often matches the usefulness of Preordain, or better, but gives you far more powerful options in many other scenarios.
Im running a single Dig just to try it out and it's been perfect so far. Flashing it back with snapcaster is very powerful actually.
I was referring to Ponder v. Spell Pierce, but yeah, I used to run Preordain over Ponder. I initially figured it was better when you had no top, and thought that it was nice to be able to clear out some, but not all of the card on top of your deck. Then I realized that I valued stacking the top of my deck moreso than drawing any specific 1 card, and you essentially can't stack Terminus or Entreat with Preordain unless you leave both cards on top. Preordain is really only better if you want to go Top/Bottom, whereas the Ponder + Fetchland lets you go Top/Bot/Bot, or even Top/Top/Bot. Plus if it goes to lategame and you're digging for outs, you're going to kick yourself for only looking 2 deep because you chose a Preordain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtrix
They still both feel like Gitaxian Probe style filler to me. Not synergistic enough to be considered engine pieces like Brainstorm/Top (a cantrip for U that shuffles your library, really?), but they still impose a real opportunity cost in that they don't cycle for free. I feel like good players come into Legacy and gravitate towards simplistic creature decks that allow them to port over their playstyle and skill, and replacing specialized silver bullets like Spell Pierce/Red Blast with Ponders will result in better percentages against the midrange decks that are inherently weak to your engine. But not covering your bases comes with it's own set of weakness, and I think that if things like "Oh, it's Miracles, I don't have to respect Spell Pierce" becomes a forethought, you'll see that version pay the price. Sort of like in current Standard where Quicken-Revelation decks formed the "ultimate" goldfish engine, but had a glaring weaknesses that players could exploit, on account of not running Detention Sphere.
Take Infect, for example. It's not by much, but I think I'd rather run Pierce or Blasts over Ponders, which want me to tap my only blue mana on early turns that my opponent is waiting to 1-shot me while I'm bottlenecked on mana. Also, imagine playing a mirror match where you know you're opponent has no Spell Pierce! I'm dropping Turn 2 CB and Turn 4 Jace all day.
And you got no Cliques?
Alrightey, exams are done, I'm back on track for Legacy.
I'll go ahead and answer a few questions in the next few days (not all of them, cause many are just... *bluuurgh*), drop a few pieces of information here and there and let you know how my testing for #GPNJ is going.
Greetings
I'm running Chi Hoi Yim's list in a GPT tomorrow. There will likely be between 14 and 20 players, and I know someone is coming with MUD. Should I be worried? I'm thinking of trying to find room for a Serenity in the board, but I don't know if I'm overestimating how much I should fear MUD. I don't have a lot of play experience against it, but I do know how the deck works.
edit: probably just scaring myself =P
edit2: list for reference
2 Tundra
1 Volcanic Island
5 Island
2 Plains
2 Karakas
4 Flooded Strand
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Arid Mesa
1 Mountain
3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
3 Counterbalance
4 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Counterspell
1 Council's Judgment
4 Terminus
2 Entreat the Angels
1 Spell Pierce
1 Pyroblast
3 Vendilion Clique
1 Venser, Shaper Savant
2 Snapcaster Mage
4 Brainstorm
3 Swords to Plowshares
4 Force of Will
---
2 Flusterstorm
1 Keranos, God of Storms
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Rest in Peace
1 Pyroblast
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Venser, Shaper Savant
1 Supreme Verdict
1 Pyroclasm
1 Pithing Needle
1 Wear // Tear
1 Izzet Staticaster
1 Council's Judgement
1 Blood Moon
My life time record vs MUD in high-level competitive tournaments is 0-1-1, just saying. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by exallium
Greetings
Hahaha. That's fair. I played with your list vs MUD the other night, and it felt a little rough. Chalice on One is super annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Einherjer
I'm definitely not worried about coming across it in NJ, but given this event is going to be so small, I feel like I should be a little prepared for the meta.
What I know is that the following decks SHOULD be present (at least):
Merfolk
MUD
Death and Taxes
2x Elves
Sneak and Show
Elves I'm not worried about in the least, and to a good extent Merfolk as well. With Chi's build, I'm also not worried about Death and Taxes, as Pyroclasm and Staticaster are both amazing answers to their deck, along with the MD karakas. Furthermore, I'm not worried about Sneak and Show. This deck is rock solid vs. combo nonsense.''
Edit: Julian Knab just mentioned how you can end up kicking yourself from trying to metagame and not going with a general approach. Might take that to heart.
Is there an updated Matchups sections somewhere in this 293 pages?
I personally prefer the non ponder version of the deck, Vendillion is just too good. Playing the Ponder build felt like I was doing nothing but looking for CB and SDT
As far as I know, there isn't. The primer of this thread still needs a huge update. I believe Ein was going to work on an updated primer a while ago, but I'm sure he got busy with other things like life in addition to magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by veeohla
Check out Ein's SCG articles (links are in his signature)Quote:
Originally Posted by veeohla
I believe I read his (ponder list right?)Quote:
Originally Posted by exallium
Yup. If you're looking for good info on the Legendary build (with Cliques and Venser) watch Chi Hoi Yim's coverage from last weekend, as well as Joe Losset's stream at twitch (twitch.tv/oarsman79)Quote:
Originally Posted by veeohla
I watched SCG Legacy every weekend. Checking out who plays what and what to expect for GP NJ lolQuote:
Originally Posted by exallium
knowing someone is hard on Elves or DnT or anything that won't turn 1 FoW/Daze my SDT is okay to know I guess.
I still don't know why Brad Nelson didn't Daze that Snapcaster... I mean Chi Hoi just Brainstormed... Daze wins the game at that point unless Chi Hoi really pulls a miracle lolQuote:
Originally Posted by exallium
Wierd things start to happen when it's 2AM and you're in your 12th or so hour of legacy. Sometimes you miss things, or you misjudge the gamestate.Quote:
Originally Posted by veeohla