Printable View
Lackey+misstep openers on the play are amazing. Either they have the misstep and you trade them, you hit their one drop with misstep and connect, or they have the force/snuff out and are down on card advantage or 4 life.
Edit: It also hits opposing missteps, and of course over 1/3rd of the format.
It's also worth noting that the biggest impact Mental Misstep has for Goblins isn't that Goblins can play it or Goblins can have it played against it. It's that this card's heavy presence is going to scare people away from a lot of the decks Goblins doesn't want to see.
Players less committed to their combo will start fading away from decks like ANT, High Tide, etc. Don't misread. I'm not claiming these decks aren't viable or even strong now. But they are a hair worse for this card's existence. And for the large sect of Legacy players who constantly waffle between decks (Either out of boredom or because they're trying to always have the best deck), there's going to be a jump ship effect away from combo. And the ones that still play combo, your chances will at least get better.
And as much as losing a Lackey or Vial to Mental Misstep will suck, Goblins doesn't run all that many 1-drops. So on the whole, I think this card helps Goblins more than it hurts it.
Very likely to be true, however everything said about Mental Misstep's impact on the format is still just speculation. We really have to wait and see what it does to fully understand its impact. If people have already made an analysis of how the meta 'probably' would be after Mental Misstep, and start taking these speculations into account when building a deck and playing a tournament, you probably have a big disappointment coming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
I absolutely agree!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacosnape
Please, everyone read his words carefully and keep them in mind: Mental Misstep is our friend!
I absolutely agree!Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeggi
Please, everyone read his words carefully and keep them in mind: Mental Misstep is our friend!
While I do agree it's hard to accurately predict a metagame expected to wildly shift, it's not unreasonable to expect a few results. Mental Misstep is a mild nuisance for combo. Chalice-y artifact decks aren't hit by MM, and should like the MM filled meta, and they do fairly well against combo. Decks like Bant and Merfolk will thrive with this, and they do well against combo. Therefore I don't think it's a wild stretch to just go out on a limb and say that combo is going to be weaker now than it has been recently, which arguably was stronger than ever before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeggi
What's hard to see is what exactly is going to emerge as the first top deck after this card comes out, then what will arise to beat it, and so forth.
Mental Misstep is NOT a good main deck card for Goblins. It's very situational. You need to have both Lackey/Vial and this goddamned counterspell in your opening hand.
I'd gladly replace them with cards that actually can DO SOMETHING instead of a POSSIBILITY OF COUNTERSPELL. Playing 4-of this new card is just giving away your strategy/synergy to try something that's pure fashion.
You guys are talking about this card like it'd save Goblins for life. What if your lackey just face a good and old Force of Will? Where's the mighty mental misstep now?
Mental misstep is good when it's the only card in your hand. Playing 4 non vial, non land, goblins has been done plenty. It's great in your opener if you have a lackey. It's something that would be good to board in against...dredge-all of their important spells are 1 drops, lands-manabond/exploration/gamble are problem cards, zoo-helps get to the mid game which is where goblins needs to be, tendrils/high tide-can buy a turn/it's definately better than having 4 more goblins at least, affinity-similar to zoo/likely to slow them down, and blue midrange/tempo-vial is great against these decks but now that they will likely be running this card we need to run it to too. Mental misstep is the best way to deal with mental misstep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vandalize
Edit: The only matchup where it seems poor to me is in the mirror...and even then it's great in your opener. Plus you can side it out.
You are absolutely right. Goblins doesn't like diluting its Goblin count. Ringleaders are better hitting 2-3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessaja
However, with 4 MM in the main goblins suddenly has a world of interactions available to it that it never had before. We can protect Lackey from removal which is absolutely HUGE! Its a game changer! Goblins has never in the history of the deck had access to protection for its T1 Lackey. A 1 land hand with a Lackey AND MM becomes Godlike. And Ringleader still gets 2 goblins on average. I've had many a game where I'm cycling Gempalms from my hand without dealing damage because I just need to get to a card I can play. having a MM instead of Gempalm in those scenarios would be incredible.
1 for 1 trades absolutely wins the Zoo match. But how much better does the match become when the 1 for 1 is MM on Bolt instead of Bolt on Lackey?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessaja
Yeah, Merfolk is gonna love this card.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessaja
Another point- I usually wind up siding out Goblins for non-goblins G2/3. This makes me feel that a few less Gemapalms or utility gobbos won't be missed in the MD. Post-board you side out Goblins for Non-Goblins that have significant interactions. MM has significant interactions against every deck in the format (except AggroLoam maybe). So why not dilute the MD of Goblins to increase the number of significant interactions you can have across the metagame?
I'm certainly looking forward to testing Gobbos with a playset of MM in it.
+1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessaja
MM seriously hurts gob. The only reason why gob was still a dtb was the high density of merfolks. Here MM is the nuts for merfolks, which will have basically 8 counters for your 8 game breakers against them (vial and especially lackey). Btw, merfolk can play daze, fow, MM and standstill without losing its consistency. Just by playing 20 spells 20 creatures 20 lands.
Therefore it will be harder for gob to win against merfolk. Do not make me say what I did not say, it will still be a good MU, but much more balanced, something like 60/40 (I am talking about 2 lists that are not optimised for this MU).
I see no more reasons to play gobs instead of zoo nowadays...
On the play for goblins the merfolk deck can stop Lackey or Vial only with Fow or Mental Misstep. If we have Mental Misstep to in our hand i don't see the difference. Our match up vs merfolks will be always good - we have piledrivers, we have ports and wasteland for their Mutavaults, we have haste, we have better card advantage.
And Yay... Merfolk will have 8 spells (daze&MM) that are useless against us past the first few turns. Should blue become super dominating I'll put a Vexing Shusher or two in the 75. Oh crap you suddenly have 12 useless spells in your deck... sorry!
The card (MM) simply gives us so many ways to interact in ways we could before... counter enchantments like Elephant grass, discard, removal, artifacts, mana sources, cheap discard outlets and quick or irritating creatures, tutors and go on. I think this more than justifies the fact that we'll be running 3-4 less Goblins. In the worst case scenario we wont run MM but the whole meta game will shift away from 1 CC which is clearly in our advantage.
So you are saying: Goblins is only DTB because of Merfolk. Mental Misstep will cause more Merfolk and Merfolk is still a good matchup. So far, I agree. The logical conclusion would now be to say that when more players play the deck that is our best matchup, we should keep playing Goblins. Instead you state that there is no reason to stay with Goblins. Whaaaat?Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchy-man
My take on MM:
I will play 4 copies. It's great to have a way to interact with combo and it will be a major improvement to the Zoo matchup because it's easier to drag the game to the longgame.
I don't really care that MM counters Lackey since Lackey doesn't connect that often anyway. I do care that MM hits Vial, this will hurt our tempo matchups. To at least have a decent game against tempo, I think mono red is the only way to go. If you do decide to keep some fetchlands, then consider maindecking a Volcanic Island. If Chalice decks see more play than we should consider some artifact destruction.
I think MM will be a good thing for Goblins, but I might be entirely wrong. Only time will provide us a definite answer.
MM is bad in gobs. As someone already said, you need a high density of goblins in order to achieve your main strategy. So yes, MM is cool against STPs & cie. But only cool. The card that you will cut to play it are better thant MM.
That being said, let see what it brings to our opponents, especially merfolks.
So yes, merfolk has a bad MU vs gob. But this new card improves it and therefore they get a better MU. So, if there are more merfolks, one could think that gob could come back. But the fact is that zoo is also very good versus merfolk and destroy gob too. If merfolk is more played, it is not gobs but zoo that will be massively played.
How can you state assumptions about MM in Goblins as a fact, while there simply hasn't been enough time to fully test it yet? Don't you want to be taken seriously? Next to the fact that your logic is flawed as Mantis pointed out, you're really missing the plank here mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchy-man
* Wild NacatlQuote:
Originally Posted by frenchy-man
* Grim Lavamancer
* Goblin Guide
* Kird Ape
* Steppe Lynx
* Noble Hierarch
* Green Sun's Zenith
* Chain Lightning
* Lightning Bolt
* Swords to Plowshares
* Path to Eile
... Those cards have 2 thing in common: they are frequently seen in Zoo-decks and they all have cc1. If you really expect MM to be played frequently don't you think Zoo will suffer more than Goblins?
Plus, I think your view on the Zoo/Gobs-MU is too much in black-and-white. We have designed decklists that can reliably beat Zoo (to the extend that the MU totally turns into a positive one).
I agree that the zoo matchup is not that bad. I can sometimes grind out a game one with tons of card advantage, and then game 2 or 3 is easy when you board perish. I blew a guy out with it, he had goyf, KotR, nactal, and teeg, and just scooped.
That guy is just trash talking. He never played a good Goblin pilot to see how scary is a connecting Lackey/Warren Instigator and Piledriver going nuts.
Those guys are thinking that if a MM hits my Lackey I'll just say: "OMG!!!!! YOU COUNTERED MY LACKEY, GG, I SCOOP, I'LL JUST DROP OUT AND CRY FOREVER."
That guy is clearly trolling.
I tested some MM this weekend, but just against an BG deck, with 7 MD 1cc cards.
Veredict: awesome. Disrupting his gameplan or countering a removal, on whichever state of the game, was awesome.
I certainly dig it.
And yet, when sideboarding we don't mind putting in non-goblins if it helps us. I think that's you have very shortsighted view.Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchy-man
Ok sorry I apologise for my trolling. MM is so strong in gob, I should have seen that this non-gob card would improve the deck.
Clearly, giving the opponent free answers to turn one lackey or vial is a good thing for the deck.
By the way, yes the whole deck zoo is affected by MM, but I don't see why it is a disaster. Zoo is also affected by STP, but this is not a reason not to play zoo.
Gob is extremely slow if it does not get lackey or vial online. Yes I know there is mana denial. But it is the most efficient when you cheat with your mana thanks to vial and lackey. Losing lackey or vial decrease the mana denial efficiency.
I give arguments against MM. I don't see your answers to mine excepted that I am trolling. Relax, I just want to debate so try to develop an argumentation.
Apologise me if I am not totally clear but I do my best to speak English without too many mistakes... (and feel free to correct my mistakes ;)).
Peace