[Discussion] Combo Summer- Coming Soon?

Not to mention that any deck that can produce 2 colorless mana can support EE@0.
BreathWeapon is right, if they empty their hand, and you can answer their tokens, you win. You are basically goldfishing at that point.
Tendrils is scarier but requires a higher storm count, and therefore offers more time to react. These decks aren't broken, or at least, not any more than before. Yes, they require some, maybe severe, deck changes, but that's what Magic is about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by C.P.

You can name ten billion cards that can answer first turn combo, It will always randomly win that die roll and kill you before you get to answer it.

---

Funny, because Goblins tends to do the same thing. Even with multiple answers to turn1 Lackey, and Plagues and Hydroblasts in the board.
Goblins is far from "broken", and so is combo. They might each require certain answers, but don't say that we don't have these answers for combo, because we have plenty. Most of them are not too slow, and are even decent against a large percentage fo the current field.

This new article, http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/academy/42, while written for Extended, is still applicable to the current conversation.

Quote:

---

Goblins is far from "broken", and so is combo. They might each require certain answers, but don't say that we don't have these answers for combo, because we have plenty. Most of them are not too slow, and are even decent against a large percentage fo the current field

---

No, Goblins isn't broken in the slightest. Having 8 Aether Vials, 4 Fact or Fiction, 4 Demonic Tutors, and an incredibly synergistic removal suite isn't broken at all. Of course the deck can be answered, but saying Goblins isn't a broken deck is a statement of denial. It's far more broken than any combo decks we have at the moment, to say the least. Those decks lose to hate, whereas Goblins somehow fights through almost everything.

I know people are going to go on and on about this forever without really changing either sides minds but from what I have heard from proponents of both sides is this:

Proponents of banning warrens feelings: Its ok that goblins distorts the format and certain specific cards like lackey make most control decks near unplayable but thats ok because I don`t like control. Empty the warrens and belcher are bad evil cards because it means my aggro deck is stupid and I have to play with control cards in my stompy deck.

Proponents of keeping things the way they are: Everything that is good distorts the format in some way to where certain cards or even decks are unplayable. Empty the warrens makes it to where you have to be able to answer another I win type situation. If you don`t like it`s too bad. Suck it up or die because the DCI ain`t gonna save ya.

I am obviously biased but anyone who is honest with themselves or those around them know everyone is biased to an extent. I think the comparison between goblin lackey and ETW is the stongest evidence for leaving things as they are and its what has made me a strong advocate for leaving ETW alone.
If goblin lackey is left unanswered or uncountered it will win the game by turn 3 and so will ETW. Almost all the same tools that is good against lackey is good against ETW. The only thing that makes lackey manageable today is the distortion that was caused by lackey himself. I think in time people will learn to adapt and the same distortion will make ETW manageable.
In short I beleive ETW and lackey are on the same power level so it is reasonable to make the claim that ETW is broken, distorting and should be banned if you agree that goblin lackey is also broken, distorting and should be banned but it is NOT ok to say ETW should be banned if lackey is ok. If you are making that argument you are arguing for a format with a metagame distorted to your personal liking rather than what is reasonable and balanced in correlation with what else is available in the format.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blacklotus3636

Almost all the same tools that is good against lackey is good against ETW.

---

Pinpoint creature removal is good against ETW? Wow. I've been missing out. Mass removal will effect both, but the problem is "Will you be able to cast your board clearer in time?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blacklotus3636

Almost all the same tools that is good against lackey is good against ETW.

---

This is such a ridiculous statement. What the hell do StP, Lightning Bolt, Funeral Charm, Small Pox, Mogg Fanatic, Darkblast, Plated Sliver, Nimble Mongoose, Basking Rootwalla, Carnophage, Sarcomancy, any other 1-drop capable of blocking and killing lackey, or any pinpoint removal do against EtW? Kill 1 of 12 turn one tokens? You can make the case that anti-goblin cards (Engineered Plague, Ghostly Prison/Propoganda, Hail Storm, Pyroclasm) all work against EtW, but anti-Lackey cards certainly do not. The problem is, Goblins cannot get 10 - 16 power out on turn 1, so you actually have time to get enough mana to cast any of the aforementioned cards. EtW can, and there is very little one can do against a horde of 10+ goblins before you even get a turn.

Brightstone Ritual.

I can imagine Vial Gobs sideboarding in brightstone ritual after a g1 anal pounding by TES, only to add 14 red mana to their pool and go bonkers with warchiefs, piledrivers, ringleaders and so on.

It is true that all cards that effect Empty the Warrens also effect Goblin Lackey.

The point that blacklotus3636 was making just got turned on it's head because he reversed the cases. When the metagame adapts to handle a turn 1 ETW effectively then Lackey will no longer be a big threat. Aether Vial will still be an issue though.

Broken does not necessarily mean ban-worthy. It just means a very synergistic and powerful card, or combination of cards. In this case, yes Goblins is a broken deck. It, as Diablos put it perfectly, has Demonic Tutors, FoFs, Lackey, Vial, and a load of synergistic removal that's not dead against combo. Does the fact that this deck is by far the most resilient and powerful deck in Legacy (yes, it's both more powerful and resilient than fast combo) and that it distorts the meta around 1 (although you could also argue that Aether Vial is distorting in it's own various ways as well) 1cc creature that you MUST be able to either answer immediately, or ignore and win anyway, to be a viable deck make it worthy of some sort of banning? Debatable. The answers to Lackey are plentiful and in every color in one form or another. Sure it's frustrating when you're 3 color control deck isn't really viable because its goblin matchup sucks, or that your aggro deck will rarely be an optimal choice because goblins has better disruption, a faster kill, and more resiliency, but that happens in every format. There will always be better decks, faster decks, whathaveyou.

However, combo decks like TES are really pushing this format to the brink. On it's own, TES probably wouldn't be that big a problem. It's not that difficult to adapt your deck to deal with a combo deck, but, it is very difficult to shift your deck to simultaneous deal with both insanely fast combo with EtW and Goblins. It might even be impossible, although I doubt it. It's not so much the individual power of these decks that's the issue, it's the combined affect they're having on the format. I, personally, don't think a ban is necessary, but even if it is, what would you ban? Lackey? Vial? EtW? LED? Banning any one of those cards probably wouldn't kill the deck it resides in anyway, weaken it sure, but not kill it. As I said, I have no preference as to what get banned, if anything. But, make sure you're banning cards for the right reasons, and just because you're frustrated with the way the format's going.

blacklotus3636 just won the thread simply by being one of the very few people on internet discussion boards who seems actually capable of seeing the other side of the argument.

I fail to see the logic in what you are saying. Blacklotus is, as he admitted, very biased in his post. He isn't calling both sides correct; he is saying that he is correct, and basically decrying all those who think otherwise. I'm not saying he's more biased than anyone else (myself included), but frankly, he really isn't seeing both sides of the argument; he is promoting his feelings and mocking the other side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Di

No, Goblins isn't broken in the slightest. Having 8 Aether Vials, 4 Fact or Fiction, 4 Demonic Tutors, and an incredibly synergistic removal suite isn't broken at all. Of course the deck can be answered, but saying Goblins isn't a broken deck is a statement of denial. It's far more broken than any combo decks we have at the moment, to say the least. Those decks lose to hate, whereas Goblins somehow fights through almost everything.

---

My point was that Goblins can flip the "I win" switch at any given time, as well, and it can fight through hate. No one is complaining that Goblins should be given a kick in the ass, so my argument was that combo shouldn't either. In fact, you kind of just aknowladged my point. The fact that you felt like squabbling over a word choice of mine that didn't have any real impact on the point of the statement didn't prove anything.

The thing is there are a ton of cards that define the game from turn one on in our environment, is Empty the Warrens and Goblin Lackey any more degenerate than Aether Vial, Trinisphere and Chalice of the Void or Blood Moon, Magus of the Moon and Root Maze? Each one is threatening to create an unrecoverable threat for the opponent if it isn't dealt with in some form, but at least Empty the Warrens and Goblin Lackey pretty much get answered by the same cards. Speaking of which, it really isn't hard to build a deck to defeat combo and Goblins at the same, just Piracy Charm, Stifle, Pithing Needle and Engineered Explosives tend to deal with both sets of decks.

All combo does is force aggro to interact with it, I don't see how that's necessarily unhealthy for the environment. Not being able to auto pilot Goblins degeneracy into the Top 8 is probably a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BreathWeapon

The thing is there are a ton of cards that define the game from turn one on in our environment, is Empty the Warrens and Goblin Lackey any more degenerate than Aether Vial, Trinisphere and Chalice of the Void or Blood Moon, Magus of the Moon and Root Maze? Each one is threatening to create an unrecoverable threat for the opponent if it isn't dealt with in some form, but at least Empty the Warrens and Goblin Lackey pretty much get answered by the same cards. Speaking of which, it really isn't hard to build a deck to defeat combo and Goblins at the same, just Piracy Charm, Stifle, Pithing Needle and Engineered Explosives tend to deal with both sets of decks.

All combo does is force aggro to interact with it, I don't see how that's necessarily unhealthy for the environment. Not being able to auto pilot Goblins degeneracy into the Top 8 is probably a good thing.

---

I don't think I've ever agreed with you more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BreathWeapon

Speaking of which, it really isn't hard to build a deck to defeat combo and Goblins at the same, just Piracy Charm, Stifle, Pithing Needle and Engineered Explosives tend to deal with both sets of decks.

---

Piracy Charm...will have very little impact against most Combo
Explosives...is actually somewhat too slow against Goblins
Needle...will do nothing against Tendrils/ETW Combo

Stifle is fine, however.

If combo like belcher had 8 belchers and 0 etw or 8etw and 0 belchers i think it would be fair but what they do is if you have counters they play etw adn if u have mass removal they pay belcher... u have to have counterspell and mass removal to have a good game vs them or be playing other disruption and a fast clock

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guy I Don't Know

If combo like belcher had 8 belchers and 0 etw or 8etw and 0 belchers i think it would be fair but what they do is if you have counters they play etw adn if u have mass removal they pay belcher... u have to have counterspell and mass removal to have a good game vs them or be playing other disruption and a fast clock

---

Are decks not allowed to have threat density anymore? It's a common principal of the game, it you ban either Belcher or ETW you're stopping the nature of the game. When this happens is there even a reason to play if you're stopping a fundamental rule of the game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guy I Don't Know

If combo like belcher had 8 belchers and 0 etw or 8etw and 0 belchers i think it would be fair but what they do is if you have counters they play etw adn if u have mass removal they pay belcher... u have to have counterspell and mass removal to have a good game vs them or be playing other disruption and a fast clock

---

You know, you could build your deck with Chalice of the Void, Pithing Needle, Pyroclasm and Rolling Earthquake if you wanted to beat a deck that quickly presents Belcher and Goblin tokens. In fact, I think someone already did that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by georgjorge

Piracy Charm...will have very little impact against most Combo
Explosives...is actually somewhat too slow against Goblins
Needle...will do nothing against Tendrils/ETW Combo

Stifle is fine, however.

---

Most people just don't understand what these cards are for,

Piracy Charm can either remove a Xantid Swarm or ruin the Infernal Tutur->Ill Gotten Gains->Infernal Tutor->Tendrils of Agony loop against combo, and it remains in the graveyard after removing Xantid Swarm to deter the opponent from using the Infernal Tutor->Ill Gotten Gains->Infernal Tutor->Tendrils of Agony loop. Piracy Charm kills Goblin Lackey, and it "cycles" against anything.

Engineered Explosives removes Empty the Warrens. Engineered Explosives can remove a Goblin Lackey on the play, but it is generally used to remove Aether Vials.

Pithing Needle "counters" Goblin Charbelcher. Pithing Needle "counters" Aether Vial.

@GuyIdon'tknow

If Belcher had 8 Goblin Charbelchers or 8 Empty the Warrens it wouldn't be viable, it's not threat density, but threat diversification that makes the deck competitive. You can always counter the acceleration, so the fact that Empty the Warrens has storm is irrelevant, and if you SB in mass removal your more likely to auto-win against the deck because there are 4 Goblin CharBelchers and 7 Empty the Warrens. Smart players will know this and prefer to use Goblin Charbelcher or cast Burning Wish for Diminishing Returns in game two, but if Belcher didn't have these options, it wouldn't be fair, because opponent's could just SB in hate for one win condition and auto-win.

The best best is to counter the opponent's acceleration and use general disruption, like Unmask, Hymn to Tourach, Duress, Trinisphere, Sphere of Resistance, Chalice of the Void, Null Rod, Root Maze and then use Stifle against either win condition or Orim's Chant to suppress their mana production and then use mass removal against Warrens and then use removal against Belcher.

The problem isn't combo, its the players that don't want to recognize combo as a healthy part of the metagame, refuse to prepare for combo, get their asses handed to them by combo and then complain about combo. Even tho' combo is very fast, as a result it's also very vulnerable, and the opponent can end the game against combo just as fast as combo can end the game against them.

I don't think the whole "distorts the metagame" line of discussion is fruitful here. As numerous people have pointed out numerous times, powerful cards in any format will distort the format around them. Wrath of God has a large effect on Standard. Should it be banned? Don't make me laugh. You only have a problem when the entire environment becomes focused around that single card or deck: valid examples of this have been Trix, Skullclamp, and Affinity. Legacy does not currently have this. There is no single card played across multiple decks which everyone has to either play themselves or devote their entire deck to hosing. Nor is there a single such deck: Goblins is certainly powerful, and is (or maybe was) the best deck in the format, but it's nowhere near Trix or Affinity. So this entire line of reasoning simply does not apply.

What it does make sense to discuss is the more subjective topic of power level. We have a fairly healthy metagame right now in Legacy, in terms of balance: Belcher/TES beats Goblins beats Threshold/Fish beats Belcher/TES, with many other viable decks also in the mix. On the other hand, you can hardly argue that it hasn't gotten faster since the earlier days of Solidarity and company. The question is, what level of power and speed do we want to have in the format? Is it acceptable to have decks either winning outright on the first or second turn, or vomiting a double digit number of Goblin tokens on the board in the same frame of time? This is a subjective issue than can only be decided personally, and so I personally answer: no. I think the previous state of the format was already a tad too powerful.

If we want to return to the format as it was, the recipe is simple:

ban Empty the Warrens

On the other hand, if I were God Almighty, the changes I instate would rather be the following:

ban Tendrils of Agony
ban Brain Freeze
ban Goblin Charbelcher
ban Goblin Lackey

(Elaborating on why, exactly, these, would be an article in itself and likely off topic, but to summarize briefly: the goal would be an environment, foremost, slower, composed of a variety of control decks, aggro decks which aren't necessarily Goblins, and combo decks which aren't necessarily Storm. Control might become too powerful, but I think Aether Vial is a good bulwark against that happening.)

There are certainly many Vintage triumphalists who claim that the current speed of the format is a good thing, an inevitable evolution, nay, the only rightful and proper direction for it to evolve in; that Legacy, by its very nature, shall get faster with the passage of time, shall have blue and black as its only respectable colors, that it shall become entirely alike to Vintage; and that this, indeed, is the only conceivable and only true form the final state of any Eternal format can take. This is true under one condition and one condition only: if the power level of a format is not sufficient grounds for the banning of cards in it. Now, the one and only criterium which Wizards has, across the years, consistently used as sufficient in itself for the banning of a card, was it not being fun, because fun is what keeps the players playing, and what keeps the money -- however much or little of it -- flowing. If players no longer find a format fun, or find it significantly less fun than it used to be, due to its power level, then that is a strong incentive to go out, take a good look around, and demolish something, or many things, with the Banhammer of Justice. The argument at this point is that Legacy does not belong to us, and this is partly true. Legacy belongs to two classes of people: those who do play it, and those who might. To use this as an argument against the banning of cards to slow the format down, one must show that the reason that those who might play the format, do not, is because it is too slow. Good luck with that.


Note: This post works off the assumption that the essence of the Legacy metagame going forward is, in fact, Belcher/TES beats Goblins beats Threshold/Fish beats Belcher/TES. There is some tournament evidence to support this, but not a huge amount. If it turns out differently, then some things, of course, may not apply. And if most players of Legacy prefer it in its faster state, then there is naturally also less incentive to consider banning anything.

You forgot to mention that Landstill beats Threshold/Fish and has quite a good match against combo too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hummingbird TG

You forgot to mention that Landstill beats Threshold/Fish and has quite a good match against combo too.

---

Sigh. "with many other viable decks also in the mix". This wasn't meant to be an exhaustive analysis of the Legacy metagame. Did it seem that way?

We literally just got rid of Flash. Actually, Wednesday we get rid of Flash. At the same time, we got 2 relatively harmless cards taken off the banned list. This is the single biggest change in Legacy's short history, and yet people are still griping about banning cards? What's wrong with you people? This format is perfect right now. Good combo decks have edged Solidarity out of the spotlight, and forced Goblins to change its game, making control viable again. Aggro-control is good as ever. Goblins isn't dominating, but still holds strong. Combo is fun, consistant, and not overpowered. What more can you ask for?

Ban Empty the Warrens... I swear, you guys always find something to bitch about. Brush the sand out of your vaginas and metagame. It isn't broken like Flash, it's broken like Force of Will. Run some answers already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nightmare

It isn't broken like Flash, it's broken like Force of Will.

---

QFT

@Illissius

Banning Empty the Warrens to decrease the speed of the format isn't even achieving its objective, because the format is going to have turn one wins as long as Goblin Charbelcher and Infernal Tutor are legal, and even then Wish + LED still has good odds of ending the game.

WOTC unbanned Lion's Eye Diamond, Chrome Mox and Lotus Petal for a reason, they had to have known that they'd contribute to the speed of combo in any format. All banning Empty the Warrens will do is weaken combo, which seems to be people's actual objective, and not reduce the speed of combo. If you want to legitimately reduce the speed of combo, you have to target the mana sources, because clearly WOTC has no qualms about printing new win conditions, but you can bet your ass you'll never see another Lion's Eye Diamond.

Regardless, nothing needs to be banned right now, control is playable and Goblins is a glass cannon, that's the sign of a healthy metagame to me.

There is a fair number of big Legacy tournaments in the near future: GenCon, 2 Dual-land drafts, the Meandeck Open. Why can't we wait a few months to see if Combo is really dominant or broken before calling for bannings?

Quote by kabal kun:
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklotus3636
Almost all the same tools that is good against lackey is good against ETW.

Pinpoint creature removal is good against ETW? Wow. I've been missing out. Mass removal will effect both, but the problem is "Will you be able to cast your board clearer in time?"

Don`t you just love it when people pick one sentence out of an entire story, warp it to make it sound ridiculous, then turn around and act like your the jackass? I think everyone knew what I meant when I said that but some people like to pervert things to suit their own ends. If you really want to talk about what I wrote then why don`t you address the actual point I was making in the post? In short I made the argument that lackey and warrens are on the same power level. I think most reasonable people would concede on both sides that this is at least somewhat true. If you concede that this is true then why are you not lobbying for the banning of lackey? If you lobby for one cards banning and not the other that is on the same power level then your just trying to force the metagame to be what you want rather than what is healthy. I think everyone who is calling for the banning of warrens should take a long hard look at themselves and their motives for wanting to ban warrens.

People want to ban Warrens instead of Lackey because they don't mind as much being beaten by a horde of normal goblins then by "combo" goblins. This is because combo decks seem to have less interaction with the opponent and you die instantaniously or (almost) inavoidably in the case of EtW. People don't think this is fun. So even though the power might be around the same level, they want to ban EtW instead of Lackey. I love combo so I don't agree, however I do think this is not a bad reason. Magic should be fun and that means cards should be banned if they are too good, because a diverse metagame is fun, but also I can see cards being considerd banning because of making "unfun" decks popular/good. I like playing combo but can see why a combodeck shouldn't be the best deck in the format because people don't like that.

While I agree that combo isn't anywhere near being overpowered, I do not agree that playing against combo always has to be boring. If you do have an answer, and if the combo player might have an answer to your answer, the game can still be very interesting and skill-dependant.

Also, for all the people bitching about combo making the meta not fun, what exactly is your definition of fun?

Obviously winning is fun, but apparently losing isn't, because that's when you turn into sore losers.
I have fun playing Magic, whether I win or lose, and I have fun designing and teching decks made for not losing.
If you only have fun when you're rolling your opponent, or it's a really close game, then go play casual. Or is that not competitive enough?

I'm not calling for ETW being banned, but I do want it and the combo pieces watched.... we know combo can suddenly find 1 card and then just be absolutely broken. I don't think combo is busted now, but I think an eye needs to be kept on it, as if that catalyst is found something will need to be done.

As for reasons why people don't like ETW but don't mind Lackey:

Most people don't mind running Swords to Plowshares, because spot removal is rarely dead.... People do, however, not like having to run cards like Sandstorm to stop 8-10+ Goblin tokens on turn 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BreathWeapon

@Illissius

Banning Empty the Warrens to decrease the speed of the format isn't even achieving its objective, because the format is going to have turn one wins as long as Goblin Charbelcher and Infernal Tutor are legal, and even then Wish + LED still has good odds of ending the game.

WOTC unbanned Lion's Eye Diamond, Chrome Mox and Lotus Petal for a reason, they had to have known that they'd contribute to the speed of combo in any format. All banning Empty the Warrens will do is weaken combo, which seems to be people's actual objective, and not reduce the speed of combo. If you want to legitimately reduce the speed of combo, you have to target the mana sources, because clearly WOTC has no qualms about printing new win conditions, but you can bet your ass you'll never see another Lion's Eye Diamond.

Regardless, nothing needs to be banned right now, control is playable and Goblins is a glass cannon, that's the sign of a healthy metagame to me.

---

I don't think anyone is actually concerned with how fast the current combo decks can win. Sure, they can pull off a Turn 1 win, but that's going to occur extremely infrequently. Banning Empty the Warrens would simply worsen the consistancy of said combo decks, as that means it loses its alternate plan.

Can somebody link me to the SI thread please.
I have searched the forums and failed to find the thread on this particular combo deck. (probably cauz I'm a fucking idiot)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by revenge_inc

Can somebody link me to the SI thread please.
I have searched the forums and failed to find the thread on this particular combo deck. (probably cauz I'm a fucking idiot)

---

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showt...t=58807&page=6

I would highly recommend looking at the 2nd to last post in the thread. I probably wouldn't play anything except very close deviations of those lists right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emidln

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showt...t=58807&page=6

I would highly recommend looking at the 2nd to last post in the thread. I probably wouldn't play anything except very close deviations of those lists right now.

---

Thanks for the link. (I only read Salvation for debates and water cooler talk....I was like WTF people innovate the Legacy format there?-lol)

The second-last post and the first one were very useful.

If this deck is as powerful as it seems to be on paper and is in fact a viable fast-storm-combo option, why isn't this deck on The Source?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by revenge_inc

Thanks for the link. (I only read Salvation for debates and water cooler talk....I was like WTF people innovate the Legacy format there?-lol)

The second-last post and the first one were very useful.

If this deck is as powerful as it seems to be on paper and is in fact a viable fast-storm-combo option, why isn't this deck on The Source?

---

I honestly didn't really like the source when I posted it there. I do most of my development over AIM/Blitzkrieg boards anyway, so discussion on these boards is more spreading information than anything.

Quote:

---

If this deck is as powerful as it seems to be on paper and is in fact a viable fast-storm-combo option, why isn't this deck on The Source?

---

There was a thread on here for the deck a while back, but for some reason I can't find it while doing a search on the deck. It's possible the name was different or something though, idk. Regardless, it seems to be the least-talked about combo deck because it is fundamentally worse than the others. The deck runs 8 dead cards (0cc creatures), which make those draw4's worse. It also happens to make those other creature dependent cards (Culling the Weak, Diabolic Intent if it's still run) very conditional. The deck isn't as consistent as TES or Belcher, and has a tougher time with control matchups, so it's difficult to believe why someone would run SI over one of those aforementioned combo decks.

I happen to think it could be a great combo. I mean, I hate the creatures and culling the weak, but a TES like build with draw 4s could be powerful. MAybe 3 colors. I think I will start a thread. Maybe.

There's nothing wrong with Draw 4 based combo, I think the basic problem with SI is that it screws around with 0cc creatures and Culling The Weak when it should just be adding tutors to find more acceleration or cantrips to build Threshold and slow down a turn. The real advantage of Draw 4s isn't their speed, it's being able to cast them against a counter wall and not lose.

Actually most of you are wrong about SI. It is extremely consistant and extremely fast. Some versions kill, yes i said kill not combo to make goblins, turn one like 70 percent of the time. The reason people don't play SI is because it is a glass cannon like dredge. It might be nuts if you don't have hate, but any piece of hate and you lose. SI cannot win through chalice at 0 or trinishpere and has a lot more trouble beating a meddlingmage, pillar, or stifle than TES would.

BTW if you want to hose goblins play SI. I don't think it can even lose a game against goblins unless they get a chalice. Even then you can sit abck behind your creatures and just let chalice counter your 0 drops and tendrils for like 5 twice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andrew77

SI cannot win through chalice at 0.
(...)
Even then you can sit abck behind your creatures and just let chalice counter your 0 drops and tendrils for like 5 twice.

---

I believe there is a pretty big chance goblins has chalice in hand if they know what they are playing against game 2 and wouldn't the creatures you want to block with be countered by chalice? I don't think game 2 and 3 are going to be so easy with chalice, waste and port to slow you down and a fast clock next to it. I believe it's not a real bad matchup, but you can lose to goblins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andrew77

Some versions kill, yes i said kill not combo to make goblins, turn one like 70 percent of the time.

---

Maybe you are right but I have a hard time believing this. I mean, to kill on turn 1 you would probably need a dark ritual, a LED or more rituals, a draw4 but not too many and a manasource. I am sure you can come up with other hands that can win right away but the chances of having such a hand seem less than 70% even with taking mulligans to me. Can anybody confirm this? And has the deck put up any results?