I read this as saying "I wish I had 3 more in my deck".Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuad
Printable View
I read this as saying "I wish I had 3 more in my deck".Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuad
Personally, I play six.Quote:
Originally Posted by rukcus
How come no one here is ever playing Tarmogoyf?
Seriously, I have played Mav at three tourneys and I always encounter at least several times per tourney the situation in which you have three mana to spend, a Green Sun's Zenith on hand, and would like to fetch up a nice big beater. Ooze often just doesn´t do (no guys in the grave, Grizzly Bear is sort of boring), so Goyf is the man you want.
I know the argument that Mav itself only gets land, some instants and creatures in the grave, so it doesn't support Goyf very well, but the opponent always helps. Everyone plays instants, most play quite a few sorceries, and you need space for only one Goyf anyway.
Second point I would like to make:
Four Swords to Powshares effects is not enough. You don't want to lose against a flipped Delver, and you never want to be able to lose against Merfolk. We need more removal than just 4 StP. That's why I advocate Punishing Fire OR additional Path to Exiles both main and side. In the GW version I play 5-6 exile effects main and 1-2 side, and I just love them. It takes up a lot of space, but it's definitely worth it.
Jesus christ....
85 pages in his thread and we are still asking about tarmogoyf?
I hate to do this, but i'll explain how this deck works again... maybe you get something out of this.
I'll start by why this thread is inconrrectly named Gw maverick.
Gw maverick was a deck designed by a spanish player called maverick. It originaly played 4 vial and 3-4 weathered wayfarer to abuse the mana denial plan.
The modern versions dont run neither vial or wayfarer, in favour of green sun's zenith, which provides a greater consitency and a batter late-game plan.
What this decks tries to do is to play a bomb in every turn, and cards that will magnify those bomb's power.
Vanila cards like tarmogoyf and serra avenger, are just that, stupid beaters. Those cards have never been good by themself, they need some kind of build around me aproach, such as mana denial or tempo plan (see D&T and RUG delver decks).
Goyf does absolutely nothing in this deck(the original maverick lists didnt run it either), you want you cards to do something at anypoint of the game, thats why cards such as aether vial, tarmogoyf, serra avenger are awful. You want your deck to give you a game winning thread every time you draw.
The consistency boost that zenith provides to this deck is so HUGE, that we are already talking about the best deck in the format.
The new adition to this deck, thalia, has pushed this deck even furder in the current metagame, making this deck even decent against combo decks G1, whith thalias and the maindeck gaddock teeg.
Green sun's zenith allows us to run all the one-ofs we want in the maindeck without diluting our deck and making it inconsistent.
Whith that said, this is the list of the best creature in the deck in order:
1- mother of runes (this is the best creature in the deck hands down, perdiod. End of dicussion.)
2- scryb ranger (The fact that a lot of you guys dont play this card makes me think you dont know absolutly nothing about this deck. It makes all the other cards in this deck 100 times better, its the glue that hold the whole deck together, is a formidable beater and is the best card against jace).
3-Kotr/stoneforge/thalia/sylvan library (great game winning threads that take over thegame if are not dealt with).
4-one-ofs (are most of the times game winning threads on their own too)
I've top8'd 7-round tournaments without zenithing for KotR any single time. Most of the times you want a scryb rager, or one for the one-ofs (mother of runes + scryb ranger is a turn 2 kill, against most non-combo decks).
So there you go, stop aking about tarmogoyf, serra avenger and crap like that. This is a very skill-intensive deck, so it's easy for weak players to not see the real potential of the cards, and the reason for them being there in the first place.
Trust me, every time i see someone play a tarmogoyf against me in the mirror i am 100% sure i'm gonna win. That's a fact, and if you know something about how this deck plays out when played correctly you won't argue about that.
I'm not claiming that my list is the best there is, but the actual truth is that the list is very tight, most of the slots are locked up. So stop trying to destroy this deck by adding crap like tarmogoyf and such.
Peace..
I tend to agree with this, 4 StP are seldom enough. I usually have at least 2 PtE in the board as well, but I was thinking about perhaps adding a few Gut Shots maindeck instead, what do people think about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Asthereal
Gut Shots should take care of the most problematic creatures we face imho. PtE is perhaps a better card, but Gut Shot can be cast without mana, and could at some point also win us a game by itself, also this would obviously free up some much needed space in the board.
Giltspire Avenger would be a viable option for removal? tutorable and multi-kill with scryb rangerQuote:
Originally Posted by Sonntag
In turn, you seem to misunderstand Goyf.
Vanilla? Sure. Does it do anything? Not in the cutesy way you refer to. But it does one very relevant thing in Magic: it kills your opponent in 4-5 turns. With Hierarchs and Pridemages flying around, your Goyf is also better than your opponent's.
A friend of mine called me a lousy player because I didn't play four Goyfs while I could have, and you are calling me a lousy player because I don't get why we shouldn't include just one. Who is right? You probably think you are. That friend of mine will be sure of his version. I'm pretty confidant the best way is the middle way.
The only time I ever went top-8 in a big tourney with Mav is when I played two Goyfs. They were awesome. Not because they did the skill-intensive stuff you seem to like so much, but just because they caused my opponents to die quickly. Right now there is just too much I want to include in the deck to be able to play two, but I always found space for one, just for the situation I described in the last post.
About your list:
I looked it up and have a few comments.
The Scryb Ranger: Great beater? Don't make me laugh. It's a 1/1 for 2. You play it for utility, not to kill opponents with. It also cannot beat an active Jace, since it hits Jace for 1 a turn and Jace goes +2 each turn. It's great with Mother of Runes, but only against fair decks. And against fair decks you already have an edge. Against decks that go turn 2 Tendrils for 22 or turn 2 Emrakul, it does a grand total of nothing and gets boarded out. Perhaps you should main deck one and sideboard the second?
Lands: You play almost no proper lands. You have 4 fetches with 3 basics. On average you will draw one of these 7 in the first 9 cards, leaving you very Wasteland-vulnerable. Scryb Ranger can protect you from Wasteland, but only if it lands, and that dude dies to every removal spell available in Legacy. I believe the mana base should be more stable to compete in the current Stifle/Waste infested meta.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asthereal
I forgot to add that scryb is a good beater with equipment.
About goyf, of course there will be games where 2 goyf will be anough, no doubt about it, but its a very marginal card in this type of deck. against combo decks, the main plan is to stick mother + gaddock/canonist/thalia. Tarmogoyf gets outclassed very easily by mother of runes, bigger KotR and is terrible against jace. I'd never fault anyoine for running one, but count how many times you want goyf over any of the other one-ofs/Kotr. Not to mention it gets incredible embarrased against scavenging ooze.
About the mana base: Do you hear yourself? How can 7 basic total + 8 turn 1 acceleration spells be a bad mana base?
anyway, how can you try to discuss my manabse when it's the most standard one, and the one that all GW zenith decks have?
All that could've sounded credible have you not bitched about losing to Counterbalance a day earlier on M-L. Oh, and did I mention general arrogance of your posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcannys
So you're defending that CB is good in this meta right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinefol
It's not arrogancy, is disapointment. From time to time i check this threads to see if ppl came up with new techs or interesting lists, but instead i see ppl arguing about things that have been discussed to oblivion, and they even get angry an asceptic when they get their lists criticised.
OK, so i did a quick search.
http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/tip...&format=Legacy
In the first page of this link, i checked all decklists (30), and saw a total of 4 decks running tarmogoyf only 1 in each of thos decks, which makes a total of 4 tarmogoyfs in 30 decklists.
Either you're right and the rest of the world is wrong about goyf, or you're just trying to defend your decklist and not accepting criticism.
I'm off trying to discuss this, it's been discussed to death in every single maverick thread of every single magic forum. I dont have time for this.
I'm merely pointing out that you're being arrogant and quick on judgements.
Though, as the developer of the mentioned CB deck, I assure you I know everything about its place in the meta through weeks of extensive testing. You're underestimating the capabilities of this build. Though this is not for this topic, PM me if interested.
Thalia is pretty bad in this deck. You have to run 3 of her to maximize your chances of drawing her, for which there is not enough room, and in a lot of matchups, adding 1 to the cost of your Zeniths, StPs, and Elspeth is just terrible.
I'm not seeing how she "pushes us over the edge".
I believe Thalia is good in the Green & Taxes shell, but not in the Maverick.
I've been a huge fan of PFires ever since I made the switch and haven't looked back.
For me, I've never been super comfortable with the Zoo or RUG Tempo matchups with the GW build and wanted more of an edge against those and the mirror.
Here's how I see pFires in those particular matchups:
Zoo: Probably helps you the least out of the above three decks, but it still kills Lavamancers and Pridemages (without you having to waste StP on them). Also, if you're lucky enough to be on the play, you can always kill a T1 Nacatl with it on T2.
RUG Tempo: We know that the T1 Delver / flip opening is their best chance of beating us (since we need to typically save StP for Goyf). In my experience, pFires has been a great answer to the Delver. Even if it's flipped, you can still kill it. Sure they have Spell Snare, but that's what your Groves are for. Yes, they can Stifle the trigger, but unless they happen to have a Wasteland right then and there (you didn't run your Grove out into Wasteland unless you absolutely had to, right?) + Stifle + Spell Snare, etc... the odds just get worse and worse for them.
Maverick Mirror: Again, we know the mirror typically comes down to Moms, Knights, Equipment. Pfires crushes Moms and gives you more removal for the little creatures that are about to get equipped and lets you save your StP's and PtE's for Knights.
We already have also gone over the awesomeness of being able to play REBs / Ancient Grudge from the board as well.
Also for me, pFires adds another aspect to the deck that makes it difficult to attack. First your opponent has to deal with your creatures, equipment, and now add in pFires to the mix (another threat to deal with that isn't typically answered by cards that answer creatures/equipment).
On a side note, having pFires is also yet another answer to the scary T2 Stoneforge that people always seem to get against me!
You only mentioned the upside of playing pFires, you didnt mention the downside, which is a weak mana base and a less consitent deck, since you're reducing the thread density by a fair margin. I guess it depends on if you are willing to accept those downsides for a better MU against those deck (which i think it's prety good aready). It's more of a meta-call.
I play the GW version and i always beat Pfire mirrors with thrun, wasteland and scavening ooze.
That.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcannys
Well, I don't see it really as losing threats since you're typically replacing things like Mindcensors (which aren't huge threats to begin with) with pFires.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcannys
The mana base is a little shakier, but it's not really that weak.
You can run Thrun, Wasteland, and Ooze in a pFires list just fine as well. Sure pFires lists tend to run 3x Wasteland instead of 4, but that's honestly not a huge difference.
What does P Fires let you beat that you can't deal with otherwise? I mean there's lots of other ways of killing Delvers.
Again, it improves your aggro / RUG Tempo matchups, especially Game 1. Having 7 maindeck removal spells (3 of which are reusable) vs 4 is pretty significant, especially when you need to quickly have an answer for things like Delvers.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
Plus, pFires is great in the mirror and makes our control matchup even better.
QFT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Esper3k
The hardest matchup, outside of combo, from a GW Maverick standpoint, is a P-Fire Maverick deck. Even sticking a Mom isn't enough to save you, and you just can't compete with their removal.
Meh, pFires isn't that important IMO. Knights will still matter more.Quote:
Originally Posted by mini1337s
I agree with KotR being a huge part of the matchup, but it's hard to keep those Knights if they can pick off Mom with P-Fire and save STP for Knight.Quote:
Originally Posted by rukcus
I have found it to be a rough matchup so far, with a straight G/W build.
Yeah this exactly. PFires kills Moms which means your StP/PtE can be saved for their Knights while they have to spend their StP/PtE on your Moms and might not have it for your own Knights.Quote:
Originally Posted by mini1337s
PFires also is pretty useful against Pridemages and Oozes (less so than against Pridemage). Having pFires pretty much means they have to wait to play their Pridemage after you play your equipment otherwise they risk losing the Pridemage whereas against GW, if they StP/PtE your early Pridemages, that just means less removal for your Knights and Mothers.
Likewise playing an Ooze without green mana open or without creatures in the yard (tougher than you think it is due to all the exile based removal we run!) is a much riskier play against pFires builds than against GW.
I think it's been agreed that Punishing Maverick has a slight edge over GW. Its not overly significant though.
Right, it's at most 5% edge in the mirror. Tight play, good topdecks, and making your land drops make a bigger deal than getting the pFires going.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinefol
Is it really 5%. I know you beat the PFM deck at SCGLA, but with PFM, he keeps shooting your hierachs and moms and scyrb ranger. It gets annoying pretty fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by rukcus
And he gets to save his plows against your knights.
Yeah I think the edge of beating opposing Moms, Pridemages, etc. without having to use an StP/PtE on them is pretty huge in the mirror.
It's still a mirror matchup. Test it out and you'll see how little Fires does in the deck.
For instance, killing an active Mom requires :2::r::r::r: over two turns. Can you really afford to spend that much mana and not develop your threats?
Plus they have very few outs to Thrun and Silhana Ledgewalker.
Probably the same outs as straight GW.. note that PFM runs on sb Engineered Explosives. Don't forget that PF kills in mirror:
-Moms
-Hierarchs
-Scryb
-Ooze (if not feeded)
-Avens
-Pridemage
-SFM
probably easier would be wrote that it doesn't kill KotR / Ooze if feeded / Terravore / hexproof guys (Thrun/SLW).
So bascially its rather thought MU since Straight GW can't ramp enough, his Cradle works much worst (since no more huge board presence), GWr just have CA over so many little dorks on table.
Which is just another good reason to run Bog maindeck. So long as you have a Knight at the ready you can respond to the PFires triggers going on the stack by fetching Bog. :tongue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal
In my experience with the mirror (I've played both sides of this one), I've liked pFires more. The pFires lists are definitely more controlling than the straight GW list to me, but yes, I usually find it worth EoT pFires their Mom, return with Grove, then kill it on your turn to be more than worth it.Quote:
Originally Posted by rukcus
That's also just against an active Mother. The most likely time they're going to be able to get an active Mother going is early game where gives you 3 more answers to Mom before they get to untap.
Mid-Late game if you have Grove + pFires, any subsequent Moms aren't a problem whereas the GW list may simply have run out of answers or is forced to spend StP/PtE on her.
What does the GW list run that's a great out to Thrun / Ledgewalker that pFires can't run?Quote:
Originally Posted by majikal
Post board, pFires actually probably has access to better answers to equipment (which is what makes Silhana scary).
This is true, but having an active Knight on either side should be quite the advantage. Conversely, if the pFires player has an active Knight as well, they can get a Grove and return their pFires in response to the Bog trigger.Quote:
Originally Posted by lyracian
I really do like Bog main, but I've been having a tough time figuring out how to fit it into my list (this is where I feel the GW list has an advantage, having more leeway on maindeck toolbox lands).
This man speaks the truth...Quote:
Originally Posted by Esper3k
Haven't playtested Punishing Fires but I haven't heard a description of the purported advantages to running a third color that sound better to me than just running more Thruns and/or Ledgewalkers and a second Jitte (if running SFM.)
I mean I already feel like I have infinite removal in my straight g/w build so I feel no compulsion to splash for removal that can't hit big guys (although it would be nice against Planeswalkers, I admit.)
Planeswalkers are not a problem for this deck, against control deck you should win most of the times. All that matters right now is having an edge in the mirror and winning combo deck. P fire was good the first time someone thought about it, now all the GW players are aware of it and know how to play around it, so its not rlly that good. I definetly think that the GW version is the way to go. The main strategy is to hold your wastelands for when they land a grove, and try to zenith for big creatures rather than the utility ones like scryb ranger (all I do in the straight GW mirror). Thrun and ledgewaker helps a ton, and you can also set up a situation where they are only able to Pfire once, and you zenith for Ooze with 2-3 mana untapped to save it from Pfires.
Yeah, I don't think that's true at all and I wonder what people base it on. I mean the most played control deck is Blade Control, which seems problematic in the extreme before they bring in Wraths. I mean the only thing I can think of is that previously Blade Control players had no fucking idea how to run this matchup down and lost to their own casual contempt for the deck, because their basic strategy is exceptionally bad for Maverick. Especially if they're wise and have ditched SoFF for Jitte.
Coupled with statements like,
I'm just going to dismiss this as overly optimistic jingoism. If Maverick crushed everything that wasn't combo or itself nothing else would be winning tournaments; a very small portion of the field plays combo.Quote:
All that matters right now is having an edge in the mirror and winning combo deck.
I agree that Ooze, Wasteland, and Knight, even without a Bog, make P Fires a questionable crutch in the mirror though.
The stoneblade MU is not the easiest one, but if you understand the keys to that Mu its actualuy preaty easy. Once they've wrathed your board, all you need is a scryb ranger (best card vs jace). The best cards in that MU are the equipment. I try to search the pro-blue one as fast as possible, as that makes every single dude i play a must-answer thread in the form of STP/PtE.
Thats why i try not to zenith for dryad in the early turns so i can have that backup plan with my fetchlands late in the game.
I mean the problem with that is that in addition everything else they have infinite StPs post-board. Or a close approximation.
And you only have, what, at most 25-27 creatures, which is considerably fewer than infinite.
I mean I may have to test it more extensively, but my impression thusfar of the matchup has been pain unending.
I'm thinking of trying out your build, IBA, but subbing out the Waves for a pair of Garruk 3.0's, and the Goyfs for an extra Ooze and an extra Pridemage.
Silhana Ledgewalker has been the best trump to UW so far in my testing. The only out they have is Wrath, which you can leverage to your advantage.