[Deck] Goblins

[QUOTE=orcanmail;880258]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevestamopz

You cannot play Legacy Goblins without 4 Lackeys, 4 MATRONS, and 4 Ringleaders. This is the heart of any Legacy Goblins deck. I have been playing Goblins for years and this is why the deck ruled the format.

---

Yes, but if you just play a slightly more aggressive version of goblins than what is normal, you're just going to lose to the usual problems. Look at old extended Red Deck Wins decks. They literally had 8x every card

8 2/1s (jackal pup, goblin cadet)
8 repeatable sources of burn (cursed scroll + grim lavamancer)
8 pingers (lava dart + mogg fanatic)
8 burn spells (firebolt + volcanic hammer)
8 mana denial lands (port + wasteland)

Trust me, if you want to play a hyper aggressive deck, there is no point in playing Goblin Matron. It's like how merfolk don't play the merfolk ringleader or brainstorm and how burn decks don't splash blue for brainstorm and ponder; the cards are so redundant in their purpose that there's no reason to waste a card slot do so something fancy. Obviously Ringleader is so good that you should play it but the rest of the deck should just be removal and aggressive beaters.

[QUOTE=Stevestamopz;880263]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by orcanmail

Yes, but if you just play a slightly more aggressive version of goblins than what is normal, you're just going to lose to the usual problems. Look at old extended Red Deck Wins decks. They literally had 8x every card

8 2/1s (jackal pup, goblin cadet)
8 repeatable sources of burn (cursed scroll + grim lavamancer)
8 pingers (lava dart + mogg fanatic)
8 burn spells (firebolt + volcanic hammer)
8 mana denial lands (port + wasteland)

Trust me, if you want to play a hyper aggressive deck, there is no point in playing Goblin Matron. It's like how merfolk don't play the merfolk ringleader or brainstorm and how burn decks don't splash blue for brainstorm and ponder; the cards are so redundant in their purpose that there's no reason to waste a card slot do so something fancy. Obviously Ringleader is so good that you should play it but the rest of the deck should just be removal and aggressive beaters.

---

This is exactly what my list is trying to do.
The deal is, we don't have 8 lackeys. We don't have 8 Piledrivers. What we can do, is work with the next best thing. That's why I'm including mox and Instigator as lackeys, and Rabblemaster as Piledrivers.
Anyway, matron is an excellent tool. There would make much less sense to play one of cards if your not running matron.
Her flexibility also makes up for the slot. When you are low on cards she becomes a ringleader. When you are going for the kill she becomes a Piledriver. When you need to get rid of an emrakul, or jitte, or Delver, she's there for you. She's like the mother we never had.
Not saying its set in stone, but I have never seen, in my 8 years playing goblins, a list that would not benefit from playing 4 Matrons.

[QUOTE=ScatmanX;880266]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevestamopz

This is exactly what my list is trying to do.
The deal is, we don't have 8 lackeys. We don't have 8 Piledrivers. What we can do, is work with the next best thing. That's why I'm including mox and Instigator as lackeys, and Rabblemaster as Piledrivers.
Anyway, matron is an excellent tool. There would make much less sense to play one of cards if your not running matron.
Her flexibility also makes up for the slot. When you are low on cards she becomes a ringleader. When you are going for the kill she becomes a Piledriver. When you need to get rid of an emrakul, or jitte, or Delver, she's there for you. She's like the mother we never had.
Not saying its set in stone, but I have never seen, in my 8 years playing goblins, a list that would not benefit from playing 4 Matrons.

---

I agree it sounds stupid at first, but if your singular plan is to flood the board with aggressive goblins that attack for 2 or 3 a turn, why play Goblin Matron? It's a 3 mana 1/1 that doesn't influence the boardstate. 3 mana gets you chieftain/king/rabblemaster, all of which immediately impact the board, especially if over the last 2-3 turns you've gone turn 1 guide, turn 2 war marshall, turn 3 bushwhacker, turn 4 rabblemaster/chieftain/king.

[QUOTE=Stevestamopz;880268]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScatmanX

I agree it sounds stupid at first, but if your singular plan is to flood the board with aggressive goblins that attack for 2 or 3 a turn, why play Goblin Matron? It's a 3 mana 1/1 that doesn't influence the boardstate. 3 mana gets you chieftain/king/rabblemaster, all of which immediately impact the board, especially if over the last 2-3 turns you've gone turn 1 guide, turn 2 war marshall, turn 3 bushwhacker, turn 4 rabblemaster/chieftain/king.

---

If you're looking for dream hands, my T2 mox + Warchief, t3 Piledriver, Matron + Piledriver kills faster and uses less cards.
Showing such scenarios don't prove much though.

[QUOTE=ScatmanX;880274]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevestamopz

If you're looking for dream hands, my T2 mox + Warchief, t3 Piledriver, Matron + Piledriver kills faster and uses less cards.
Showing such scenarios don't prove much though.

---

Except if a single blocker gets in the way... then you're in trouble.

I'm not advocating building Goblins this way at all, but if you want the most aggressive Goblins decklist, Matron and Instigator aren't gunna cut it, that's all I'm saying.

The idea of The Most Aggro goblins list is a bit of a Red Herring. We don't put huge amounts of damage on the board by playing super efficient 1/1s. We put damage on the board by connecting with Lackey or controlling the board while Vial ticks up. Both of those require that we're able to play control. And while I agree that T3 kills are awesome, this deck just doesn't have game against the field by going that route. It's either going to be a worse Zoo deck or just a more linear, less interactive Goblin deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrw1985

The idea of The Most Aggro goblins list is a bit of a Red Herring. We don't put huge amounts of damage on the board by playing super efficient 1/1s. We put damage on the board by connecting with Lackey or controlling the board while Vial ticks up. Both of those require that we're able to play control. And while I agree that T3 kills are awesome, this deck just doesn't have game against the field by going that route. It's either going to be a worse Zoo deck or just a more linear, less interactive Goblin deck.

---

I agree entirely with this view. Goblin's strength comes from being able to grind out games. Hyper aggro goblins seems like a really bad burn list to me. It may be more fun, but less effective for sure. We turn off their counter magic but turn on their blockers and removal (in comparison to burn). I think this yields lower aggressive potential. Granted, if you love goblins (I certainly do) and just want to play super aggro instead of control/grind then by all means go for it. Just don't expect grand results in the average meta. You may as well play modern goblins, as that's the idea behind goblins in that format.

Edit: another bit to think about - the aggro build doesn't actually goldfish faster than traditional goblins in the best case scenario. It's still turn 3. The amount of times you get a t3 hand with aggro build is greater than with traditional, but i'd expect the frequency of successful execution to be roughly the same, as it also depends on your opponent not having any blocks or removal.

[QUOTE=Stevestamopz;880268]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScatmanX

I agree it sounds stupid at first, but if your singular plan is to flood the board with aggressive goblins that attack for 2 or 3 a turn, why play Goblin Matron? It's a 3 mana 1/1 that doesn't influence the boardstate. 3 mana gets you chieftain/king/rabblemaster, all of which immediately impact the board, especially if over the last 2-3 turns you've gone turn 1 guide, turn 2 war marshall, turn 3 bushwhacker, turn 4 rabblemaster/chieftain/king.

---

I think goblins would just lose to decks with any sort of sweeper effect available without goblin matron. She is card advantage which is the primary win con in vial goblins. Try playing with warren instigator, goblin matron, and kiki-jiki and you have your explosive finish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goblinpiledriver

I agree entirely with this view. Goblin's strength comes from being able to grind out games. Hyper aggro goblins seems like a really bad burn list to me. It may be more fun, but less effective for sure. We turn off their counter magic but turn on their blockers and removal (in comparison to burn). I think this yields lower aggressive potential. Granted, if you love goblins (I certainly do) and just want to play super aggro instead of control/grind then by all means go for it. Just don't expect grand results in the average meta. You may as well play modern goblins, as that's the idea behind goblins in that format.

Edit: another bit to think about - the aggro build doesn't actually goldfish faster than traditional goblins in the best case scenario. It's still turn 3. The amount of times you get a t3 hand with aggro build is greater than with traditional, but i'd expect the frequency of successful execution to be roughly the same, as it also depends on your opponent not having any blocks or removal.

---

The ability that goblins has to grid out opponents comes, imo, mostly from matron and ringleader.
Granted, Gempalm is awesome too, but don't know why we just flat out look like zoo if we loose 4 CÁ advantage tools while still playing with more than 8 and still using Black lotus and infernal tutors and such...

Just to say my 2 cents : i play hyper aggro goblins in modern (where matron and ringleader are not legal) and the list looks like this.
4 goblin guide
4 foundry street denizen
4 legion loyalist
2 mogg fanatic/spikeshot elder
4 mogg war marshal
4 goblin bushwhacker
4 spike jester
4 goblin chieftain
4 goblin grenade
4 lightning bolt
lands (including 4 cavern of souls and a couple of mutavaults)

While a lot of people argue that this is a worse version of burn, i also play burn and recognise differences between the two decks. i believe burn is overall better, but goblins has an even faster average goldfish while beating counterspells with cavern. Turning on removal spells and blockers is an issue, but in the end most creatures have haste and goblin grenade + bolt makes extremely easy to burn out the opponent. I won a lot of modern events with that list or similar ones.

Now, if you ask me to have a similar approach in legacy, the only cards i'm looking to play are 4 lackeys and 4 piledrivers. I think they are the only candidates that could make my modern deck more explosive than it currently is.
Playing matrons and ringleaders changes the strategy of the deck, and i don't know if it's possible to find the right mix sacrificing just a bit of speed for card advantage. I think everything is worth trying though, because a deck similar to the one i posted above with lackeys and piledriver wouldn't be very good in legacy .... could certainly win games because it is really fast, but probably not be very competitive overall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeoCop 90

Playing matrons and ringleaders changes the strategy of the deck, and i don't know if it's possible to find the right mix sacrificing just a bit of speed for card advantage. I think everything is worth trying though, because a deck similar to the one i posted above with lackeys and piledriver wouldn't be very good in legacy .... could certainly win games because it is really fast, but probably not be very competitive overall.

---

This is what I've been trying to say.
If you want to play an aggro deck, you have to be all about aggression. Whether it's good or not remains to be seen, but I supremely doubt it.

IMO legacy Goblins is a control deck more than anything and should be built as such.

This is the current list i'm running

4 Caverns
17 Mountain

4 Lackey
3 Piledriver
4 Matron
4 Ringleader
4 Warchief
3 Gempalm
4 MoggWM
2 Stingscourger
2 Siege Gang
1 Skirk Prospector
3 Tarfire
1 Goblin King

4 Vials

Hi, I feel that I need to weigh in on this "aggressive version" debate. IMO a Goblins deck similar to the Modern Goblins deck isn't going to be particularly strong in Legacy. If you want to try it out, go for it! I'm all for experimenting with different approaches, but debating it back and forth isn't productive. The idea that I do very much believe has a lot of merit is that of a more PROACTIVE list. Sometimes the best answer to a TNN is dropping a Goblin Chieftain and swinging for lethal. We don't need to turn into an aggro deck, we just need to make sure not to dilute our deck.

I have been thinking about the fundamentals of Vial Goblins a lot lately, will post later when I have organized my thoughs, come to more conclusions etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandro95

Hi, I feel that I need to weigh in on this "aggressive version" debate. IMO a Goblins deck similar to the Modern Goblins deck isn't going to be particularly strong in Legacy. If you want to try it out, go for it! I'm all for experimenting with different approaches, but debating it back and forth isn't productive. The idea that I do very much believe has a lot of merit is that of a more PROACTIVE list. Sometimes the best answer to a TNN is dropping a Goblin Chieftain and swinging for lethal. We don't need to turn into an aggro deck, we just need to make sure not to dilute our deck.

I have been thinking about the fundamentals of Vial Goblins a lot lately, will post later when I have organized my thoughs, come to more conclusions etc.

---

In my local tournaments, a guy took his Modern goblin deck and just directly played with it in Legacy. He got dead last for two tournaments.
He added Lackey two tournaments after that, he got 1-5 and 2-4.
He added Matron some tournaments after that, he went 2-3 and 3-3.
He added Ringleader, one Piledriver and some Gempalm (to a more classic list sans wastelands and ports), and he went 4-2, 4-1, and 3-2.

So maybe he just got experience, but even then, his deck was more consistent with the classic list than the "Adapted from Modern" list, he himself confessed it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandro95

Hi, I feel that I need to weigh in on this "aggressive version" debate. IMO a Goblins deck similar to the Modern Goblins deck isn't going to be particularly strong in Legacy. If you want to try it out, go for it! I'm all for experimenting with different approaches, but debating it back and forth isn't productive. The idea that I do very much believe has a lot of merit is that of a more PROACTIVE list. Sometimes the best answer to a TNN is dropping a Goblin Chieftain and swinging for lethal. We don't need to turn into an aggro deck, we just need to make sure not to dilute our deck.

I have been thinking about the fundamentals of Vial Goblins a lot lately, will post later when I have organized my thoughs, come to more conclusions etc.

---

indeed! I totally agree, sandro!

so I played this list:
MANA (23)
4 Cavern of Souls
2 lotus petal -3 Chrome Mox
3 Wasteland
2 Pendelhaven
12 other manasources
(opting to add another Chrome Mox as a 24th manasource)

[b]CREATURES (37)
3 Aether Vial
4 Goblin Lackey
4 Warren Instigator
3 Goblin Piledriver
4 Stingscourger
4 Goblin Warchief
4 Goblin Chieftain
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Ringleader
1 Krenko, Mob Boss
1 goblin settler (there is one enchantress guy here, so the card is pretty relevant)
1 legion loyalist

w/ Wsplash for canonist/thalia/priest (guess i'll change for all in canonist, as far as omnitell is unbeatable w/out them)
so here are my thoughts-
it`s a 50-50 against burn. and guess what? incredibly necessary to be on the play =P (figures =P)
i liked the 4 stingscourger main, but the deck needs more removal. got to bounce a 2 wurmcoil against MUD and a metalworker that would have wrecked me pretty hard.
Cool thing about loyalist: got to kill w/ an alpha strike against 1 wurmcoil (dealing 12 damage before they could lifelink him. so that was awesome)

also, 8 hastelords tended to get clogged in my hand. aggresive mulliganed for an enabler (Lackey,instigator or vial), and felt pretty unconfortable playing w/out them (but then again, I had limited experience w/ the classic build. kinda became a instigator addicted) but it was better than playing 4 chieftains (Winstigator build). So i guess i'll trade 2 of them for spot removals.

concerning matrons, i don`t think we should be lowing their numbers. the reason i abandoned affinity is because the ways to get gas was pretty hard (all u have is a thoughtcast u.u) matron+ringleader allow the deck to come back alive, should some wipe happen on table, and still keep pressuring board. (which is nice)

heavy aggresion doesn`t mean "affinity combo". or super speed. if we were to go through that route, we should be playing belcher or SI. but constantly pressuring the board feels like the right way to play the deck.

again, still a great lotus petal advocate, since it fixes mana, is not a card disadvantage, and we just need to ramp a t1 or t2. even relevant in lategames, when a chrome mox alone is not even castable at that point, while petal still is.

TL;DR
* haven`t tested a lot, but ran 2 testruns against burn and miracles. also played an 8-man tournament. deck didnt work as expected, eventhough i got more t3 kills =).
* 4 stingscourger felt cool. but missed spot removals (pyrokinesis,tarfire,gempalm)
* 8 hastelords felt like they were too much, i guess we can play 6 or 7.
* matron/ringleader still worked fine.
* i am still deciding if I should replace 2 haste lords for tarfires or gempalms. that should balance the deck enough

it was cool playing this hyper agression. but things didnt go as consistent as I wanted them to be. still got a lot of t3 kills, but I had to mulligan way more for games to get me there.
so i'll make some tweaks and keep you posted.

hope I contributed for the cause

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seilaquem

indeed! I totally agree, sandro!

so I played this list:
MANA (23)
4 Cavern of Souls
2 lotus petal -3 Chrome Mox
3 Wasteland
2 Pendelhaven
12 other manasources
(opting to add another Chrome Mox as a 24th manasource)

[b]CREATURES (37)
3 Aether Vial
4 Goblin Lackey
4 Warren Instigator
3 Goblin Piledriver
4 Stingscourger
4 Goblin Warchief
4 Goblin Chieftain
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Ringleader
1 Krenko, Mob Boss
1 goblin settler (there is one enchantress guy here, so the card is pretty relevant)
1 legion loyalist

w/ Wsplash for canonist/thalia/priest (guess i'll change for all in canonist, as far as omnitell is unbeatable w/out them)
so here are my thoughts-
it`s a 50-50 against burn. and guess what? incredibly necessary to be on the play =P (figures =P)
i liked the 4 stingscourger main, but the deck needs more removal. got to bounce a 2 wurmcoil against MUD and a metalworker that would have wrecked me pretty hard.
Cool thing about loyalist: got to kill w/ an alpha strike against 1 wurmcoil (dealing 12 damage before they could lifelink him. so that was awesome)

also, 8 hastelords tended to get clogged in my hand. aggresive mulliganed for an enabler (Lackey,instigator or vial), and felt pretty unconfortable playing w/out them (but then again, I had limited experience w/ the classic build. kinda became a instigator addicted) but it was better than playing 4 chieftains (Winstigator build). So i guess i'll trade 2 of them for spot removals.

concerning matrons, i don`t think we should be lowing their numbers. the reason i abandoned affinity is because the ways to get gas was pretty hard (all u have is a thoughtcast u.u) matron+ringleader allow the deck to come back alive, should some wipe happen on table, and still keep pressuring board. (which is nice)

heavy aggresion doesn`t mean "affinity combo". or super speed. if we were to go through that route, we should be playing belcher or SI. but constantly pressuring the board feels like the right way to play the deck.

again, still a great lotus petal advocate, since it fixes mana, is not a card disadvantage, and we just need to ramp a t1 or t2. even relevant in lategames, when a chrome mox alone is not even castable at that point, while petal still is.

TL;DR
* haven`t tested a lot, but ran 2 testruns against burn and miracles. also played an 8-man tournament. deck didnt work as expected, eventhough i got more t3 kills =).
* 4 stingscourger felt cool. but missed spot removals (pyrokinesis,tarfire,gempalm)
* 8 hastelords felt like they were too much, i guess we can play 6 or 7.
* matron/ringleader still worked fine.
* i am still deciding if I should replace 2 haste lords for tarfires or gempalms. that should balance the deck enough

it was cool playing this hyper agression. but things didnt go as consistent as I wanted them to be. still got a lot of t3 kills, but I had to mulligan way more for games to get me there.
so i'll make some tweaks and keep you posted.

hope I contributed for the cause

---

Lotus petal is interesting but wouldn't simian spirit guide work even better? Exile instead of cast and actually has a body.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seilaquem

hope I contributed for the cause

---

Sure did. Your kind of post is the ones we need to have a healthy discussion.
It made me think about of couple of changes in my deck. Hopefully by Wednesday I'll have something to report.
Thanks for sharing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGreenGuys

Lotus petal is interesting but wouldn't simian spirit guide work even better? Exile instead of cast and actually has a body.

---

Because eventhough i play a monored main, i use a lot of hate offcollor: Thalia, canonist, rips...
If u were to play monocolor, sure i would put those monkeys in use xp

I am not a fan of chrome mox or lotus petal but i think between the two mox is better. They are BOTH card disadvantage, lotus petal cashes a card only to ramp one mana, while mox eats two cards but then it remains on the battlefield as a permanent mana source ..... i prefer the latter because we need mana in mid-late game to cast the goblins provided by ringleader.
Anyway my opinion is that mana accelerations is very useful to us only against combo decks to either kill them faster (turn 1 instigator is good vs combo) or stick an hate permanent turn one. Against all the fair decks the accelerators could sometimes lead to blowout in our favor but sometimes leave ourselves in a very unfavorable position when they have answers to the cards we ramped into.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeoCop 90

I am not a fan of chrome mox or lotus petal but i think between the two mox is better. They are BOTH card disadvantage, lotus petal cashes a card only to ramp one mana, while mox eats two cards but then it remains on the battlefield as a permanent mana source ..... i prefer the latter because we need mana in mid-late game to cast the goblins provided by ringleader.
Anyway my opinion is that mana accelerations is very useful to us only against combo decks to either kill them faster (turn 1 instigator is good vs combo) or stick an hate permanent turn one. Against all the fair decks the accelerators could sometimes lead to blowout in our favor but sometimes leave ourselves in a very unfavorable position when they have answers to the cards we ramped into.

---

You are right about the unfavorable position it can provide. though when you are on topdeck mode, chorme mox is slightly worse due to requiring 2 cards in hand to cast it, and having to "discard" a beater just seems awful to me. (i've been playing tes for a while, so i know how frustrating it is)

I have been advocating petal use for a while, and it's been really great for me. we just need the ramp t1-2. and it can leverage some awesome t3 plays.
it helps a lot to play around daze. (providing you also have a land in hand)

so, lotus/mox/SSG acceletarion allow us play better against tempo. 1 haste lord on turn 2. it's very good against RUG, when you can play chalice t1. (did that, was awesome)

also, you can play a chalice @2 against punishing combo on turn 3. although you might be just plain dead if you need to play around such combo u.u

so, i guess the tradeoff is worth it, even against fair decks. (though it's not great)