Printable View
I don't care much for Cataclysm either actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marungo
I was just giving a reason why SoLaS is worth playing in some match-ups but I personally don't play it right now. I would agree with you that in many cases it is mediocre.
For Macabre, I was referring to your "worse than Rest in Peace" comment. Surgical extraction is definitely the better card in some match-ups, but not downright superior.
@marungo
Those are some nice Thalias.
Your main is one card off mine and your sideboard is 3 off of mine. The list is definitely solid. I think I've played 80 or 90 matches on MTGO now, and these were my thoughts on SoLaS. It's not great, it really isn't, but it does have a set of flexible roles.
My list.
I've bombed out of my last two leagues due to some unfavorable pairings (Elves 3 times in 6 matches was rough...) and unfortunately draws, but otherwise it has been performing very well. Of the common decks, I only don't like my percentage points in the mirror and against Stoneblade. I'm also a little less favored against Delver than I used to be.
I'm messing around with cards to improve the Delver matchup at the moment. I'm dropping more games to Delver than I used to now that they have a bit more room in their sideboard for dedicated hate (Dread of Night, K. Command, Marsh Casualties) and now that TNN is becoming a more common flex creature. I'm going to try a few games with some of the cards I dismissed in the past to see how I feel about them in the new metagame. I'm trying Fiendslayer Paladin in the current league and will try Aerial Responder again in my next one. Sanctum Prelate #2 is also on the list to try. I want to try these due to issues against Young Pyromancer in particular, who has been going wider than my deck in many of my games where I don't get an active piece of equipment. I want something that can wall the 2-1 body or the tokens and gain me some life. Many of our game one cards (Recruiter, Revoker, Prelate) don't do that.
I'm frequently losing the mirror to players who are, in my opinion, over-prepared for the mirror. I think lists like that one that Marungo and I are running are pretty close to optimal for the metagame as a whole. I keep finding players who have a bunch of Seal of Cleansing, Needle, Jailer, and Manriki-Gusari in the board. It's a little hard to beat all that. Similarly, my numbers against Stoneblade aren't the best either. Disenchant followed by Snapcaster Disenchant is rough. I think I probably want to sneak a Needle back into the board to compensate for dropping more games to those decks.
Aside from +1 Containment Priest and +1 Faerie, -2 Surgical, my list is an exact copy of Marungo's. Feels pretty good most games. I like 2nd Priest for Sneak and Show, Reanimator and Elves.
Been trying 22 lands as well, so far it hasn't brought sadness.
I'm testing around with this right now. Kambal has been great in a meta of grixis and miracles, but he pushed the mana curve back up again and 2 revoker is really on the low end (I worry about the sneaky show and stoneblade match-ups). The manabase also probably needs an extra black source to accomodate the extra black creatures.
I tried Sword of Light and Shadow, but didn't like it. For a sword, its boon effects just don't really do enough in the match-ups where it's supposed to be good. The protection is nice, but too often they can afford spending a few turns finding artifact removal and ignoring the little points of damage the sword gets through. The red swords are fundamentally way more threatening and sowap is boardable in more match-ups.
I'm still a fan of Judge's Familiar, but unlikely ever more than the single slot. That card has won me quite a few games I had no business winning, but most of the time he does some damage while slowing the opponent and coercing him into bad sequencing of his spells. It's nice to have a one-drop creature which, unlike mother, is actually good against combo and control and (like mother) still fine against midrange. You lose a tiny bit in the delver match-up, but these tend to be very good pre-board anyway.
Up for debate right now:
-1 plains
+1 flooded strand
Blood Moon will be more of a problem, but that is the inevitable price for splashing. I still think Pontiff is worth that price. At least with 4+ basics and vial the deck remains relatively impervious to blood moon, making decks that run it waste slots only on a conditional piece of hate and often a very double-sided one at that (because fetchlands, duals and/or sol lands lose their functionality).
-1 Gideon
+1 Revoker
Double Kambal is already extremely punishing against the decks where Gideon would also be great. A third revoker on the other hand would be a great help against a variety of combo as well as stoneblade.
4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
3 Karakas
5 Plains
3 Flooded Strand
2 Scrubland
2 Cavern of Souls
3 Mother of Runes
1 Judge's Familiar
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
2 Serra Avenger
2 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Flickerwisp
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Kambal, Consul of Allocation
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Orzhov Pontiff
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
1 Batterskull
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
Sideboard:
2 Rest in Peace
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Council's Judgment
1 Path to Exile
1 Leonin Relic-Warder
1 Pithing Needle
1 Palace Jailer
1 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1 Blessed Alliance
1 Sword of War and Peace
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Sanctum Prelate
Kambal seems a bit weak in a deck that is actually trying to prevent noncreature spells from being cast / slow down the opponent. I am not saying it can't situationally make a difference but a 3-drop with taxing on life seems... questionable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Mat
This deck is very poorly equipped at preventing spells from being cast. Only a few lists run chalice and the others only have sanctum prelate and the hope that their opponent gets manascrewed. Our strategy is to slow down the consistent gameplan of fair decks by taxing their mana, especially cantrips, and the broken gameplan of combo by disrupting some or all of their pieces (and/or slow down their consistent gameplan if they're blue-based combo). We accomplish this through creatures, by far the most vulnerable sort of cards in the format. The advantage of creatures is that they constitute a clock. We slow down, then race for the kill before they can stabilize. But we don't prevent them from casting their cantrips and removal spells. We just try to make them cast them in the poorest ways possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by grayryker
The inevitability of Kambal fits very well into this plan, in particular in conjunction with karakas. A deck like grixis, miracles or anything midrange with punishing fire is not very well equipped at gaining life. This makes them vulnerable to late-game burn, which is even only a part of what Kambal accomplishes. A deck like burn or delver will try to race us, as our late-game threats tend to be much more powerful than theirs. Kambal alters that dynamic as well, because he adds to our pressure and takes away from theirs. A lot of combo decks will use their life source as a resource in order to fuel their combo or to buy time to assemble it optimally. Kambal also can put a snag in that strategy (e.g. storm, sneaky show, lands), as he can very well suddenly lock them out of the game regardless of whether they have answers to hate pieces. However, there are also quite a few combo decks which are not very vulnerable to Kambal (e.g. elves, infect, food chain), hence this is where he is at his weakest. He's also obviously horrible in the mirror.
What about Thalia? I thought it was quite good at keeping spells from being cast...
I do agree with you that this deck is not as good at locking down spells as people think it is. That's why I run a Chalice build and I feel the deck is so much more powerful. The deck is no longer super reliant on Thalia. Chalice solves so many inherent problems with the deck that I just left the land mana denial strategy altogether, which gave me room to substitute powerful options like the 4 Cavern of Souls, Dark Confidant, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Mat
But my original point was that Kambal is doing something that's counterproductive to what other parts of the deck are doing. The second major weakness of Kambal is that it's a 3 drop (often late with any relevant taxing) and is just a poor top deck in general. It's kind of the same issue with Thalia Heretic Cathar, who arguably has superior taxing on average but cannot be played early to take great use out of it. I think you are presenting Kambal as a sort of lockdown 'inevitable' card and this is the part that would leave me skeptical.
Thalia is good at keeping multiple spells from being cast, but not specific ones. People still get to cast their cantrips and removal, they just don't get to string them together efficiently in one turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by mistercakes
As soon as you are running chalice, I see little reason not to go for (White) Eldrazi or Red Stompy rather than a hybrid with D&T. D&T is fundamentally a vial deck, as its strategy would not be possible in the Legacy format without the insane boost to acceleration, stack interaction and color-fixing vial provides. But Chalice has terrible synergy with vial. Chalice decks do not go for a utility card like vial, but shut down the other deck through chalice then bomb the battlefield with big bad threats, like Thought-Knot Seer, Reality Smasher, Chandra, Knight of the Reliquary... They count much less on synergies and much more on swarming with singular threats.Quote:
Originally Posted by grayryker
If you tackle people on mana through denial and taxes, yes, you can expect them to cast less spells and hence take less damage from Kambal. But that's not the point of running him. He's not the card to save you when your board is gone and they have superior presence. There's really no card in D&T that can reliably allow you to come back from that other than Cataclysm, situationally. Kambal is the card that can kill them even if they have all the answers, because answering him requires losing life. He is the card that really punishes them while they're digging for answers or trying to answer your other threats. Whereas Thalia taxes their early game, constraining them on mana which is scarce then, Kambal taxes their late game, constraining them on life, which tends to be scarce then. If it's not, things aren't looking very good anyway as our end game is not that good. In match-ups where our end game is good, Kambal helps because he often turns off the ways they can still steal the game. He's not as win-more as he seems, he's the card that enables wins that would otherwise have ended as losses while only a few life points away.Quote:
But my original point was that Kambal is doing something that's counterproductive to what other parts of the deck are doing.
Kambal is meant to tax the late game, not the early. That makes him a rather good top deck, at least considering the strategy I outlined (tax, then race, then seal the deal before they get to stabilize). Thalia HC is different, because she gets ignored, chump-blocked, randomly killed (or slowed if you got karakas) and does not really penalize the casting of spells now your opponent has the mana. She has a similar role in that she seals the deal when she comes down at the right time, but I think this window is much less narrow than it is with Kambal, because Thalia's danger is still dependent on the combat step. That makes her much slower than Kambal and much easier to answer. Worst case, they take three a turn while for the rest casting whatever they want to find answers or improve their hand. Of course, Thalia does have the advantage that she is overall a much better card against combo.Quote:
The second major weakness of Kambal is that it's a 3 drop (often late with any relevant taxing) and is just a poor top deck in general. It's kind of the same issue with Thalia Heretic Cathar, who arguably has superior taxing on average but cannot be played early to take great use out of it. I think you are presenting Kambal as a sort of lockdown 'inevitable' card and this is the part that would leave me skeptical.
The simplest answer I can give you for why I no longer play Eldrazi Stompy is because it's usually a bad Eldrazi deck. Displacer is insane if you get it to go off but it doesn't happen often. A lot of the powerful interactions you get with him doesn't happen enough to warrant playing the deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Mat
"But Chalice has terrible synergy with vial". Have you played Merfolk/Goblins? It's an occasional nonbo at worst because most games you don't draw them simultaneously. If I draw both an Aether Vial and Chalice, I typically play the Vial first. This deck is content with playing a turn 2 Chalice. Against a blue deck, if I have an Ancient Tomb I will typically play the Vial first to get around Daze anyhow. It's not the best Chalice deck (as in playing it turn 1) but that's because it's playing other powerful 1-drops for consistency. When I play Eldrazi, it feels super vulnerable without a turn 1-2 Chalice.
Your overall argument is telling me what (some) decks with Chalice do and using this as a set criteria for other Chalice decks. This is a bad argument.
"Kambal is the card that can kill them even if they have all the answers" You're telling me a card that takes away 2 life after taking a removal spell to its face is that dominant? Again, even if this card is really good I don't find these arguments convincing. You're telling me he is good in the late game (say turn 6+) even when that's when he loses most of its value? You're saying it's a good card when your opponent is hellbent so aren't you already winning by that point? Why do you need a 3-drop that probably can't attack and instead deals 2 damage based on what your opponent is doing? But wait towards the end of your paragraph you're saying this is a card that actually saves you inches away from death, despite the fact that it's a 2/2 body that is terrible on a losing board. Again, you leave me very confused my friend. Overall, the argument you're presenting seems to be that Kambal is a good card in a few very specific clutch situations, which to me sounds like it is a bad card.
Not sure "Have you played these bad decks that do this same thing?" is the strongest argument.
(I don't even consider playing Chalice because I would rather not play legacy than play a Chalice deck. Card is dumb and should be banned.)
That's not the main problem with vial + chalice. The main problem is that you're running twice as much dead top decks as you would in a deck running only one of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by grayryker
Any deck with chalice is super vulnerable without a turn 1-2 chalice. Chalice is a terrible topdeck and warps your deck into omitting a whole segment of broken spells.Quote:
When I play Eldrazi, it feels super vulnerable without a turn 1-2 Chalice.
It's not about set criteria. The argument is not: decks with chalice (that get good results right now) do that right now, so that's the only strategy possible. It's: decks with chalice do that right now, what do you bring to the table to trump their approach?Quote:
Your overall argument is telling me what (some) decks with Chalice do and using this as a set criteria for other Chalice decks. This is a bad argument.
If your opponent has removal for every threat you play, you never stood a chance of winning that game. Otherwise, he is another must-kill creature who still does damage even if he gets killed and is much more trouble if you have karakas.Quote:
"Kambal is the card that can kill them even if they have all the answers" You're telling me a card that takes away 2 life after taking a removal spell to its face is that dominant?
How does he lose value in the late game?Quote:
You're telling me he is good in the late game (say turn 6+) even when that's when he loses most of its value?
Hellbent, what? Where did that come from?Quote:
You're saying it's a good card when your opponent is hellbent so aren't you already winning by that point?
Because your role is to pressure your opponent so that he has to be doing something. Otherwise, you will inevitably lose against most decks in this format.Quote:
Why do you need a 3-drop that probably can't attack and instead deals 2 damage based on what your opponent is doing?
It's a card that seals games that you would have otherwise lost because your opponent took control of the game. It's not a card that wins you games because you're facing overwhelming board pressure. I never said that.Quote:
But wait towards the end of your paragraph you're saying this is a card that actually saves you inches away from death, despite the fact that it's a 2/2 body that is terrible on a losing board.
I said that he's good basically every time unless you're facing certain combo decks (or the mirror) and unless you're in a losing position already due to board presence. That's not very specific and narrow, it's most of the games you will play and still stand a chance of winning. Kambal sucks if you're facing down double flipped delver. Kambal sucks if you're facing down a turn 1 Griselbrand. Kambal sucks if you're facing down six Monk tokens. Kambal sucks if you're facing down True-Name with Jitte. Kambal sucks if you're facing down Jace with 4+ cards in hand. But about any card you could play in this deck sucks in those situations. Those are just certain losses.Quote:
Again, you leave me very confused my friend. Overall, the argument you're presenting seems to be that Kambal is a good card in a few very specific clutch situations, which to me sounds like it is a bad card.
Chalice is not a dead top deck. Have you ever played ANY chalice deck? I've locked down people with a vial on 2 and casting chalice on x=2. Note that this deck plays 4 Cavern of Souls so I can still cast spells through my own Chalice. Even a late game chalice on 1 is powerful, locking people out of cantrips, any cheap removals, delver/shaman draws, etc. If your best argument against chalice is it increases the number of bad top decks, sorry it is hard to take your arguments seriously.
"What do you bring to the table..." Actually this was not the argument you were making at all.
On Kambal, I'm saying he loses value the more you wait on playing him because this is numerically less activations you'll get out of him. I thought it was a pretty simple explanation. I can't think of a single match-up except Burn and Storm where this card would be clearly more dominant than another slot: Mirran Crusader, Serra Avenger, hell even Fiendslayer Paladin, Magus of the Moon, Prelate, etc. If your overall argument is that Kambal locks things down on a board parity, hell you could make the same arguments for any of the other cards except they can actually attack through a board.
I'm willing to test him in a variety of match-ups. Might take a few weeks to test. My mana base can support Kambal with minor adjustments.
That wasn't the argument. The argument was vial+ chalice work in creature-centric decks. You can be a total snob and say Merfolk/Burn are 'bad' decks but the fact is playing Chalice makes these decks better than they would be in its absence.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatee
And your 2nd paragraph doesn't help hide your immaturity or prejudice. Chalice is one of the biggest reasons why many non-blue fair decks exist and it should be played if it makes a deck better. I've won games just from Delver players probing my hand and unable to answer a Chalice.
I have played with the card a bunch and it is a beast. Every Brainstorm turning into a Drain Life means you don't even really have to attack. He's also protected by Karakas and Cavernable. Vs Delver decks if you can resolve and protect it it's way better than any of those cards - and even if they have removal on the spot the Drain Life changes the clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by grayryker
Why would I need to help hide my prejudice when I'm explicitly spelling out my prejudice? Yeah, beating Delver players by resolving exactly one card is dumb and not fun and I'd rather play some other format than play a Stompy deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by grayryker
Does anyone have experience with Dust Bowl in the current meta, specifically against Czech Pile or straight Grixis? I'm thinking of trying one out as a way to out Wasteland the decks that have both mostly non-basics and a higher land count. It also might help with those games that go long, since you can turn all your lands after 4 or 5 into Wastelands. Since I'm on Flagstones and Cataclysm's there's some synergy with it already built in, and I'm thinking of trying to cutting a Cavern for one. Thoughts?
Not just Delver but a whole range of decks flat out lose to a turn 1-2 Chalice. I don't see why the prejudice exists when you're playing a deck that wants to have as much lockdown as possible and prevent your opponent from playing magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatee
I'm going to test Kambal, but again, I find it skeptical to think it's reliable. So far the argument seems to be "this card helps you when you have 2-3 other threats on board with pressure and your opponent needs to use cantrips to find answers for what you have" which sounds like a pretty weak card to me. A 2/2 body sounds like a huge liability on offense and defense, and any decent opponent in a tight race can play around it, rather than having the 'lockdown effect' you guys claim it does. It kinda reminds me of Vexing Devil. Both its effect are decent except the moment your opponent can choose to play around it, those effects lose tremendous value. Winning most fair games for me doesn't come down to life points but board presence; hell I could be way down on life points and still be winning because getting to superior board presence is what matters.
Guys,
HI,
I'm back into D&T since like 5 years of playing all the other decks.
Kinda build it just not to waste the cards I've around TBH, and since I don't have rishadan, I was curious to run either ghost quarter list, or splashed list.
atm I've took this link list as reference, and I'll build it like this:
2 Mirran Crusader
2 Aven Mindcensor
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Sanctum Prelate
3 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Flickerwisp
4 Mother of Runes
4 Stoneforge Mystic
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Batterskull
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
4 Aether Vial
2 Cavern of Souls
3 Karakas
4 Ghost Quarter
4 Wasteland
1 horizon canopy
2 flagstones of trokair
7 plains
side
2 Containment Priest
2 Council's Judgment
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Faerie Macabre
2 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
2 Path to Exile
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Rest in Peace
1 Spirit of the labyrinth
I've yet to play it, will likely be able to game in the next week, I was wondering if I were missing some key sinergy in the ghost quarter builds (I like the idea of mindcesor and ghostquarter), or If I was missing some sideboard cards
Hey all,
Looking for some advice on playing against Czech Pile. I've been out of the loop a little while and played against it for the first time at a team tournament this past weekend. We ended up playing that team in our 4th round and again in the quarterfinals -- I tried different strategies and sideboard and really got blown out both times. I certainly made some play errors (redtwister was there and saw a number of them) but overall I struggled on the tactics. My list for reference:
Creatures:
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
4 Mother of Runes
4 Flickerwisp
3 Phyrexian Revoker
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Mirran Crusader
2 Serra Avenger
1 Sanctum Prelate
Spells:
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Batterskull
Lands:
10 Plains
1 Cavern of Souls
1 Horizon Canopy
3 Karakas
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland
Sideboard:
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Rest in Peace
2 Surgical Extraction
1 Faerie Macabre
2 Council's Judgment
2 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1 Pithing Needle
2 Containment Priest
2 Path to Exile
1 Sword of Light and Shadow
I read through Medea's match-up analysis after the first loss. I suppose my main questions are:
(1) How does one "play around" Kolaghan's Command? Most often I was blown out by K-Command, Snap-K Command.
(2) What does sideboarding look like? I brought in Gideon, RIP, and SoLaS of which I only saw the Sword. Obviously RIP would have solved the Snapcaster problem if I had seen it. I took out Prelate, a couple of Revokers and one piece of equipment, maybe an StP or an Avenger? Mostly I was at a loss for keeping the equipment on board long enough to get in the necessary damage. Crusader was an all-star but hard to keep on the board against 2x K-Command, 2x Lightning Bolt, and the Snapcasters.
Thanks in advance.
@NegatorITA
Your list is reasonable. Keep is mind the GQ is largely a budget substitution for Port. Against DRS and basic-heavy decks in particular, you will notice the difference in how those cards perform.
@Copperhead
I usually board out Revokers and StP for Gideon, RiP, SoLaS, and Council's Judgment.
It's hard to describe how to play around K. Command. Your opponent is always going to cast it and get a 2 for 1, but you can give them worse 2 for 1s or make them waste their mana. If you've got the read that it is coming, you can hold back some artifacts or play your worse artifacts first to bait it. If your opponent has Gitaxian Probed you and knows they need to use it to beat something like a SoLaS, you can pressure them with creatures until you force them to tap low. That can give you a chance to connect with SoLaS once, replacing itself in terms of value. Similarly, if they pass the turn with K. Command mana up, you can just play in a way that gives them the least value for casting it now, or force them to wait a bit on it.
Regarding Fiendslayer Paladin:
I don't remember who advocated this as a bullet for the Czech Pile/Grixis matchups, but I don't think it is worth slots in the 75. I ran it through two leagues in the maindeck just to get a feel for how the card performed generally. It helps you *not lose* the game, but doesn't particularly help *win* the game. While it is borderline impossible to get off the board, it doesn't actually beat most of their stuff. A young Pyromancer goes wider than it in just a few turns, forcing a board stall. Similarly, a couple of DRS or other dorks stops it from attacking. With a Jitte or SoFaI, it doesn't actually beat through or stall a Gurmag Angler. The lifelink didn't end up being as relevant as I'd hoped it would be, as he eventually got walled out and I died to a hoard of tokens. In more general matchups like Eldrazi, it again got walled easily unless I had equipment, and unlike THC, it couldn't work together with another first strike creature to take out a Reality Smasher.