[Deck] Suicide Black

Sucks in this meta. He's not that good really now that decks don't completely suck ass, but it's even worse that nobody plays control or combo in this format. Which are the two archetypes that Hyppie is mostly likely to actually wreck with one or multiple hits.

Aggro loses a land or a dude and probably doesn't care. To top if off, if you ritual Hyppie out, you basically beg your opponent to kill it before it actually does anything. At least when you Ritual your other guys in Sui Black you can generally cast Hymn or Duress first and then play them.

Arguing about Tomb of Urami pretty much amounts to circle-jerking. The number of games that a single Swamp/Tomb swap will win or lose is undoubtedly marginally small.

That isn't to say that every extra percentage point doesn't matter, but it's pretty easy to contend that you'll lose more games to Tomb getting Wasted than you will win by activating it. The problem is that figuring out who is right requires testing, not filling up multiple pages regurgitating the same points. Drop it until someone can present some actual numbers.

Quote:

---

Everybody yelling about Confidant

---

Dark Confidant is pretty closely comparable to Hypnotic Specter. Both give up size (relative to the other creatures in this deck) for the ability to generate incremental card advantage. However, Hyppie is a much better tool for this deck than Confidant, for a couple of reasons.

First of all, Hyppie's ability disrupts the opponent. Making you opponent discard cards may generally be worse than drawing your own cards, but not in this case. This is because the ability is attached to a creature, which means that your strategy (attacking and disrupting) must already be online to some degree for it to be relevant. Drawing more cards can bolster your strategy, but removing cards from your opponent's hand will often inhibit their strategy to a greater degree. Basically, a card in your opponent's hand will usually be more important to both players than an extra card drawn by Sui will be (insert Sui-bashing joke here). As a related point, Hyppie's ability can often delay the onset of the mid- and late-games, which is beneficial to Sui.

Secondly, Flying lets Hyppie deal far more damage, on average, than Confidant. The evasion also severely mitigates the disadvantage that Hyppie must deal combat damage to trigger. Combined with the disruptive nature of the ability, Flying makes Hyppie better suited to Sui's aggressive strategy than Confidant is, despite costing more.

Even though Hypnotic Specter is superior to Dark Confidant in this deck, they are still fairly close in purpose and in power level. Thus, arguing for the inclusion of one but not the other is certainly questionable, but bear with me.

Sui works with a delicate balance of disruption and threats; drawing too few of either during a game weakens the deck's strategy a great deal. The best argument for Hypnotic Specter's inclusion may likely be that it tries to fulfill both roles, even if it isn't a massive threat. Confidant, lacking evasion, can't really be considered a threat at all, so squeezing him into the list disturbs the disruption:threat:mana ratio the deck relies on.

An active Confidant will obviously fix your draw over time, but that does more to highlight the card's conflict with the Suicide concept than it does to support the card's inclusion in the deck. As others have said, Confidant may help out Suicide in the mid- to late-game, but this comes at an unacceptable expense to the deck's early-game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obfuscate Freely

Arguing about Tomb of Urami pretty much amounts to circle-jerking. The number of games that a single Swamp/Tomb swap will win or lose is undoubtedly marginally small.

---

Probably the best words that were written about the Tomb of Urami Debate.

I need to emphatically argue for Confidant's inclusion.

First of all, suicide sucks. You get one or two disruption spells, then attempt to ride one of your shitty men to victory. Once you've blown your load, that's pretty much it.

Confidant allows you to continually put pressure on your opponent, making it so they can't recover. I don't quite understand why confidant helping as a mid-game card is considered a strike against it.

Here is an example of a traditional game.

turn 1: land, duress. (5 cards in hand)

turn 2: land, ritual, sinkhole, hymn. (2 cards in hand)

turn 3: here it is, turn three. I would consider this mid-game. Considering that most decks in the format have a FT four. It's not early game (turns 1-2) and it's not late game (turns 5+) so it must be mid-game. You are generally looking at 3 cards in your hand. At this point in my example, an example that is pretty close to optimal, you have yet to cast any creature kill. That's fine unless you are playing goblins. Now, let's assume that of the three cards left in your hand one of them is removal, so we really only have two cards that are threats or potential threats. At this point we have to play a threat and ride it to victory with no card draw and no real reserves. The situation is worse if your threat costs three mana. At this point, a confidant here will either draw removal like any other creature you play or survive to refill your grip as you apply the pressure. What is better right now? Nantuko shade? It's a 4-power at best right now. Hypnotic? Dead or winning, just like confidant. Negator? One bolt and you are out of the game.

Confidant doesn't suck.

Next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FakeSpam

I need to emphatically argue for Confidant's inclusion.

First of all, suicide sucks. You get one or two disruption spells, then attempt to ride one of your shitty men to victory. Once you've blown your load, that's pretty much it.

Confidant allows you to continually put pressure on your opponent, making it so they can't recover. I don't quite understand why confidant helping as a mid-game card is considered a strike against it.

Here is an example of a traditional game.

turn 1: land, duress. (5 cards in hand)

turn 2: land, ritual, sinkhole, hymn. (2 cards in hand)

turn 3: here it is, turn three. I would consider this mid-game. Considering that most decks in the format have a FT four. It's not early game (turns 1-2) and it's not late game (turns 5+) so it must be mid-game. You are generally looking at 3 cards in your hand. At this point in my example, an example that is pretty close to optimal, you have yet to cast any creature kill. That's fine unless you are playing goblins. Now, let's assume that of the three cards left in your hand one of them is removal, so we really only have two cards that are threats or potential threats. At this point we have to play a threat and ride it to victory with no card draw and no real reserves. The situation is worse if your threat costs three mana. At this point, a confidant here will either draw removal like any other creature you play or survive to refill your grip as you apply the pressure. What is better right now? Nantuko shade? It's a 4-power at best right now. Hypnotic? Dead or winning, just like confidant. Negator? One bolt and you are out of the game.

Confidant doesn't suck.

Next.

---

Lets assume in you're example you could cast any of you're creatures.

Confidant gives you're opponent the most change to get back in the game.
Hypnotic Specter. Is about the same strength as Confidant, see Obfuscate Freely's post. But it keeps you're opponent hand from growing, deals damage to you're opponent and not to you and has evasion. If you're opponent playes a 1/x threat Specter can chump block it, Confidant Dies to it. if you're opponent has something like a Wall of Blossom( it isn't much played but hell) Hypnotic Specter can attack where Confidant can't.

Nantuko Shade. Doesn't give card advantage, but is a house lategame. It can block anything without flying and survive. It can beat for 6-7 damage a turn, makes you're Dark Rituals Giant Growths.

Phyrexian Negator. His drawback is quite bad in the midgame, and will become worse. But he can beat 5 damage a turn and if you've got enough lands to support him, he tramples over small blockers. In this point he might not be as good as confidant, but Negator is so much better turn 1 and 2.

Wretched Anurid. Both cost you life, but Anurid attacks and blocks where Confidant gives you cards. Anurid dodges Pyroclasm and fire // Ice and Mogg Fanatic. In this scenario Confidant might be better. But Anurid can beat the turn after it comes into play, where it is doubt for Confidant.

In you're example, if you assume you're opponent is going to play a creature, you're better off with playing a Arena then a Confidant. Also, the disruption Sui-black packs, isn't for late game. Hymn is dead when you're opponent hasn't got a hand left. Sinkhole isn't great when you're opponent has 4 lands. So I rather seal the deal quickly, then search for threaths and disruption, wich get worse every turn.

Here is an excerpt from Zvi Mowshowitz's Systemic Thought article from Tuesday April 25th -

Quote:

---

These games are about tempo, with two general subtypes. In type one, both players are racing to complete their task first, such as when one person has the advantage on the ground and one has it in the air. In these games, your most important concern is the efficiency of your time and mana. You want to get as much as you can done as quickly as possible, and other considerations don't matter unless they will get in the way. Extra cards don't matter in these games unless one player runs out of cards and therefore things to do with his mana, or he needs to go digging for the tools he needs.

---

The last part is especially relevant to this conversation. In that extra cards (Confidant) don't matter unless you actually run out of cards and basically can not accomplish your goal with the cards you have in hand. Confidant does not help you do "as much as possible" because he rarely is able deal damage to your opponent (which is your main goal), but Hyppie almost always hits thus helping you accomplish your goal.

Without a dark ritual, what is the earliest this deck can win?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phantom

Without a dark ritual, what is the earliest this deck can win?

---

You will actually kill your opponent sometime around turn 8 or more.

This is my point.

Without a Dark Ritual the deck can Goldfish earliest Turn 5.
Which is why the deck plays Dark Ritual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ewokslayer

Without a Dark Ritual the deck can Goldfish earliest Turn 5.
Which is why the deck plays Dark Ritual.

---

Unfortunatly, they don't allow you to run 8.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benie Bederios

In you're example, if you assume you're opponent is going to play a creature, you're better off with playing a Arena then a Confidant.

---

What? Have you played with confidant before?

Why do you say confidant gives them a chance to get back into the game? You're drawing more disruption with it, as well as twice as many threats... how is that giving your opponent time? If anything, Confidant takes away their time, as the longer he lives the better your odds are of winning.

Why are you bringing up Wall of Blossoms? Wretched Anurid is pretty crappy when the opp plays a wall of blossoms too, but so what? If you have a second threat on the ground then blossoms is only blocking one of the creatures, so confidant might as well be a hippy then, as far as damage is concerned.


Yes, magic is a game of tempo, but it's also one of options. That's why we run Hymn, to deplete our opponents options so that we can ride our tempo advantage. Confidant gives us more options, which in turn can be converted into tempo when you draw into more threats than your opponent can deal with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caleb

What? Have you played with confidant before?

Why do you say confidant gives them a chance to get back into the game? You're drawing more disruption with it, as well as twice as many threats... how is that giving your opponent time? If anything, Confidant takes away their time, as the longer he lives the better your odds are of winning.

Why are you bringing up Wall of Blossoms? Wretched Anurid is pretty crappy when the opp plays a wall of blossoms too, but so what? If you have a second threat on the ground then blossoms is only blocking one of the creatures, so confidant might as well be a hippy then, as far as damage is concerned.


Yes, magic is a game of tempo, but it's also one of options. That's why we run Hymn, to deplete our opponents options so that we can ride our tempo advantage. Confidant gives us more options, which in turn can be converted into tempo when you draw into more threats than your opponent can deal with.

---

Yes I've played Bw Confidant. In that deck he really shines. But this deck is quite different than Sui-black. Bw Confidant is a control deck, this is aggro, with some control elements. This deck plays more creatures and less disruption. Your late game is bad, whether you have Confidant or not.

All land and hand disruption loose there power overtime. The disruption looses his power after turn 5. As I said before, a sinkhole doesn't hurt when your opponent has 4 lands in play. Hymn to Tourach is bad when you're opponent played his entire hand. Diabolic Edict is not that powerfull if you're opponent has 2 or more creatures. Vendetta will become worse, when you're opponent plays more expensive threaths. So you need to kill as fast as possible, before you're creatures and disruption loose their strength. So Confidant will draw into disruption that becomes weaker and weaker, while the other creatures have a faster clock, or denies you're opponent from cards.

Bw-Confidant plays Engineered Plague, Cursed Scroll, Swords to Plowshare and Vindicate. The first two are reasonably late game and the last two are just great.

I still fail to see how wretched anurid is better than dark confidant.

In Phantom's build, Dark Confidant is fine. Phantom is proposing a BW Confidant disruption/control aggro deck that more closely resembles Deadguy Ale than Suicide Black. Benie hit it right on the nose when he said the disruption [as seen in Deadguy and Phantom's build] is much better early on than later and Confidant allows you to see more faster. Suicide Black is not about heavy disruption, it's about applying early pressure with cheap, efficient creatures. Contrary to what Caleb thinks, drawing more of these cheap, efficient creatures with Confidant will not help you win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obfuscate Freely

Sui works with a delicate balance of disruption and threats; drawing too few of either during a game weakens the deck's strategy a great deal. The best argument for Hypnotic Specter's inclusion may likely be that it tries to fulfill both roles, even if it isn't a massive threat. Confidant, lacking evasion, can't really be considered a threat at all, so squeezing him into the list disturbs the disruption:threat:mana ratio the deck relies on.

An active Confidant will obviously fix your draw over time, but that does more to highlight the card's conflict with the Suicide concept than it does to support the card's inclusion in the deck. As others have said, Confidant may help out Suicide in the mid- to late-game, but this comes at an unacceptable expense to the deck's early-game.

---

Relying on Confidant to do as such means sacrificing your early game to win later, which also I feel is unacceptable. That strategy will play right into the hands of Rifter, Gro, Goblins, Solidarity, Wombat, Iggy Pop, Salvager Combo, Deadguy, and numerous other decks that become more dangerous the longer the game takes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fake Spam

I still fail to see how wretched anurid is better than dark confidant.

---

I thought Benie put it pretty plainly, do you not agree with his logic? If not, why?

I guess I'm going to have to do this the hard way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benie Bederios

Lets assume in you're example you could cast any of you're creatures.

Confidant gives you're opponent the most change to get back in the game.
Hypnotic Specter. Is about the same strength as Confidant, see Obfuscate Freely's post. But it keeps you're opponent hand from growing, deals damage to you're opponent and not to you and has evasion. If you're opponent playes a 1/x threat Specter can chump block it, Confidant Dies to it. if you're opponent has something like a Wall of Blossom( it isn't much played but hell) Hypnotic Specter can attack where Confidant can't.

---

Where are all these opposing creatures coming from? That, and assuming you can't pave the way for Confidant to actually get in there he still does something. Hypnotic Specter just kinda chills in the face of a blocker. Granted, he gets blocked by less. I would put the two cards at the same power level. Confidant is nice that he only costs 2 mana, only one black, and therefore just a little easier to cast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benie Bederios

Nantuko Shade. Doesn't give card advantage, but is a house lategame. It can block anything without flying and survive. It can beat for 6-7 damage a turn, makes you're Dark Rituals Giant Growths.

---

I'm not debating Nantuko Shade's late game power. We also aren't debating Confidant's late game power. Let's compare apples to apples. Early on, Nantuko Shade is a 2/1 for 2. Just like Confidant. He will eat up mana to trade or better early threats. Confidant will draw cards and trade with early threats if neccessary.

Everyone keeps saying this is an aggro deck, then they talk about how the creatures suck on D. I didn't know Aggro decks did so much blocking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benie Bederios

Phyrexian Negator. His drawback is quite bad in the midgame, and will become worse. But he can beat 5 damage a turn and if you've got enough lands to support him, he tramples over small blockers. In this point he might not be as good as confidant, but Negator is so much better turn 1 and 2.

---

Wrong. You don't have the cards in play to support him early on. If you trample over a blocker, you shoot yourself in the foot for development. Basically, you give your opponents the turns back that you took from them with Sinkhole and Hymn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benie Bederios

Wretched Anurid. Both cost you life, but Anurid attacks and blocks where Confidant gives you cards. Anurid dodges Pyroclasm and fire // Ice and Mogg Fanatic. In this scenario Confidant might be better. But Anurid can beat the turn after it comes into play, where it is doubt for Confidant.

---

Wretched Anurid is a 3/3. That is not a signifigant clock for an "aggro" deck. I would rather put my two mana into something that actually did something. Big deal, so it can swing. Confidant can swing, too. As I said earlier, where are all these blockers coming from? And why can't we just kill them? Also, Wretched Anurid doesn't draw me into more threats. He just sits there and looks all frog-like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benie Bederios

In you're example, if you assume you're opponent is going to play a creature, you're better off with playing a Arena then a Confidant. Also, the disruption Sui-black packs, isn't for late game. Hymn is dead when you're opponent hasn't got a hand left. Sinkhole isn't great when you're opponent has 4 lands. So I rather seal the deal quickly, then search for threaths and disruption, wich get worse every turn.

---

Arena doesn't beat for two. Arena costs 3 mana.

I think people fail to realize that this is an aggro-control deck. It's not pure aggro. If it was, it would suck completely. You have control elements that you use to get the advantage on your opponents resources so that you can win. In a hand of seven cards you can only sustain this for three turns at most. Drawing extra cards via confidant will allow you to keep them in the stone age while you run over them with your shitty men. This is super-duper important, because when an opponent does finally get the chance to stabilize their deck is most likely better and will quickly destroy you.

Leaving the Confidant debate alone, I have some questions/comments about the deck:

1) One drops. I think this deck needs some. Without Rituals, this deck has no turn one play which is pretty awful for a speed deck. I reccomend Carnophage or the enchantment, which actually has good synergy with Negator.

2) Negator. I tested the hell out of this guy because he is so damn tempting, but I just can't see him in the maindeck. Every deck running creatures is running more creatures than you have removal. Any deck running burn can completely ruin your game. Even Thresh usually gets a 3/3 Mongoose up by turn 3, so you might be able to get in 5 damage before you are screwed. In short he has too many horrible matchups (burn, Gobos, Angel Stompy, Zilla Stompy, Faerie Stompy) and mediocre matchups (Thresh, UR Landstill, Rifter) compared to great matchups (UW Landstill, Combo). I have no idea what to replace him with, but Juzaam and Grinning demon are options I guess.

3) Nantuko Shade is a fantastic card, but he's a pretty terrible tempo card. If you lay him second turn, he's hitting like a Confidant unless you have mana to pump him (thus denying you playing a spell that turn). Also, he's pretty much as fragile to removal as Confidant seeing as you probably end about 0 turns with any free mana. This means that even a cycled Slice and Dice spells doom for your 2 drop.

4) Vendetta is simply amazing in this deck, and it's only dead to Pikulas. Color me impressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phantom

Leaving the Confidant debate alone, I have some questions/comments about the deck:

2) Negator. I tested the hell out of this guy because he is so damn tempting, but I just can't see him in the maindeck. Every deck running creatures is running more creatures than you have removal. Any deck running burn can completely ruin your game. Even Thresh usually gets a 3/3 Mongoose up by turn 3, so you might be able to get in 5 damage before you are screwed. In short he has too many horrible matchups (burn, Gobos, Angel Stompy, Zilla Stompy, Faerie Stompy) and mediocre matchups (Thresh, UR Landstill, Rifter) compared to great matchups (UW Landstill, Combo). I have no idea what to replace him with, but Juzaam and Grinning demon are options I guess.

---

I would tend to disagree with your assessment of Negator. I'll grant you that he is horrible against Burn, but he's not terrible against goblins, angel stompy, or Faerie Stompy (though I haven't done much testing against this deck). He's simply bigger than most if not all the creatures played in those decks. Against goblins with or without a ritual he's very good. They have to sacrifice their creatures to block him. Angel Stompy is the same way. Zilla Stompy is only unfavorable because that deck plays burn otherwise it would be okay. Faerie Stompy is so easy to mana-screw as well as removing the 1 or 2 creatures they have played before you do mana-screw them. The other problem with replacing Negator is that their no other comparable creature - Juzam and Grinning Demon both cost 4 and that is just killer in terms of killing the curve (not to mention not as tasty with Dark Ritual). I've beaten goblins so many times with Negator that I've come to the conclusion that he's really good against Goblins.

Phantom: Faerie Stompy hardly has enough presence in any meta to justify any kind of inclusion into any gauntlet at the present.

I'm going to have to agree with Anwar, Negator is just the best card for the slot. A 3-mana 5/5 Trample is just insane and it ends games especially as it converts a non-essential resource (lands) into a warm, cheap body. In my experience, Goblins simply have tons of trouble dealing with anything that's bigger than their whole deck. Again, I don't think Zilla Stompy has enough presence to be included in a gauntlet just yet.

Threshold actually seems kind of interesting; I doubt they'd be willing to trade 1 of their 8-10 threats for a few lands. UGr would of course just Bolt it and call it a day though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldariel

Phantom: Faerie Stompy hardly has enough presence in any meta to justify any kind of inclusion into any gauntlet at the present.

---

I certainly agree with that, but I threw it in there (as well as Zilla) b/c I had actually done the testing. Psionic Blast just makes Negator cry. SoFI on a flyer does the same (we trade damage but you sac 2 permanents while I draw a card).

I found Negator pretty solid off of Ritual vs Thresh, but pretty awful turn three. They are laying 4/4's and 3/3's they would happily trade for all your lands (usually). I was running 12 creatures in the Thresh build though, so maybe that's a little off.

I can't understand at all how he is decent vs. Goblins. They will block him every turn, doing 1-2 damage (this plays into there mana denial a little too). Then they will attack and prob do as much damage as your Negator. And god forbid a bolt or incinerator get aimed his way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldariel

I'm going to have to agree with Anwar, Negator is just the best card for the slot. A 3-mana 5/5 Trample is just insane and it ends games especially as it converts a non-essential resource (lands) into a warm, cheap body.

---

When he's powered out first turn, lands are pretty damn essential, aren't they.

Hell, I'm not even arguing that he's not the best card for the spot, but if he's in your board, he can still play in 66% of the matchups where he rocks without costing you the first game of already unfavorable matchups.

In short: I'm saying that at least he needs to be looked at and considered for the sideboard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FakeSpam

Where are all these opposing creatures coming from? That, and assuming you can't pave the way for Confidant to actually get in there he still does something. Hypnotic Specter just kinda chills in the face of a blocker. Granted, he gets blocked by less. I would put the two cards at the same power level. Confidant is nice that he only costs 2 mana, only one black, and therefore just a little easier to cast.

---

How many creatures are actually played in this format that can block Hippie and kill it? How many of those can be taken out via Vendetta, Edict, StP, or Vindicate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fake Spam

I'm not debating Nantuko Shade's late game power. We also aren't debating Confidant's late game power. Let's compare apples to apples. Early on, Nantuko Shade is a 2/1 for 2. Just like Confidant. He will eat up mana to trade or better early threats. Confidant will draw cards and trade with early threats if neccessary.

---

Next turn, Shade can be a 5/4, Confidant will flip over a card. I think I'd rather have the 5/4 in a traditional aggro SuiBlack build.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fake Spam

Everyone keeps saying this is an aggro deck, then they talk about how the creatures suck on D. I didn't know Aggro decks did so much blocking.

---

If Suicide Black is forced to start blocking, they're going to lose. You're right, Fake Spam, Suicide Black is about offense. Negator and Shade have it, Confidant doesn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fake Spam

Wrong. You don't have the cards in play to support him early on. If you trample over a blocker, you shoot yourself in the foot for development. Basically, you give your opponents the turns back that you took from them with Sinkhole and Hymn.

---

Either your testing with Negator is flawed or you've never played with Negator, because what you've just said is completely false. See AnwarA101's post before this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fake Spam

Wretched Anurid is a 3/3. That is not a signifigant clock for an "aggro" deck. I would rather put my two mana into something that actually did something. Big deal, so it can swing. Confidant can swing, too. As I said earlier, where are all these blockers coming from? And why can't we just kill them? Also, Wretched Anurid doesn't draw me into more threats. He just sits there and looks all frog-like.

---

Suicide Black does not depend solely on a 3/3. When combined with the other cheap threats, you've a fast enough clock that becomes a significant threat. As it's been explained multiple times, 2/1 Confidant is not a threat even when combined with the other threats in the deck because it dies too easy or doesn't attack at all. I know that even with AnwarA101's build, which doesn't run StP or Vindicate, you could easily remove an early blocker for your Confidant. That doesn't make Confidant harder to kill though. The two extra toughness you get from Anurid does make Anurid harder to kill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fake Spam

Arena doesn't beat for two. Arena costs 3 mana.

---

Arena would also take 2 turns to reach the card advantage Night's Whisper does. If I really wanted to draw more cards in Suicide Black, I'd run Night's Whisper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fake Spam

I think people fail to realize that this is an aggro-control deck. It's not pure aggro. If it was, it would suck completely. You have control elements that you use to get the advantage on your opponents resources so that you can win. In a hand of seven cards you can only sustain this for three turns at most. Drawing extra cards via confidant will allow you to keep them in the stone age while you run over them with your shitty men. This is super-duper important, because when an opponent does finally get the chance to stabilize their deck is most likely better and will quickly destroy you.

---

And what's why Phantom's aggro-control build needs to be put elsewhere. Could someone please make that happen?