-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arianrhod
Also, will the uncounterable clause on Decay actually get around Mother of Runes? Since her ability would make an illegal target, the spell would be "countered," I'm just not sure which way it would go as far as the rulings are concerned. I want to say that Mom won't stop Decay, which would be amazing.
Abrupt Decay can't be countered by spells or abilities, but it can still be countered before resolving if the legal target is removed. MoM effectively 'counters' Abrupt Decay by removing the legal target required for Decay's resolution. EDIT: And the legal target just needs to be legally removed once. So even if you Momentary Blink a creature that's the target of an AD, the AD will still be countered even if the creature is still on the battlefield after Blink resolves.
Spells (typically instants/sorceries) usually have a 'can't be countered by spells or abilities' clause if the said spell targets something, so that in cases such as Mom vs AD, they can still be countered if they fail to have a legal target for resolution. But spells that don't require targets, such as creatures, or Supreme Verdict, just have a 'can't be countered' clause so no matter what those spells will never be countered before resolution.
*goes back to lurking*
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Haha, I'm just saying that there are a few ways for Rector to circumvent the hardest part to beat of ScapeFit :P.
On STE, my view point is that if the deck is leaning towards a sac outlet core (it is approaching 8 or 12+ outlets with 2 Tower, 4 Therapy, 4 GSZ -> 1 Ruskala, Intent...depending on how you count GSZ and not counting Nightmare) then the more powerful card to roll with will be the Emissary since you have a high chance of having an outlet in hand. I count VE as being more powerful as it can be combined with 8 cards of the deck for profit (Rusalka being a weak #8), whereas STE finds marginal synergy with a lonely Nightmare and otherwise is a slightly warm old man on the field.
All that said, I do like this point you made:
Quote:
I'd rather my "backup ramp dude" is able to actually ramp on his own without needing an outlet, personally, because that's his purpose
so I'll have to keep that in mind in my testing, and see when it is relevant and how it changes the game plan. tl;dr the pilot needs to see if they prefer 100% chance of ramp dude or 80*% chance of ramp/sac utility dude.
*with 12 sac outlets, this one website says you have a 81% chance of drawing one outlet in your opening hand. 35% of the deck can use VE for profit. Fuck if I know for harder math further than that, such as chance of drawing sac + 6 ramp dudes vs 4 ramp dudes and varying for 3 or 4 GSZ. I do chemistry, lol. http://www.kibble.net/magic/magic10.php
Also, this is the concept fueling my next Modern deck that will be graveaggro with a Jarad's Orders kill:
Quote:
The idea behind Scapewish is that it's a Nic Fit deck first, and a combo deck second. The combo blends seamlessly into the overall gameplan of the deck...it's not a "Valakut deck." It's a Nic Fit deck that uses a Valakut core. It all goes back to that question of conceptualization and intent.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
@Arianrhod,
Decay is more useful than Pulse against Mom because it is instant speed, not because of the "countered" clause. Along with a beefy creature, you can circumvent Mom with decay using combat tricks.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
@Qweerios
That new BUG list you posted is almost card for card the list I'm working on when Return to Ravnica is released. Let me know how your testing fares!
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Yep, Great Whale (or Palinchron, if I determine whether mixing it up game 2 and 3 would be a viable option) will be one of win-cons for my build. Why? Because it's so useful (and fun) to just do anything you want as a win condition. You can get around pretty much any kind of defense as long you anticipate it. They got Leyline of Sanctity? Exsanguinate. Strong counterspell suite? Tendrils of Agony. Both? Put in a bunch of tokens with Thragtusk and gain enough life to last you for the rest of the game. Possibilities are truly, truly outrageous. And it's all thanks to Recurring Nightmare and Great Whale/Palinchron.
Granted, grave-hate is a pita, as is a properly timed counterspell (i.e. countering the Recurring Nightmare itself). Also, setting up the combo is a bit of a hassle: might up my Intuition count to 4. But otherwise, it's been working great as an alt win-con (primary win-con is still smash face with giant dude).
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arianrhod
@Cire_dk -- Firemind pretty much nailed it. The idea behind Empath is that you can Green Sun for your non-green 6-drops that way. Empath for Sun Titan, sac Empath to whatever, then Sun Titan bringing back Empath for Yosei is a savage beating that a lot of decks just crumple under. I'll grant you that Empath is a little underwhelming, and I do hope that one day we get a "better" Empath. Mwonvuli Beast-Tracker was really, really close. All it needed to say was "Flying" instead of "Reach," and I would have been allllllllll over that. So, hopefully one day. For now, though, I think it's still important.
Thanks for the response. I understand its use with GSZ but is it not to slow. If I understand correctly it will take 2 turns most of the time to activate. Empath -Suntitan, next turn Play Sun sac empath, next turn Yosei etc. With Eladamri's Call it would be much faster. Since you need it towards mid end game the chances are, playing top and fetch, you will likely have seen the card. So it is speed vs utility. I guess I will just have to find out. :tongue:
PS How do I insert images correctly?
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
a question about the Scapewish deck:
To make it simple, say I have 8 forest in play. I then sac 8 forest for scapeshift and search for 2x valakut and 6x mountains. They all enter the battlefield simultaneously and I'm wondering, can I deal 36 damage in total or only 6? Since I need 5 mountains for valakut to trigger and then only the 6th would do damage, but as they all enter the battlefield at the same time will I then deal max damage?
Sorry if this has been asked already.
Also I can't decide if I want to play rector version or scapewish next sunday... problem is im missing the duals for scapewish but if I can get a hand on them I'll try that deck
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Because they all enter the battlefield at the same time the Valakut sees 6 mountains enter the battlefield. Now it checks, are there allready 5 others? Well yes there are!
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Viridia
Because they all enter the battlefield at the same time the Valakut sees 6 mountains enter the battlefield. Now it checks, are there allready 5 others? Well yes there are!
The important thing is it checks for EACH MOUNTAIN. So mountain 1 checks and yes, there are 5 others. Mountain 2 checks and yes there are 5 others. Wash, rinse, repeat. It's kinda insane really.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
EDIT: Disregard This. RTFC. derp.
So as long as you have 7 lands in play when you scapeshift (or one less for each valakut you already have in play) you can find 5 mountain and 2 valakuts and deal 30 damage. Or if 15 damage is enough you can scapeshift on 6 lands.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TheArchitect
So as long as you have 7 lands in play when you scapeshift (or one less for each valakut you already have in play) you can find 5 mountain and 2 valakuts and deal 30 damage. Or if 15 damage is enough you can scapeshift on 6 lands.
Valakut says
Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle enters the battlefield tapped.
Whenever a Mountain enters the battlefield under your control, if you control at least five other Mountains, you may have Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle deal 3 damage to target creature or player.
Tap: Add R to your mana pool.
This means that with 7 lands you should scapeshift for 1 Valakut and 6 mountains, resulting in 6 Lightning Bolts (18 damage).
This is usually enough because of fetchlands, FoW and your creatures.
8 lands Shift will result in 2 Valakuts and 6 mountains or overwhelming 36 damage.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cire_dk
Thanks for the response. I understand its use with GSZ but is it not to slow. If I understand correctly it will take 2 turns most of the time to activate. Empath -Suntitan, next turn Play Sun sac empath, next turn Yosei etc. With
Eladamri's Call it would be much faster. Since you need it towards mid end game the chances are, playing top and fetch, you will likely have seen the card. So it is speed vs utility. I guess I will just have to find out. :tongue:
It's numbers. 3-4 zenith + 1 empath = 5-6 chances at a 6 drop. Or*replace empath w/ call and you only get two chances.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eq.firemind
Valakut says
Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle enters the battlefield tapped.
Whenever a Mountain enters the battlefield under your control, if you control at least five other Mountains, you may have Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle deal 3 damage to target creature or player.
Tap: Add R to your mana pool.
This means that with 7 lands you should scapeshift for 1 Valakut and 6 mountains, resulting in 6 Lightning Bolts (18 damage).
This is usually enough because of fetchlands, FoW and your creatures.
8 lands Shift will result in 2 Valakuts and 6 mountains or overwhelming 36 damage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slikwilly
It's numbers. 3-4 zenith + 1 empath = 5-6 chances at a 6 drop. Or*replace empath w/ call and you only get two chances.
I don't even have to say anything this morning -- you guys already answered the questions correctly lol. So yeah, people who are wondering why Empath and how Valakut works, there you go.
I'm just going to go continue being miserable. I hate colds.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TheArchitect
So as long as you have 7 lands in play when you scapeshift (or one less for each valakut you already have in play) you can find 5 mountain and 2 valakuts and deal 30 damage. Or if 15 damage is enough you can scapeshift on 6 lands.
there must be a MIN of SIX mountains and 1 Valakut! :p
so MIN scapeshift land count is SEVEN!
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Speaking of Abrupt Decay's wording ... anyone see the new wording for Gilded Drake?
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Ca...tiverseid=5837
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
EpicLevelCommoner
That... looks like how I remember it being for a while. Care to elaborate?
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Wow, that's...unusual. Why would they do that, it has no bearing on the card's original intent at all.
^I imagine he's referring to the "Can't be countered by spells or abilities". If its always been like that then I'm not sure why the text is there.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
@slikwilly
"Can't be countered except by spells or abilities. (This effect lasts indefinitely)."
^
That's what I'm referring to. Very confusing for me.
EDIT: jinxed lol
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Wait, I see now, I was thinking it meant "Can't be countered BY spells and abilities", not "This ability can't be countered EXCEPT by spells and abilities". Now it makes more sense.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Looks to me like the card still works the exact same way -- they just closed up a few potential loopholes. Unless I'm missing something...?
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
what? no more stifle of that trigger?!
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
That still works. It says "can't be countered EXCEPT BY spells or abilities." So Stifle still works.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Yeah. I mean I don't know how it could fizzle. I mean it still works, but that clause threw me for a loop.
Anyhow that was a fun derailment but time to get back to Nic Fit.
What are some good piles for GBu?
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Played Punishing Fire Fit Last night. 2-1-1 in swiss to make top 8 and finished with a top 4 split. If we had played I think I had favorable match ups. RUG, Rock, and UR delver.
Round 1: Maverick Lost 1-2
Basically never really got much going. I mulled into oblivion the 2 games I lost and the one that I won was thanks to Punishing Fire and Liliana.
Round 2 Bye I always get these!!! :( Got a Jap Tamiyo for my BUG standard deck through trading though!
Round 3: UW Delver Won 2-1
Game 1 He just had a lot of counters for everything I did. I could beat anything but a Geist of Saint Traft. Games 2 and 3 I stabilized at healthy Life Totals and my Broodmate Dragon was awesome.
Game 4: Stoneblade: Draw into top 8
Top 8: Maverick Same as my first round opponent.
This time I actually got good hands and I just did what Punishing Fire does vs Maverick. Neither Game was very close.
2-0
Next week I should have a better report thanks to the SCG Invitational and SCG Opens being here in Atlanta. I expect a lot of people to show up and be testing for Friday. May change my board up a bit in anticipation of a few Show and Tell decks. Definitely adding a Third Liliana to the board. Probably will end up dropping my grove and punishing Fire out of my SB for Liliana and either another durress or another edict effect.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Qweerios
Why Prime Time instead of Grave Daddy? GSZ?
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
@Slikwilly,
Yes, for GSZ. Volrath Tower pretty much seals games with Witness/Thrag/Planeswalkers. The beauty of this engine is that the cards work wonder independently and the combination is rarely worth siding GY hate for. If I could fit a Creeping Tar Pit, Primeval Titan would be perfect.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Wait. What happened to Gifts? Genesis? Oracle?
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Qweerios
Congrats on the results. I see you favored more Walkers than the GSZ package and Gifts. How did the Walkers turnout? With fewer Creatures to search, going all Green is the way to go. What about the loss of acceleration due to no Oracle? What does Garruk bring to the deck with fewer creatures now?
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Can't find room for the tar pit? Itseems so good. The Jace slayer!
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
@Qweerios
I've got to ask, what are your thoughts on Recurring Nightmare versus Volrath's Stronghold? Because I really like the synergy you got going with Tower and Stronghold, but I'm impartial to Recurring Nightmare's explosive capabilities.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Qweerios
@Slikwilly,
Yes, for GSZ. Volrath Tower pretty much seals games with Witness/Thrag/Planeswalkers. The beauty of this engine is that the cards work wonder independently and the combination is rarely worth siding GY hate for. If I could fit a Creeping Tar Pit, Primeval Titan would be perfect.
Huh. Looks cool, might have to try it out, though lacking trops is a problem for me.
Any of you multi-variant players think that playing a variety of Nic Fit decks improves your overall skills with your preferred version? Or does it just muddy the picture? I'm too invested in a rector build now to change but the others seem fun in their own way.
Speaking of rector builds, I tried rusalka tonight. Definitely enabled some nifty otherwise impossible plays. That card needs a nickname though. I nominate 'crack ho' thanks to a thought process that probably only makes sense to me... :eyebrow:
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slikwilly
Any of you multi-variant players think that playing a variety of Nic Fit decks improves your overall skills with your preferred version? Or does it just muddy the picture? I'm too invested in a rector build now to change but the others seem fun in their own way.
Playing different styles makes you fammiliar with the different archetypes. But more importantly is knowing what kind of player you are.
I am playing BUG with splash, I like conmbo and cantrips that is my playstyle, wich doesnt get boring. I am not very fnd of attacking.
so *dumb creatures like tarmagoyf I dont like at all*
Other point that is important, knowing your deck inside out and ofcourse the meta.
I have been playtesting a bit on mws lately (10 games orso) and Now I have learned again that the deck is extremely difficult to play yet very powerfull.
if I lose its mostl because of a severe misplay, mostly I win though with misplays or non optimal plays..
Get focussed and you will dream the deck. But before you do, know what your playstyle is.
Mud Stacks, Combo, Ramp, Conrtol, Denial... very important for at least me
I have played rector as an early build which originates from the alluren build I had to go turn 2 aluren. After tinkering I have played it with the same engine targets: recurring nightmare, day of the dragons and even decree of silence.
The thing is you can do allot, the danger in my perspecitive is that it is very easy to build a deck and just become a weaker version of anything else.
The engine is solely made for warping to mid-late game AND have a clear edge over the opponent. With that in mind most or all have a form of board control. and then you decide which pathyou take.
For instance if you want fast agro, better play goblins.. or combo go for hightide or ant..
my game plan is:
hand disruption
board control
options that I have:
Combo - palinchron - recurring nightmare
Denial - Iona
Board control - Kederek leviathan
Plays as follow
Gitaxian probe
Therapy
Veteran explorer - therapy
intution
Versus mono colorered standard play:
Iona-unberrial rites-gigapede
Kederek leviathan versus Show and Tell / Planeswalkers / big mobs
Kederek leviathan + animate death = each turn bounce the board
Palingchron + recurring nightmare infi combo
palinchron + phantasmal image is Ramp
Phantasmal image - palichron = ramp
Phantasmal image - kederek is show and tell loop
Phantasmal image - random mob unremovable since it dies when it becomes a target yay
playing with unearth for: phantasmal image/eternal witness/veteran explorer
and ofcourse the random ooze which just wins games due to the removal and life gain.
still thinking wheter i should play woodfallprimus or karn
SB plan atm
Show and Tell + package
Carpet of flowers
Gaddog Teek
Loaming Shaman
With rector your gameplan should be something similar because when youcast rector you want to sac it imidiatly and win. So combo
perhaps you want to share your list so we can analye and perhaps make it even better then it already is
with rector I keep thinking of aluren, its a really fun deck to play. and like I said, you can go turn 2 with daze backup or handdisruption
You have to have recruiters though, and they are not easy to obtain.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
@Star Scream,
I droped the Gifts package 2 weeks ago. It eats up a lot of deck space, and opens you up to GY hate. T2-3 Jace is often better than Gifts. Oracle are nice, but I think Decay will quicky replace them.
@EpicLevelCommoner,
If you look back in the thread, you will find a discussion on Recurring Nightmare. All I will say is that I think it is win-more in version non-rector. As for Volrath Tower, I have been playing it since my first successful GB Nic Fit list using Primeval Titan and Treetop Villages (a version I might go back to when Decay comes out).
@Slikwilly,
I personaly played/own every iterations of Nic Fit except for Jund Fit that I recently sold (before scapewish). I think that what makes you a good Nic Fit player is reflected in your use of Therapies, sequencing of plays, and build-up of your manabase in a tricolored version. These are the things I tend to focus on more during a game because:
-Therapy considerations makes you keep track of your opponent's potential plays;
-Sequencing your plays reflects the importance of certain cards in your hand with regards to surviving the first turns vs. resolving important spells against counterspells;
-Planing your manabase with regards to your color requirements, CMC curve, and land availlability while considering potential disruption is key to getting a game going.
As for KMS' "playstyle" take on Nic Fit playing skills, I explained before that I don't believe in playstyle as an argument for anything really. The term gets tossed around a lot (I know Arianrhod employs it regularly) and often times can be substituted by: "my opinion" or "my personal preferences". However, as a general guideline to play Magic, I agree that it is important to know what strikes your fancy as you play, but I don't think it reflects any measurement of what makes you good at playing a certain archetype. A good Magic player will take in-game decisions based on the board state, hand sizes, potential plays, potential draws, etc... Personal preferences don't come into play during a game, they merely affect your deck choices, which is not to be confused with card choices.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
. . . seems like I have a lot of digging to do, both for bruizar's intuition build and for the discussion on Recurring Nightmare in non-rector versions.
Anyhow, I see what you're saying in response to KMS, but to be fair, some card choices are less obvious than others, hence why there are so many potentially viable variants of this one archetype (3 of which I'm fairly confident have been proven viable [RectorPod, BG-straight, and Scapewish]), and I believe KMS was asking if playing different variants of Nic Fit improved one's ability to play with Nic Fit as a whole.
Which I'm curious: does it? Because then that opens up the potential for transformational sideboards.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
What kind of transformational are you thinking about?
I love being graveyard heavy in game one and then if nessecary going transformational with show and tell, letting the opponent board in a pile of crap
What kind of transformational idea'a do you have?!? Im very curious about your build and thoughts
I still need to implent a natural order package
Woodfall primus
Progenitus
Woodspine Wurm
Broken with cantrips yeah baby! And ofcourse pimped out! Im expecting a pimp pic from brewsars MUB pile of pimp
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Yeah something like that. More or less sticking with the same archetype, but changing how you win the game.
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
@EpicLevel -- One quick word -- Rector notequals RectorPod. In fact, Rector, which does figure into Pod lists, is not a limiting name for Pod. Pod is Pod. Rector is Rector -- two different versions. I can't speak for Pod, but Rector has definitely been proven viable. BUG has been close a couple of times, but I don't think that anyone outside of Qweerios has reported longterm success with it. Caffrey started really strong and then scrubbed, and I think Caleb got what, like 20-something-th?
And yeah, you do have a lot of reading to do =)
@The "other versions make you better" Theory -- The things that you get better with by playing other versions are things that you get better with by playing your "primary" version, IMO. Like naming with Cabal Therapy -- that's a skill that will improve no matter what version of Nic Fit you're playing, so long as you're playing Nic Fit. I personally play other versions not because I want to get better with the archetype overall, but because I enjoy them. I enjoy this archetype, not just "this deck" or "that deck." There are other prevailing reasons, like winds, such as local metas, mood, etc, of course -- but overall I count myself as a Nic Fit player and designer first, and a Rector player/Scapewish player/BUG player/whatever a distant second.
@Personal playstyle preference -- Since Qweerios kind of shipped this ball into my court, I'm going to try my best to explain my position on it. I'll warn you now that this may grow long, and that I have a headache, so I may make less sense than usual. You have been warned.
I am a firm believer in the principle that when we want to do something, we do better at it.
This seems like it's totally obvious, but bear with me.
I could pick up TES, and play it. I'm not gonna say I'm going to play it optimally, or even close to well. In fact, I'll probably make a pile of mistakes and rage my way into the 0-X bracket, which will put me on lifetilt, and make me angry outside of the game. That said, I'd probably do some things right. I'll borrow this from Qweerios:
Quote:
A good Magic player will take in-game decisions based on the board state, hand sizes, potential plays, potential draws, etc
I agree with this. But I put a lot of stock into the notion of mental state. If for some reason I wanted to play TES...actually WANTED to...I could probably do a passing good job at these categories. But it would take a strange day for me to want to play that deck, so the likely truth is that I would fail Qweerios' classifications of "a good magic player."
Qweerios and I agree up to the point where archetype selection ends. I don't think there are many people who are going to say that, in legacy, if you play anything but the "best deck," you're doing it wrong. Legacy is a much more open format, where it's usually hard to determine what the "best deck" is. Legacy players are also more likely to devote themselves to an archetype, because of the non-rotational way the format works. Look at Nick Patnode. The man knows his goblins. He's played goblins for basically ever, and he can do stuff with that deck that shouldn't be possible. It doesn't matter that goblins isn't always a good choice for a tournament. He rocks it anyway, and it usually works out well for him. Only the spikiest spikes will say otherwise.
So yeah. You like Nic Fit. Congratulations. Now what?
I'm going to note here that I'm unsure of where Qweerios leaves off. I think I know from our previous debates on the subject, but I don't want to put words in his mouth, so I'm going to switch to using "some people," just in case. I do respect his opinion, and I mean no offense.
Some people say that within an archetype, there exists a "perfect deck." Now, this ideal of a perfect deck is somewhat akin to the New Critics. If anyone here's studied Lit Theory, you can probably guess where I'm going with this. For the rest of you: the New Critics basically said that reader interpretations and personal preference is meaningless, because there is only One True Correct interpretation of a text, namely, that of its author. As such, they focused a lot of work in finding out what they called the authorial intent of a work. Now, there are all kinds of problems with this, and I don't want to get into a tirade on New Criticism, because I dislike their viewpoint a great deal (I tend more towards mythopoetic posthumanist interpretations, with a hint of Marxist theory splashed in for good measure). One True Correct Interpretation is very similar to the Perfect Deck. Just as there is a correct interpretation and everything else (and everyone else) is wrong, there is a perfect 75. I won't even say 76, because most thinkers in this vein are too strict to bend even that little.
Now, they'll couch their terminology in language that evokes flexibility. "Oh, I mean there's a perfect deck for this tournament." And that may well be true. There may well be a combination of cards that, based on the strict data of the event, who shows up with what decks, configured in what ways, etc, such that you can have a statistically best chance of beating every person in the room. I don't doubt that this exists.
However, where I disagree is that this viewpoint discounts the human. It discounts that certain people, after playing a certain deck for a certain amount of time, can ignore the odds. It discounts the mental state of mind that you can get in when playing a certain deck, configured your way, not just "the" way. I'm more mystic than scientist, I'm afraid.
So let's bring things back to Earth with a long-raging debate, which I will preface by stating that I'm using it as an EXAMPLE. I have NO desire to start this fire again. It's just an example.
Let's go back to the Liliana of the Veil debate for just a few minutes. Liliana is a powerful card, and I strongly appreciate her in certain decks, specifically those with Punishing Fire and/or Life from the Loam. However, some people are staunch supporters of Liliana, and regard her as something of a sacred cow, like, say, Green Sun's Zenith. If you cut (or choose not to run) Liliana of the Veil, then you are moving your deck further away from the Perfect Ideal (let's change terminology to get a little Plato in here), and making the tournament you're going to harder to win.
What does Liliana of the Veil do? I have a sinking feeling that this section is going to revive the old debate, and I'll reiterate again that that is not my wish. It's merely the easiest example to understand.
Liliana of the Veil does the following:
Keeps both players in topdeck mode, unless one player has a means of drawing multiple cards in a turn.
Synergizes really, really well with flashback spells, Life from the Loam, Punishing Fire, and similar cards that return to your hand, providing you with a means of keeping your opponent hellbent.
If you don't have either of these options, Lily limits the number of things that are capable of happening in a game to those which are onboard and those which are on the top of the deck. If you have a Sensei's Top, you're likely in a good spot because your deck manipulation should be better than your opponents'.
However, they might have a Top.
However, they might be playing Brainstorm.
However, they might not have the three lands on top of your deck that you do.
However, they might have a better board presence than you do.
However, they might be playing Reanimator (obv. you don't +1 here, but bear with m)
However, they might be playing Sneak Attack.
However, they might be playing Burn.
Etc. The list goes on forever.
The point is not that there are a lot of "might be"s that interfere with your plan. The point -is- your plan. By playing Liliana of the Veil, you're committing yourself to one of the possible eventualities. You will keep both players hellbent. You will break PFire. Etc. But the opportunity cost of that decision leads to all of these problems.
But that isn't even the biggest problem with Liliana of the Veil. The biggest problem is one of personal preference.
I, personally, prefer not to play Liliana of the Veil.
Why would I do this? Why would actively injure my chances of winning an event? Why would I design my deck to be further from the Perfect Ideal? Isn't this just crazy? Everyone agrees!
Ignoring the mob mentality, what does NOT playing Liliana of the Veil do?
Both players are not constrained to be hellbent.
That's really just about it. Sure it gives you some slots in your deck, it means you don't need double-black early, and it means you have a longterm plan vs something like Enchantress by putting all of their permanents in piles. But really, at the core of the issue, that one central point stands out.
Isn't your opponent being hellbent a good thing? Hell yes it is. However, in my opinion, in my PREFERENCE, having cards in hand is a good thing. They represent future options, as yet untold opportunities. Threats that have no answer, and answers that have no threat to solve yet, but which might be lurking behind any rip off the top.
Liliana of the Veil leaves the game up to "luck." I quotation luck here because it isn't really luck. I understand that. You have Top, you have the best topdecks in the entire format, you have heaping piles of board presence. Nic Fit isn't a deck that lives in its hand, it lives balls-out, with its junk plastering the table, only occasionally spurting across its opponents' boards with wracking convulsions that ruin their day.
I may have gotten a little involved in my metaphor.
Anyway, I hope that the context was enough to get the idea across. Our hands aren't important, so why do I insist on keeping mine as opposed to reaping the benefits of Lily?
Because it's my preference. I play better when I have a hand. It's just that simple. And before the trolls come out of the woodwork asking why I'm playing -this- deck, then, when it so obviously doesn't require or often desire having a hand, I'll just preemptively point at the results, and at my history in this thread.
The Perfect Ideal deck is not the Perfect Ideal deck for every person. Removing the human element, that of preference, removes the strength of the deck. I could time-travel back a few years and play Mystical Reanimator, which was arguably the closest to a "best deck" the format has had in the past few years (personal opinion. Survival wasn't that bad, people were just lazy.). But that doesn't mean that if I'm playing the Perfect Ideal deck for an event, that I'll do well with it. It isn't to my preference. I mean sure, it's a powerful monster and I'll get some mileage out of it. But I value my human desires much more strongly than the coldness of math.
So if I play a tournament with a Nic Fit list sporting Liliana of the Veil, I won't do as well, even if it's a better choice for the deck on that given day (I've actually tried this).
I feel like I've gotten a little far afield here, so I'm going to pull back to reality with a quote from my esteemed colleague's post:
Quote:
A good Magic player will take in-game decisions based on the board state, hand sizes, potential plays, potential draws, etc... Personal preferences don't come into play during a game, they merely affect your deck choices, which is not to be confused with card choices.
I'm not sure if Qweerios means card choices in the sense of individual card selection in an archetype (ie Lily in Nic Fit), or card choices as in which card you play when (ie do I brainstorm this mainphase or hold it to dig for a counter). Regardless, saying that personal preferences don't come into effect during a game is something that I disagree with.
If I'm playing vs Sneak and Show, I guarantee you that I'm going to play worse than if I'm playing against Maverick. Hell, I have recent evidence of this from Jupiter (well, as "evidence" as can be when we're talking about something like this). I played against five Ermakul decks rounds 1-5. Now, I hate Ermakul decks with an everloving passion. They're stupid, they're not fun to play against, they're too strong, whatever excuse you'd like to put in my mouth, go ahead. I fucking hate Emrakul as a card both from a game standpoint and from a design standpoint. It's like you have a 3-yr-old a crayon and some pens and told him to design a card.
I did not enjoy playing against those Emrakul decks. They were not my preference. This does not mean that I didn't still play well enough to beat three of them. But I know I made mistakes and slips up that I wouldn't have otherwise made, because my confidence wasn't there. Confidence is another one of those esoteric concepts that statistics can't really say much about. When you're confident, you play better. You make more correct plays, actually, would be a better way to put it. Here's a definition: [b]When you're playing in your preference zone, you're playing more confidently/[b]. This seems to me to be a good thing.
When I played against Maverick later that day, I was feeling pretty confidant. Relieved, even. Here was something that was a good matchup at long last. The games I played with Jesse that round were some of the most lopsided blowouts I've ever had against Maverick in the 15-odd months I've been playing this deck. Nothing about them was even slightly close...or at the very least, that's how it felt to me. Maverick was my preferred opponent, and there was nothing he could do to stop me.
I feel like I've gotten a little far afield yet again, unfortunately, so I'm going to pull out...I mean back....what? And provide a summary.
I reject the notion that there is ever The Perfect Ideal deck for any given event, and that theoretically everyone in the room should strive to locate it.
I will bend as far as to say that there is a Perfect Ideal deck for any given event with any given pilot, however. My Perfect Ideal deck is different than Qweerios' Perfect Ideal deck for the same event, in my opinion.
Preference is confidence. Confidence is match win slips. The more you prefer your deck and your opponent, the better plays you will make throughout, which will convert directly into wins. Playing to your preferences therefore helps you win.
Now, I'm going to go rest a bit, because I've tired myself out posting this =( I hate being sick =.=;; but at least I'm recovering quickly.
I'll try to post some more thoughts on various topics for you all later. I'll just close for now though by once again stating that none of that is meant as a personal attack on anyone who feels the opposite way that I do (thinking of Qweerios in specific, as he's been a very vocal supporter of that viewpoint). My opinion was summoned, and in my delusional state I felt it was a good idea to share it =)
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
I don't mean to add fuel to the liliana debate because it has gone on for awhile, but kind of like you said, we play off of the top of our deck. I'd rather make it into both of us doing it. My personal preference. Plus having an edict is sweet. I understand what you mean though. Sometimes you either don't like playing with a card or are not good at it despite it being powerful. A friend of mine has won a couple of legacy opens this year playing UR Delver, and he even admitted that when Jace was in standard he didn't play Jace because he just wasn't good enough. It really pays to play what you know how to play.
Not saying you aren't good enough to play with Liliana, you're probably better than me, just giving an example
-
Re: [Deck] Nic Fit (GBW Explorer Zenith Control)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
KMS
What kind of transformational are you thinking about?
I love being graveyard heavy in game one and then if nessecary going transformational with show and tell, letting the opponent board in a pile of crap
What kind of transformational idea'a do you have?!? Im very curious about your build and thoughts
I still need to implent a natural order package
Woodfall primus
Progenitus
Woodspine Wurm
Broken with cantrips yeah baby! And ofcourse pimped out! Im expecting a pimp pic from brewsars MUB pile of pimp
If you go for Natural Order, then you'll want sources of card advantage and plenty green creatures with a CMC of 3 or less (because if you're deck is top-heavy, then you might as well just cast those creatures instead of NO). So when playing with NO, you'd probably want 3 Eternal Witness instead of 1 or 2, probably a Kitchen Finks, and cards which still have good utility even in the late game but are still CMC 3 or less, stuff like Ohran Viper, Knight of the Reliquary or even just straight-up cantrip cards like Wall of Blossoms, Elvish Visionary, Heart Warden or Yavimaya Elder. Yavimaya Elder looks pretty decent. 3 mana for a 2/1 that gives you up to +3 CA and acts as an extra Explorer?
