[Discussion] Melting Pot For Thoughts On Extirpate

Quote:

---

FOW is stricly superior to any counterspell, both early, mid and late game.

---

Do you even know what "stricly [sic]" means?

Quote:

---

FOW is just the best counterspell ever printed, period. Don't argue that

---

Mana Drain is better than Force of Will, if it resolves the game is usually over in Vintage (or in Legacy because of teh match loss illegal decklist).




But anyway, nobody cares that FoW is good or how good it is. Everyone's willing to accept the card disadvantage.



I hate how people are sticking to retarded arguments like, "That assumes that he or she even would have DRAWN the Swords in the first place!"

That's a dumb argument on like 30 levels. For one, it's unknowable and irrelevant. All we know is that it decreases the average value of cards in their deck. Over enough draws, that makes up for the card disadvantage by itself, because they no longer have a 1:1 with tempo removal. They might not even have instant speed removal at all for your man lands.

For two, knowing that they don't have creature removal changes how you play and allows you to play more aggressively, even using creatures as counterbait (because they know they can't answer your goyf later, they have to counterspell it). This goes hand in hand with the average card value thing. You can probably force them into committing to 2:1 trades and that gets you card advantage.

Lastly that I'll get into, they have a huge chance of having another copy of the card in their hand, giving you right away card advantage. Against a lot of decks, that's far more probable than them "never drawing into a swords" as though that matters.


Please stick to arguments that have a legitimate basis. Also, if you care, here are the actual probabilities of drawing one and only one swords to plowshares for x draws:
10: 40%
15: 44%
20: 41%

Probabilities of drawing more than one swords:
10: 13%
15: 26%
20: 41%

Probability that they see another Swords given the hypothetical situation that one Sword had already been drawn:
10: 43%
15: 59%
20: 71%

So yeah, if they like Brainstorm twice and Ponder once, they've already seen 16-20 cards and have like a 60% chance of having another one in hand, ready to get raped by your Extirpate.

16 draws assumes that, even with a Brainstorm + shuffle, you get to turn 6.

It's a lot easier to get to turn 6 if you have cards that do something before then. And if we're focusing on late game plans, you still haven't explained where Cranial Extraction (which can pre-empt any drawing of the card entirely) or Haunting Echoes (which is practically a win condition) wouldn't be better.

Also, I notice that your definition of "raped" means, "Forced to discard an Extirpate, maybe, if they haven't immediately used it and on turn 6 when this could also have been done with Cabal Therapy, Blackmail, or, hell, Cry of Contrition".

At least Unburden has cycling.

Stupid go byebye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin

Holy crap, a card's that marginally powerful in conjunction with other cards + luck?

Again, why is this card better than Fiery Gambit? Or, y'know what, Hatching Plans? Shit. Why aren't we playing Vial Horror when we're at it?

---

Don't class my deck with the likes of Fiery Gambit, Hatching Plans... or worse Extirpate. :eek:

Extirpate is absolutely worthless, even in conjunction with other support. My deck, on the other hand, is the first example I've ever come across that is able to truly claim that the sum of the parts is largely stronger than the individual pieces AND individual 'just good' cards such as in GoodStuff.decs

The idea that synergy outweighs individual weakness is ONLY a valid point if:
(1) The individual cards or at least one of them isn't awful alone, given that the sum is powerful enough. (eg Dreadnought + Stifle)
OR
(2) If each piece is not entirely useful alone, there is a VERY large amount of redundancy. (eg Horror + Drake + Stylus + Scepter)

Extirpate aims to fulfill (1), but fails because the result of the combination isn't that spectacular.

Vision Charm + Dreadnought squeezes through (1) because Vision Charm isn't entirely useless and (2) because Stifle and Trickbind can offer redundancy.

Let's look at one more example: Brand. Brand doesn't fulfill either of these because (1) it is awful alone, and (2) there is no redundancy printed as of yet. The closest WotC has come is with Brooding Saurion, but instead it says "nontoken," so it can't be included as redundancy. It would probably also need to be a 1R or R body with that ability to be considered redundancy worth building around.

Extirpate isnt't bad at all,its just 'better' in some decks.
I play 2x MD extirpate in my Rock deck,and it can be very usefull to loam,which is a bad matchup to start with. Extrpate also improves the combo/ichorid MU, and things like ThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh,like pate Goyf.
Even if they see it comming, they still wont be able to stop it.

So.. its a good card in some decks and its worse in others. Care?:/

How about we put an end to this useless debate? Because clearly, it is leading to nowhere. Some argues that it is good (myself) and others argue that it is bad. In the end, nothing has changed

Those who believe extirpate to be decent, good, useful, play with it, win with it.

Those who believe extirpate to be bad, to be card disadvantage, do not play with it, and win without it.

There, the debate is over. Thanks to relativism. Maybe, someday, we will find some strong criterias for what is right and what is wrong

Robert

I think, somewhere, that perhaps there is light, if possible, within those words, surrounded by, and I mean this as kindly as possible, your complete rape, metaphorically speaking of course, of comma use.

Thank you, kind sir, for your words of wisdom, and your trouncing of the debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adan

It's Tunnel Vision and you are too fucking lazy to take a look by yourself. It's not difficult to klick on the "1342 Extirpate" and browse for non-European tournaments.

I also don't know what you are trying to accomplish with the SIDEBOARD-card argument. I never wanted to argue for maindecking it. This duscussion is about whether Extirpate is good or not.

From what I have counted yet, you have been 17 times wrong. Tendency rising.

---

Adan, you're being incredibly rude and you need to read my post a little closer before you come off with "fucking lazy". I think it's obvious you're nearsighted if you don't see the correlation between how good Extirpate is and why it's not a more played card everywhere in the world and the maindeck.

These are facts, they are absolutely indisputable

Have you bothered to count the number of Americans, Asians, and other non-European tournament players running Extirpate? It's all right there for you on Deckcheck.net, it's just one click away! Here are the steps I took to find out which players and which decks are playing Extirpate in the Maindeck

1. Click "Advanced" Search
2. Select "Legacy" from the pulldown menu
3. Type "Extirpate" in the Maindeck field
4. Click "Search"

Are you seeing the same 70 decks I am? Would you like to tell me how many of those 70 decks came from Europe?

Now, do the same, except in Step 3 Type "Extirpate" in the Sideboard field

Are you seeing the same 469 decks I am? Would you like to tell me how many of those 469 decks came from Europe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanni

Your statement is completely retarded. I don't see people maindecking Tormod's Crypt. Why is that?

---

Let's talk about being retarded, Hanni. Let's talk about the following statement you made in the ITF thread which I think was just plain dumb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanni

Against control, even if you lose -1 card from hand and it doesn't change the board state or do anything with the opponent's hand, who cares. You now know there hand, which in itself is almost worth it. Now, the opponent has no more of that win condition left.

---

You think losing a card, not changing the board state, not changing your opponent's hand, but looking at their hand is almost worth playing? That's just silly. But I want people to focus on the bold part of what you said. If you could have a card that removes a win condition from your opponent's deck as a Split Second Instant,

Why wouldn't you run it in the maindeck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freakish777

For those of you still doing things like Extirpating dredgers instead of Bridges, Ichorids or Narcomoebas (with the trigger on the stack), in that order, you're are playing the card incorrectly against Ichorid. What good is dredging your deck if the explosive cards have already been removed from the deck?

Furthermore, in the 4C Threshold mirror, Extirpating Swords to Plowshares, or Nimble Mongoose (or SDT if you're lucky enough to Seize it on turn 1) is a beating even if you give up a card to do it. Leaving the opponent without answers to your Goyfs and Enforcers is brutal. Extirpating Goyf? Kinda meh here.

In the control mirror, Extirpating threats like Decree of Justice, Misrha's Factory, or Eternal Dragon (with it's cost paid and the activation on the stack) typically leave you with more Trump left in the deck than the opponent. In such long games, the usefulness of the card is far more likely to be fully realized.

Less strong argument:

As an aggro or aggro control deck against a control deck, you go for Brainstorms or Swords as it takes away their tempo plays that help keep them in the game early (if you don't draw a lot of threats and they draw Wrath they still need to draw mana to cast it).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Illisius

Extirpate is extremely useful in control decks against Loam decks, especially control decks which don't also have Counterbalance or Chalice.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaynel

Phyrexian Dreadnought is rather hard to deal with. Ripping one out early with discard and Extirpating it saves you from having to scramble to deal with it later. Big Game Hunter is hard to recycle, and most artifact removal critters are too slow.
Target Bridges against Ichorid, and that will hopefully stall enough to drop Plagues on Horror and Illusion.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nihil

You use Extirpate specifically against cards that have no replacements. If you Extirpate Tarmogoyf, that's good, but you can still lose to their other creatures. But if you Extirpate Back to Basics, your mana base is forever safe vs. MUC. If you Extirpate Life from the Loam, and the opponent doesn't run Burning Wish, his deck turns to a bunch of utility lands that would otherwise have never made the cut.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forbiddian

Beyond the obvious Wasteland + Extirpate, Thoughtseize + Extirpate, etc. to give immediate board advantage (or the even cooler Thoughtseize + Wasteland + Extirpate), Extirpate has real long term effects on the game.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoolofaTook

Against Landstill you can basically win off of the card by Extirpating their wincons, with no possible response from them.

---

According to these and other advocates of Extirpate, it's good against Bridge, Ichorid, Narcomoeba, Decree of Justice, Life from the Loam, Nimble Mongoose, Back to Basics, Brainstorm, Tropical Island, Swords, Force of Will, Mishra's Factory, Phyrexian Dreadnaught, Eternal Dragon, and not Tarmogoyf.

Force, Tropical Island, Brainstorm, Swords to Plowshares, Mishra's Factory, and Tarmogoyf are 6 of the Top 30 Most Played Cards in the format according to Deckcheck.net (Adan, click "Legacy" and click "View the Top 30" on the right-hand side of the page). If Extirpate is that good, why isn't it an auto-include or something you should run in the maindeck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoolofaTook

I understand the wide swing of opinion that we've all had on Extirpate. It's really not a good maindeck card, even in a deck playing a fair amount of discard. However the same can be said for any number of cards that currently hold tenuous main deck slots in Legacy, and Krosan Grip is the primary example of that class of cards in my opinion.

---

Krosan Grip won't stop a single one of the Top 30, much less the 5 mentioned above. Extirpate can, so why not run it maindeck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nihil

Extirpate: I'm the biggest fan of this card on the Source, and even I would basically never maindeck it. The card is good in three instances: as an answer to graveyard combo; when you're trying to win a game of attrition (by taking away an opponent's long-term trump engine, like Ringleader or Loam); and when you cut an opponent off a splash colour entirely.
Now, if the first situation is so common that you want to maindeck Extirpate, I suggest you maindeck Yixlid Jailer instead, which at least beats for two. The second one clearly doesn't apply to this deck, which just wants to beat face against a opponent whose hand has been heavily disrupted. The third only applies against a few decks (Threshold, 3/4C Landstill) and only if they drop only one land of the critical colour and if you destroy it and Extirpate it before they can drop/fetch another one. Oh, and
if they don't play a basic Forest (Thresh) or a Scrubland (Landstill). So yeah, pretty low odds overall. Wouldn't it just be better to devote those (now three) slots to more disruption and threats?

---

Nihil, I'm a little confused. According to this, you would almost never maindeck Extirpate, but the first situation (an answer to graveyard combo) is so common you'd maindeck Jailer instead? Wouldn't Extirpate be better because you can remove any one of the previously mentioned cards?

I'm not a fan of Extirpate, my record is clear on that, but I'm willing to hear out the supporters and allow them to sway my opinion. So far I haven't read anything convincing about why I should run the card. What I'm basically reading from supporters of Extirpate is the following

Extirpate is good against [insert one of many cards here], but I wouldn't run it in the maindeck, and I don't know why it's not more popular outside of Europe.

To me that means it's really good, but not that good. Opponents of the card have clearly laid out the pros and cons in this thread and the older [Spoiled Card Discussion] thread. I haven't seen one bit of that from the supporters except these nebulous "Well, you see, it's kinda situational. I mean, I wouldn't run it in every deck, and most people aren't using it right." Maybe we need a primer on how to use Extirpate. I volunteer Adan since he seems to know what he's talking about.

Tormod's Crypt is a lot more awesome than Extirpate in fighting Loam decks, and it's not particularly close. The single exception would be if you were aiming at Seismic Assault.

Saying that a lot of people play Extirpate doesn't make it good. A lot of people are positively garbage at Magic.

First of all, two big reasons why the vast majority of Extirpates you find on DeckCheck are in Europe:

1) Because the majority of lists are from Europe. Duh.

2) Because the Loam archetype isn't played much outside of Europe, removing the matchup where Extirpate has the biggest advantages compared to Leyline/Crypt/etc (EDIT: Frogboy posted while I was writing this. I strongly disagree with him.)
Why? Now that's a question I'd like to know the answer to. Aggro Loam is second only to Threshold in Top 8s, and a force to be reckoned with in the majority of metagames.

You know what, I'm actually going to make a thread for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by URABAHN

Nihil, I'm a little confused. According to this, you would almost never maindeck Extirpate, but the first situation (an answer to graveyard combo) is so common you'd maindeck Jailer instead? Wouldn't Extirpate be better because you can remove any one of the previously mentioned cards?

---

I was listing possible reasons given for maindecking Extirpate, and showing them to be fairly weak. The first one I listed was "My metagame is full of graveyard-based decks so I want MD anti-graveyard hate". To that, my answer was "Among graveyard hate options, Jailer is the one that is most fit for maindeck use, since when you don't meet graveyard decks you'll have a 2/1 body, rather than a tool that only helps in long-game struggles (Extirpate) or a complete blank (Crypt, Leyline, etc.)".
BTW, I think today Offalsnout would be better than Jailer at that role.

Or, you know, Relic of Progenitus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Illissius

Or, you know, Relic of Progenitus.

---

Illissius has nitpicked Nihil Credo with the New Card Cannon!
Illissius's score is now 1,271.
Nihil Credo has respawned.

I think that people are really missing that Extirpate is really good against combo too. If they try to IGG loop not only do you extirpate the combo but then they burn with no cards in hand. Same goes for Belcher, if you counter the belcher and Extirpate, game over. ANT, if you hit all the tendrils then they can't do anything. The combo matchup becomes a lot better when you have Extirpate over Leyline which does nothing against a combo that doesn't use the grave. I think that this point has been overlooked for quite some time in this thread.

Usually if you counter the belcher, it's GG anyway. They need 10 mana to try and go off again. Vs control, they try to dig out a Warrens win.

It's probably a better idea (because of Warrens Win) to try to Extirpate some of their mana production earlier in the turn (like cabal ritual on the stack, extirpate dark ritual, lolol) to try to get lucky and shut them off (you'll hit a second ritual like 30% of the time). Even if you don't, you see their hand and know what their options are. If you see Warrens or a tutor, you'll know you need to counter their fuel. If you just see a belcher, you can sit back a few turns (hope they don't draw into Warrens before you get a second Counterspell or Counterbalance lock on them).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forbiddian

It's probably a better idea (because of Warrens Win) to try to Extirpate some of their mana production earlier in the turn (like cabal ritual on the stack, extirpate dark ritual, lolol) to try to get lucky and shut them off (you'll hit a second ritual like 30% of the time).

---

I'm not sure about that percentage, or I'd be playing Brothers Yamazaki beatdown. And don't you get like, priority or something after a spell? Wouldn't a good player play their second copy immediately off the mana from the first?

The card sucks, in my opinion. Rarely it has an affect on the game that can be directly attributed to a win. So will Gosta Dirk if you play him enough times.

Quote:

---

(EDIT: Frogboy posted while I was writing this. I strongly disagree with him.)

---

I'm not particularly impressed with either Extirpate or Crypt against Aggro Loam, but Extirpate is probably better because it also picks off whatever redundant pieces they were sandbagging. I think Crypt is a whole lot better against Loam control decks because they have other graveyard interactions. I might be colored by only playing with Demigod, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by URABAHN

Krosan Grip won't stop a single one of the Top 30, much less the 5 mentioned above. Extirpate can, so why not run it maindeck?

---

Extirpate maindeck is probably about as justifiable as Krosan Grip maindeck. Which is to say that neither of them is particularly justifiable as a maindeck resource unless you're playing a control archetype that is going to be able to get a handle on the game and then win in the mid to late game.

Decks like Goyf Sligh that run Krosan Grip maindeck probably hurt themselves in the process, because they have no way to dig it up when they need it and don't have it and they have no guarantee that it will even be needed. It does however slow down their bid for rapid tempo gain leading to early wins.

The decks that run Extirpate maindeck generally wind up extirpating something marginally valuable early on and hoping that this prevents the opponent from getting into play the things they need to win.

Once you know what the opponent is playing then the value of Extirpate and Krosan Grip improves, because you can either continue to exclude them from the deck in situations in which they are not relevant or you can bring them in when there are specific targets against which they would be highly effective.

Both of these cards are weaker maindeck than Disenchant in the old meta. They're either highly effective or they're a drag on the hand that can really hurt you. The difference is that games went longer back then and at worst Disenchant could be used to kill a Mox or Sol Ring even if the opponent was not playing other artifacts and enchantments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by herbig

I'm not sure about that percentage, or I'd be playing Brothers Yamazaki beatdown. And don't you get like, priority or something after a spell? Wouldn't a good player play their second copy immediately off the mana from the first?

The card sucks, in my opinion. Rarely it has an affect on the game that can be directly attributed to a win. So will Gosta Dirk if you play him enough times.

---

See my earlier postings for more precise probabilities. I rounded up like 5% (iirc) because people usually mulligan onto hands that can actually do stuff, like BB accelerants and RR accelerants are much much better than BR accelerants, so they're likely to run hands with sets.


About priority: Often players will play like Dark Ritual, resolve it. Cast Cabal Ritual (or Lotus Petal) and try to resolve that to try to bait countermagic before the countermagic would be prohibitive against the combo (or at least giving out less information). It'd be better to cast DR, DR in terms of facing Extirpate, but how many players are thinking about you Extirpating their Dark Ritual?

At least almost everyone tries to resolve spells one at a time to avoid showing the entire hand before countermagic. I'd be very surprised if someone went: Dark Ritual, Pass. Lion's Eye Diamond, Cabal Ritual, Dark Ritual, pass, because it's a weaker play against a control player who's on the edge about countering an accelerant.

Of course, if they're forced to land grant first, you know exactly where to stick the Extirpate.


If you have Extirpate in the board, of course you bring it in vs. Belcher. I mean, duh. Odds are you're running useless stuff like Swords to Plowshares that can come out.

Extirpate might be useful sometimes.

Krosan Grip destroys a card in the most relevant zone, play.

Extirpate destroys a card in the fourth most relevant zone, the graveyard, maybe, maybe one in the third most relevant zone, the hand (#2 is the stack, if you're wondering), and otherwise removes copies of a single card from the second-to-least relevant zone, the library.

The first has a tangible effect on the game state.

The second requires you to wait turns and turns to see an impact on card quality equivalent to a full card such as you've lost, if it even happens.

I don't know how to explain the flaw with Extirpate any clearer than that. At least Jester's Cap can actually hobble a deck by removing key cards, such as DoJ from Landstill, or kill conditions or Doomsdays or whatever from Fetch-Tendrils, before they become an issue.

How about this: Use Crypt if your game plan involves overwhelming your opponent with tempo or raw power. Use Extirpate if you plan to grind them down through attrition and inevitability.

(This is fairly obvious, but the value of Extirpate increases if the game ends up going long: they're actually hurt by not drawing any more copies of the card where they otherwise very well might have, while Crypt's value decreases: they get time to recover from it.)

(My affinity for Extirpate might have something to do with the fact that I play in online tournaments exclusively, and like to play slow-ass control decks which would have a much more difficult time in Real Life due to the whole time limits thing.)