Manaplasm would be an interesting idea and it would be awesome to Snuff Out Tarmgoyf and swing 7. Funny with Fow and Tombstalker as well. Probably danger of cool things though.
Printable View
Manaplasm would be an interesting idea and it would be awesome to Snuff Out Tarmgoyf and swing 7. Funny with Fow and Tombstalker as well. Probably danger of cool things though.
the meta is a factor in whether or not sinkhole or hymn is better, and being as ignorant as to say that one is better than the other is absurd. It is part personal preface and part metagaming.
I would disagree there. There may be certain meta games where it seems one is better, but I would contend that Sinkhole is almost universally better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy I Don't Know
1) A meta game full of Threshold seems like it would make Sinkhole bad, because Daze is amazing against Sinkhole.
There are other considerations at work here:
A) Daze is good against Sinkhole, but Daze is also strong against the deck entirely.
B) If they don't have Daze, because of their lower land count, you can screw them out of mana slightly better. It's a question of changing the priority of your counter magic. Stifle and Wasteland both do a decent job of cutting them low on mana, but the real problem is their low curve. However, with Sinkhole, you can capitalize on them stumbling on mana, and destroy ALL of their lands. With Hymn, that's not the case. If you read Hymn to Tourach very carefully, you'll see that it says that it's "random". It doesn't let you look at his hand and choose the two most devastating cards against them. It doesn't allow you to hit the other lands in his hand. It doesn't allow you to hit all of the creatures in his hand. It's random. I'd rather not lose a game because my Hymn didn't impact his hand in any meaningful way. Sinkhole allows you to pursue a particular strategy against them. Sometimes, you want to either draw out a Daze, or keep them off of a particular color. Even if they Daze, that's still tempo lost for them. Because they're using Daze defensively.
C) It prevents Mystic Enforcer from coming down with higher reliability.
D) For Threshold lists that run Top, it limits the plays their capable of doing, because Top ties up their mana. Additionally, if the Threshold builds running Top run into decks that have Hymn, they can keep the cards on top, where they are immune to your discard. With Sinkhole, you can cut off those potential plays.
2) A meta game full of Goyf Sligh seems like it would make Sinkhole bad.
Again, there are more things to consider here.
A) Even though the deck keeps the mana curve low, Goyf Sligh's burn can rarely deal with Tarmogoyf. By keeping the amount of mana low, you reduce the possibility of them being able to use two things; Fireblast, or double burn spell. Hymn can't prevent the top decked Fireblast, and it can only hit the double burn if they can't play both pieces of burn in the same turn.
B) Even if they don't play Fireblast, Sinkhole can prevent multiple plays in a turn, which Hymn will only have a theoretical impact upon later in the game. Because Hymn doesn't empty their hand immediately, they can still go land (number three), double threat. With Sinkhole, you can cut off the ability to play more threats in a turn.
I don't think either one is the nut high against this match up, but I do think Sinkhole is better in enough situations to warrant it's spot in the main deck. To assume that the choice is between personal preference is to confuse the deck's strategy. Sinkhole fits better into the deck's strategy than Hymn does. Simple as that. I tested Hymn to Tourach, and found that Sinkhole was better. Not "different but just as good". Better. That implies that personal preference was not a factor. One card is functionally superior to the other. In this case, Sinkhole is functionally superior to Hymn.
If you interpret "personal preference" to mean running worse cards, then I would look into your interpretations of common connotations before I would look into this. It is not absurd to come to these conclusions. It is absurd to assume that functionally superior choices take a back seat to personal preference.
Specifically for the Goyf Sligh match, I'll gladly play against Hymn all day long. If you give me mana to cast things - guess what - I'm casting things. Jet and Library will make sure I get decent cards too.
Also, when speaking of personal preference, I personally prefer to play the right cards. Hymn has sucked ass for years. I said it. It is truth. I'll say it again. Hymn has sucked ass for years.
(To be fair, I'm no fan of Stinkhole either, but it is CLEARLY superior to Hymn in this deck whose plan includes mana denial - not cross your fingers and hope to nab a land out of the opponent's hand).
I swear to God, people have been justifying poor card choices based on 'metagame' or 'personal play style' or some other kind of garbage for like seven years. It's no longer allowed. Read my last post and then read David's. When your game plan involves 'apply constant pressure to their mana base while beating them up with gigantic monsters' the land destruction spell is in fact superior to the 'discard two' spell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy I Don't Know
Ok, I've tested more and agree that EE and Spell Snare are not very hot in this deck (basically for the same reasons Deep6er pointed out to me earlier):
EE is really too slow... I'd rather side-in K. Grip to get rid of CB and Edicts to get rid of extra creatures than slowing down the tempo to do these tasks with EE.
As for Spell Snare, I think reactive control has to be free in this deck. In my experience, it was often more relevant to do something on my turn (casting Sinkhole, Goyf, etc.) than keeping U open for Spell Snare (keeping U open for Stifle in the early game as mana denial or in the mid/late-game to Stifle an activation - for example of P. Deed - is a totally different story).
I was simply trying to point out something trivial about your post: your argument considered only one side of the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ertai's Familiar
As for the comparative study of Hymn vs. Sinkhole, I honestly can't answer that question because I don't have enough playtesting/tournament experience with the deck and don't have the arrogance to claim otherwise.
That being said, I'm starting to see that the deck's game plan is mana denial with complementary control elements (discard + counters) and not the other way around. I think my suggestion of swapping Hymn and Sinkhole was me trying to turn things around. (EDIT: Ok, my name is Stan The Obvious...).
Anyways, I'll continue my testing with the original decklist (and try - probably useless - changes later).
Sidenote for E.'s Familiar:
Sorry if I'm totally off on this, but here's my perception:
Some of your posts are bordeline pretentious and seem more to go along the lines of mental masturbation than actual (and relevant) playtesting conclusions or play situations. I don't want to attack you, I'd rather have a relevant discussion.
(EDIT: Sorry about that... guess it's that time of the month for me... what I meant to say can be summed up by a quote by Rodney Dangerfield: Mental masturbation, when done right, can be enjoyed by the person performing it and all who are present. When done wrong... well, someone could lose a ball).
With that in mind, I think I'll go playtest.
There are so many worse cards suggested in this thread already, why attack someone about discussing Hymn vs. Sinkhole, one of the first discussion topics in the thread and presented in the initial post? I've done some brief testing on MWS vs. some of the top decks and came to the same conclusion about Sinkhole being better, EXCEPT in matchups against Combo. 2 for 1s are never ever bad, that being said, in an open metagame I would still take sinkhole over hymn.Quote:
Originally Posted by frogboy
So concerning the sideboard of the deck I think that Diabolic Edict is definately not a good card to run.
(as it should probably be boarded against Dreadnought, Goyf, Terravore and other big creatures)
I'd rather have Threads of Disloyalty as it not only kills their goyf but even gives you another one to attack with next turn. Since this deck is not running counterbalance + Top in its maindeck the issue of Krosan Grip getting boarded against Threads is also really negligible. This also supports the tempo based playstyle of the deck very well. The only thing I am not sure about is whether Mind Harness or Threads is the superior card in this slot. Both have their obvious advantages and disadvantages.
Concerning the maindeck I really have to say that this deck is quite strong and plays outreally smoothly most of the time.
So, let me get this straight. Instead of running removal that definitely kills a creature, you want to run something that might, kind of maybe, steal a creature.
Threads can only take Tarmogoyf. Can't take Terravore, and Krosan Grip is better against Dreadnought.
Mind Harness requires you to constantly pay mana to keep it, which effectively turns off additional plays in a turn.
While I agree that stealing creatures is good, the ways that we have access to right now are all pretty terrible.
Diabolic Edict also helps deal with Mongoose and Mystic Enforcer out of Threshold, and Tombstalker in the black aggro match ups. Neither of the cards you mentioned can do that.
Killing a creature is better with this deck because of the fact that once it's dead, it's not going to fuck with you. Just stealing it can open up possibilities of them answering the card used, thus getting their creature back.
Edict is better because it's cheap, and it answers creatures that are problematic (Enforcer if he resolves, but more immediately Tombstalker). Additionally, it's good against Factory because of it's instant speed. That means all of your removal is instant speed, which is the best kind of utility for your removal.
Edict is a little loose against Dreadnought, but you can probably wreck all their Mages and Mishra's if that is part of your plan. I'm really really excited about the idea of Threads on a Dreadnought, but there are so many things that can go wrong with that plan.
Especially considering (seeing Rodney's sideboard and what he boarded in against Dan) bounce, it seems like it could be a beating at an extremely relevant time.
The only creature stealing spell I would want would be control magic, considering the card's power against threshold (steals enforcer and is 4cc for balance) and the fact that it can take pretty much anything. Four mana in this deck hurts though.
Edict was the best of the options available. Honestly, it was very, very solid. I almost wished I had run 4 instead and cut the grip count to 3.
Almost.
PS. They mostly come at night, mostly.
Step 1: Steal underpants.Quote:
Originally Posted by nitewolf9
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Make profit.
On a more relevant note, Have you guys had any problems with the beating that is Magus of the Moon? In my testing TA has been outstanding, but the two match ups I was having real difficulty against we're Dragon Stompy and Moon Thresh, it made me kind of want to run a basic Island for BEB. Also I was testing Sinkhole vs. Hymn to Tourach and my testing suggests that Sinkhole is definitely the better call.
I don't think this deck can afford to run a basic island, while trying to reach double black so early. Yes, moon effects are beatings. I think "board in blasts and pray" might be the only solution there.
Honestly, like John (Zork) was saying, Dragon Stompy really isn't something that everyone is playing en masse, and the deck is extremely inconsistent. Even though everything they play has "bad for you" written in sharpie on it. Against Moon thresh, you will have time to get a blue source in play and leave it open for blast. Or to get threats down and disrupt them, or keep them from ever reaching 3 mana. It's rough, though.
I think Magus doesn't see nearly as much play as it did in the past, but the options to it are very limited I think. Postboard Edict certainly is a good answer when floating the mana...and of course BEB. But if they actually catch you off guard without an answer for him then yeah it's basically game time.
If Magus is heavily played, Slaughter Pact is probably the best board card that helps against him while not being dead in other matchups. Still, though, Moon is less common nowadays and barring a abnormal meta, Pact probably isn't needed.
Well, free spells are the shit, and Massacre is free, but I really don't see it helping the Counterslivers MU. I'd suggest Engineered Plague, but that really doesn't but a dampener on Counterslivers either, at least in my experience. Errr... This is also a terrible idea, but maybe Ensnare (one of my pet cards, so yell at me if you wish, it's not like I haven't been yelled at about Ensnare before) could help. It's like a shitty Time Walk (yeah, I'm being honest, a shitty Time Walk, like most "Time Walks". Fuck that phrase with a shoe) against agro, makes EtW combo go :cry: (for a turn, i.e. it's just a stall), and forces through your Tarmogoyf/s and/or Tombstalker/s. It gets around Mystic Enforcer, in the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by aTn
Well, Sickening Shoal is an option, if you want it, but considering the black curve of the deck (Thoughtseize, Sinkhole, Snuff Out wtf pitching removal for removal, and Tombstalker who shouldn't be pitched), it's most likely a bad idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by aTn
In case anyone outside of Deep6er and nitewolf9 haven't figured it out, THERE AREN'T ANY FUCK-AROUND SLOTS IN THE DECK. Seriously. Sinkhole wants to be LD, and there isn't anything better to take it's spot. Stifle wants to be Stifle. Wasteland wants to be Wasteland. Snuff Out wants to be Free Removal that isn't shit, i.e. Snuff Out. The lands can't be changed (and I say that as I look at the list and cringe at Bayou, a mandatory evil). It's a rather straight forward deck without any wiggle room. Maybe there will be a better LD spell printed in UBg sometime soon, but not likely. So, yeah.
Cool deck.
I would perhaps not use sinkholes in it, but would probably like to see spell snare, as it has proven really good in tempo threshold, which manages with only stifle and wasteland as LD.
I would also like to see pernicious deed in the deck somehow.
Sorry for the intrusion after so many pages. I'm going to revive an old point here: 8 threats might be a little bit tight. There have been efforts to find threat 9 and 10, but no creature fits this deck as a low-cost big beatstick. Sea Drakes won't work in this deck because this deck plays without any accelerators.
Over time I have given threat 9 and 10 for this deck some thought. Phyrexian Negator seems like a beatstick that might fill these slots. He used to be very popular in suicide decks, until Tarmogoyf was printed and Eva Green was born. But perhaps we can revive this sucker. This deck has enough control to make sure the Negator doesn't recieve too much damage, while beating your opponent's face for 5.
If you have an aggro meta, this might not be a good option, but if you don't, at least it's a good sideboard card against decks with fewer creatures. Just a thought :smile:
Hi,
I think it has been made quite clear why sinkhole is functionally superior to hymn in this deck.
However, I don't understand why spell snare has been disregarded so early. It's still played succesfully in tempo threshold builds (3-4 copies) as said. If played au lieu de sinkhole, your mana base would become a lot more stable and you'll be playing more blue cards (20 to 24 is quite noticeable for FoW). It is true that your mana dirsuption will be lessened to certain extent and that the deck becomes a bit metagame dependant. It is true aswell, that I don't encounter many decks where snare is not close to acceptable. Snare is also loyal to the deck's philosophy of tempo, in the sense that CMC answer < CMC threat.
If the creators can throw any more thoughts on why snare is dismissed I'd be grateful. It may be that sinkhole is strictly better despite its mana requirements (whick is my main concern)
By the way, I can't understand why there are such complaints as 'This is not original' 'playsets of good cards thrown together' and the like, specially when good result's back-up the deck. As far as I can see, no-one untill now has thrown all the good free-spells in a deck together (I might be wrong), and that's something to consider innovative.