Printable View
:eyebrow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelis
And I own Suzuki Intruder and still I'm playing Goblins with Lightning Bolt MD.
What's your point?
Bolts are best against aggro-decks (and therefore a good choice in aggro-metas). Goblins perform best in Aggro/Control meta's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelis
What's your point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakofried
Well I have been playing storm combo, especially Doomsday Fetchland Tendrils for the past one and a half year. I have nearly no experience with goblins. I just wanted to try something new. That's why I borrowed the goblin deck from a mate. Lightning Bolt just seemed the best option to me as a removal in a mono-red shell. That's why I'm playing it. And it really helps connecting Lackey on turn two, because you always have that red mana avaiable. When you play Weirding, you need to meet two requirements to connect a Lackey on turn two against a creature-based deck. You need to have a black manasource and your opponent has only one creature. Especially on the draw, Bolt just seem's to be superior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelis
I'm kinda new to the deck and I just tried the things, which seemed to be alright for me. That's why I wrote down boarding plans. To tell the internet what I did, so they could tell me, what I did wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoboLord
That was really the only right way to respond to the other guy's post. You're awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoboLord
There is absolutely no point in making excuses for this choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by flrn
There are MU in which you would board like this (Kinesis IN, Bolts OUT) because you don't want to cut creatures from MD (just like you said). This is true for MU in which creatures are especially valuable cause your opponent can't remove them (e.g. Merfolk).
So, your "mistake" wasn't a huge one, it's just that Piledriver is one of the weakest cards against against Zoo.
After reading my post a mate asked me, what line of thought I used to determine to take out Lightning Bolt and I realized that I'm not used to play anything related to creature matchup's. As I stated earlier in this thread I have been playing Doomsday Fetchland Tendrils ever since Mystical Tutor got banned. And when you board with this deck, you really don't wanna touch your engine. For example, if I face a ***** Build with Spell Snare avaiable I board out Cabal Ritual's and board in Carpet of Flowers. Or when I play a blue deck in general I have seven protection piece's avaiable in my first 60 cards. When I bring in Xantid Swarm's to fight those decks I don't go up to eleven protection spells, because that would be way too much. You take out some other protection spells, which are weaker against the given matchup and bring in Xantid Swarms, because you think they work better in the given situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoboLord
My point is, when i faced Zoo the most natural thing for me to do, was to take out the weaker removal spell, to bring in the better removal spell against the given deck. I realized too that Piledriver is not that good against Zoo in the postboard matchup's, even though my opponent had to make a bad trade in the third game due to an attacking Piledriver, but I didn't question my boarding plan, while playing the match. And in the end it didn't even matter, because I lost the game due to two stupid mistake's. I also realized after the match, that I did those mistake's, because I'm not used to fight creature fight's or remove the creature's my opponent controls, because I have no experience whatsoever in those kinda things. Tarmogoyf was the most irrelevant card, when I played tournament matches, as long as he didn't kill me.
I think it's really interesting to analyze those line of plays, when playing a completly different archetype. And I know one thing for sure. If I play another tournament with Goblin's, I won't make those mistake's again. And I think that is what you need to take from those tournament, if you wanna improve your own game.
I agreed with everything you said up 'till this. I don't have the option of switching decks just because I saw a certain someone walk through the door. Personally, if you're willing to sit through a tourney, or even a match, you shouldn't be, for lack of a better word, "scared" of the metagame. It's just like every other deck; make good card choices, and play with a style that comforts you. Choosing Bolts over something else doesn't mean you've been forced into it because of the meta. Even in a meta where Goblins dominate, I bet people would still play Bolt here and there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelis
I've changed my removal package quite a bit over the last couple months, trying everything including Tarfire and Lightning Bolt. I'm currently settled on Warren's Weirding, which I know has it's pros and cons..
+ Tutor-able
+ Doesn't target
+ Synergy with Warchief/Ringleader/Piledriver
+ Turn 2 removal for alpha strike
- Sorcery speed
- Requires B
- 2cc
- Nullified in mirror match
- Diminishes against numerous enemies
- Boosts Goyf
Now, knowing all that, it stills takes priority over Bolt, because it is fitting to my play style. If I drop a Ringleader, and I pass a Lightning Bolt, I beat myself up over it, but here's another scenario. Just yesterday I was sitting across from a level 4 Coralhelm Commander with Jitte, a situation where Weirding helps, Bolt does not. There's plenty of times when you can be looking at a lone Iona, or Progenitus, or just a lone fatty in general, and that's when Weirding shines brightest. It's funny watching someone drop Iona naming red, just to get it sacrificed next turn.
If Bolt fits your play style, throw it in there, just be ready to see them go to the bottom of the library.
If Warren Weirding fits your play style, throw it in there, just be ready to drop crazy amounts of cash on Badlands. =)
I think the major point of playing Lightning Bolt main deck is helping Lackey connect turn 2 (which is probably the classic best hypothesis for a goblin strategy). I'd say that 40~50% of the time, people won't let Lackey shine by trading a creature (if it's X/1) or just dropping a better toughness creature (the other 50~60% of times, Lackey just eat a Swords to Plowshares or another Bolt). It's also great when some unlucky T.E.S guy has to go low on Ad Nauseam (which shouldn't happen too often because they usually play Orim's Chant before going off). Well, Lightning Bolt will always be a broken card, since 3 damage for R is pretty much a classic good option for most metagames given.
Warren Weirding is losing it's power because creature based decks are becoming really popular (I'm talking about general random metagaming). Green and Taxes, GWb Rock, Merfolks, or any other Tempo decks are pretty popular. I don't find WW to be the best removal avaliable at the moment. Although, I really like those funny synergys that WW has with Mogg War Marshal.
Even in matches where WW is known to be awsome adapted to it. NO/PRO decks usually have that pesky little Goyf or even a Noble left to be sacrificed instead of the Fat Wurm. Iona from Reanimator might eat a WW, but Dredge's Iona will never be touched, there'll always be some tokens or even a Narcomoeba to be sacrificed.
In my opinion, the main reason to splash black today isn't WW, as it was in the early past. The most powerful cards black can give us now is Cabal Therapy and Perish.
I know not everyone has multiple decks to choose from, I mentioned this in one of my earlier posts. Im not going to say people shouldn't play bolts in their list. I just dont see enough reasons to play bolt myself unless a specific metagame might demand it.Quote:
Originally Posted by pater
But if that were the case I think its better (if one has the option) to play another deck. The point I am trying to make is that I'm not going to play Goblins if half the field is Zoo and other aggro.
And of course everybody should choose a deck that fits their play style. In my meta it would be best to play combo but I dont know how to play it properly so i wont pick up a combo deck myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pater
Well, right now I'm testing a card similar to Bolt but just with better range: Swords to Plowshares. I wouldn't go for W splash just for StoP, but with recent developments in the metagame W provides good SB cards.
Here is my current list
//Lands [22]
6 Wasteland / Port
7 Fetchlands
6 Mountain
3 Plateau
//Core [25]
-1 Piledriver
//Others [13]
3 Gempalm Incinerator
3 Swords to Plowshares
1 Stingscourger
3 Warren Instigator
3 Goblin Chieftain
//Sideboard [15]
Combo: 4 Chalice of the Void
Graveyard: 2 Tormod's Crypt, 1 Relic of Progenitus
Aggro: 3 Pyrokinesis, 1 Goblin Sharpshooter
Enchantment/Artifacts: 2 Disenchant, Serenity, 1 Goblin Tinkerer
The SB looks a bit like a random grasp into a box of Sideboard cards but has actzually some thought behind it (especially in configuration with MD)
Explanation:
IMO the current meta seems to bring (back) artifact-based deck like Affinity and MUD as well as some old-school aggro-decks like Goblins and Zoo. The rest is fairly unsure, therefore I want to bring flexibility to the deck.
* The removal package in MD is designed to beat Goblins and Zoo (StoP is just like Bolt good in dealing opponent's 1st-turn Lackeys). StoP is obviously the most flexible removal because it kills alsmost every creature (unless there's a Chalice @ 1 lying around)
* WI is mostly considered to catch removal that would otherwise target Chieftain, Piledriver and co. Chieftain and WI have a strong synergy and help us out in the mirror.
* -1 Piledriver, cause he's not the best card in aggro MUs (same is true for Rishadan Port)
* SB: generally I don't like to split up cards, but in an unknown meta it's probably a good idea. When running splits I try to use 1 slots for Goblins
* Serenity wins us the MUD and Affinity MU singlehandedly (and obviously Enchantress and Staxx), against those decks Disenchant is even better Vindicate with instant-speed.
* I like Tuktuk Scrapper more than Tinkerer, but with 7 hasters in MD Tinker should be given a try. He's also able to shatter MUD's and Affinity's manabase. The same is true for Sharpshooter: generally I's run the 4th Pyrokinesis but Chieftain make Sharpshooter and Tinkerer much better.
What do you think? I don't know how the MUD and Affinity MU should be played from Goblins perspective, but I guess this SB should make it possible to beat them.
What I don't see at the moment: What MU become worse with W splash? Or asked differntly: Why did we abbandon W splash?
Rishadan Ports are good against MUD. Keeping them off Ancient Tomb/City of Traitors is pretty nice. If you can kill his early Metalworker and keep up the manadenial, you should be fine. Postboard things get better. They usually bring in some CotV, but Serenity rapes them, so does Shattering Spree, Meltdown, Pulverize...
Affinity is a really crappy matchup for RB Goblins because they are REALLY fast. White/Green splash should help in this MU also.
Back from a break while playing Standard.
On the subjects discussed:
- There is absolutely no problem on running Bolt MD. It's great against every single agroo MU. They still leave you with 29-30 goblins, with is just fine. And they should not be dropped for Knesis against Zoo. We should overwhelm them with our removal, then get ahead on card advantage.
- Faerie Macabre is a fine sb option.
- WW is good, but I don't think is the right choice for the meta. It is bad against Goblins and Merfolk (mainly due to Mutavault. (yes, I know, we have Wastes...)). Against Zoo, Bolt is better, because the majority of their damage, at least in my view, is done by an unanswered Nacatl, which Bolt takes care even on the draw.
- The W splash looks bad for me... I'd rather run green, with K.Grip on the side (due to all the CB, that I see around here at least, and the rise of MUD and the likes).
On Lightning Bolt Vs Warren Weirding
Let there be no confusion, these cards serve very different purposes. While both can be played to get a T2 Lackey attack through, WW is the only option for taking out those big fatties, and it's tutorable, and it's Ringleaderiffic. If you run a Rb build there is no reason not to run at least 1 WW MD, even if you're running Bolt too.
Perish should be played now more than ever. With the introduction of Green Sun's Zenith Legacy is more green creature centric than ever before. It's just a stupid-good card for anyone running black without Goyf, so use it.
Onto a growing threat-
GBW Junk or Rock or Death and Taxes, whatever you want to call it, and BUG Control!
I haven't seen these decks discussed too much, but they are terrible MUs for Goblins. They run a shit-ton of discard (Thoughtseize, Hymns, Gerard's Verdict) plus creature removal (Vindicate, Edict, Innocent Blood) and worst of all they follow up their early game disruption with midgame Pernicious Deed. This is the single biggest beating they can throw at us. Cracking that deed will clear our board 95% of the time, leaving us with no Vials, no Lackeys, no Warchiefs, and just a few lands. These matches make me wish the SB had room for 4 Needles to drop against Deed, as their hand disruption clears out K-Grips (which are too slow anyway). And attacking their manabase isn't an effective response since these decks typically run Mox Diamond, making Wasteland awkward.
I don't agree with you that legacy is become more creature centric because of Green Sun's Zenith, I really don't see that coming. I'd say that we should stick to Pyrokinesis instead of Perish becaus it is just way more flexible (running both would overdo it).Quote:
Originally Posted by jrw1985
However, the real problem about those decks you mentioned is that they run E-Plague and Jitte etc. and you can't handle them with B splash. I feel that artifact- and enchantment removal is needed more than ever. D'n'Taxes in particular rises and fals with it's artifacts (Equipments and Vials, sometime CoP: Red).
Right now I think B is the weakest splash-color just because it lacks flexibilty and privides us with nothing more than very special removal.
Apart from that:
I've been testing W splash (see list above)yesterday and today...Result: just awsome.
I didn't record all decks I was testing against but among those were: W Staxx, MUD, Affinity (lots of it), Ugr and UBw Countertop, Goblins, MBC, Team America (the winning list of SGC DC) and Zoo...I didn't lose a single match.
I can't say wether W or G splash is superior, Serenity was a real bomb against stax and Affinty. I liked StoP especially against Gobs and Team America (sided them out against MUD and both Countertop lists). I was actually testing StoP instead of Bolt and I think it's worth it!
(I normally don't post the same question on two separate sites, but Salvation isn't biting.)
Just a few questions regarding Counter-Top variants:
1) How negatively does an active Counter-Top work against goblins without Vial on the battlefield? Can you generally play around it?
2) Do they typically side out Counterbalance in games 2-3?
From what I've been hearing, it's supposed to be a slightly favorable matchup for goblins? How would/do you typically play against it? I'd especially appreciate input from players with experience in this matchup. The only reason I'm asking is because I'm just trying to debate whether Krosan Grip is worth the 3-4 SB spaces I devote to it because that's what they are there for. Split Second is very appealing, but 2G is a lot to ask for in goblins (at least IMO, and I run 24 lands), and I would much rather use Nature's Claim as my artifact/enchantment spot removal of choice.
The black splash provides something other than very special removal: a chance against combo decks. White and green have no real way of interacting with (storm) combo. Black can bring in cabal therapy/earwig squad/duress/thoughtseze/extirpate. I know, there is still Chalice of the Void against combo, but if they get to start they can use their first turn to set up the combo/find an answer to Chalice of the Void... and use their second turn to go off/again look for an answer.... before you can even cast the hate card...
So while white does give a great answer to artifacts and enchantments, it doesn't give you the anti-combo fighting options. Although I could see people running into a random Mana Tithe, and Silence could be practically a timewarp against combo in game 2... Hell, you could even run Ethersworn Cannonist and they'd go wth? (and then solve it with the same kind of hate they'd use against Chalice). Rule of Law could totally screw them over if you manage to bring it into play early as could the Leyline of Sanctity/Gilded Light. (Just because of the surprise, once they know about it they do have the hate required to stop it).
All in all I think black has the better odds against combo, white against the artifact abusing decks. Green has Krosan Grip which is just extremely awesome when you have to fight counterbalance a lot. And maindeck artifact removal options (which is very nice in a jitte-heavy environment).
But ehm that's just me...
Well, you are right, my view was a bit too much black-and-white (hah, pun on words :-D)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nameless Two
B provides us with Discard and Extirpate as well as Earwig Squad, thus good solutions on fighting combo. HOwever, jrw1985 said that he expected the meta to be more creature centric (I agree with that), while I think that combo won't show up in high numbers. That's why we don't need the B splash - even without B we have 2 great cards to fight combo: Chalice and Mindbreak Trap
I'd say it depends on board position here: Let'S assume we don't have Vial from the start. Counterbalance isn't a problem as long as we have 2-3 creature in play (Lackey n particular cause he helps cheating other guys into play). If we are in this position our oponent should be busy with searching for answers like Firespout and Tarmogoyf, this in turn makes it hard to use Sensei's Divining Top more than once each turn. Without Top CB is nearly useless (but that's not only true for Goblins)Quote:
Originally Posted by anotherday
CB + Top can be extremely distrupting when our opp manged to clear the board and is clever enough to let cards with manacost 2 and 3 float in the top 3 cards.
However, this isn't happening too often since we have 8 cards that make CB nearly useless (Lackey, Vial).
I don't think there is a rule for sideboarding against Goblins. It depends on their SB. Friend of mine is playing Ugwr Countertop and he sides out balance if he's on the draw. (well he has 2 Grims, the 4th Firespout and 2 Needles in SB)
Back to the topic of W splash:
So far I didn't hear good arguments not to run W. Can someone please convince me that W isn't a good choice?
I'll probably play Rb once I get that 4th red fetch. It would be well suited to whatever the hell my meta is on any given day.
I think Black or mono red are just better choices. I don't see how much more you would benefit from adding white opposed to black or just stay red.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoboLord
The way I understand it is that you want to run white mainly for artifact removal. But red has enough options (the ones mentioned before) for that. Even better since Meltdown and Shatterstorm are able to destroy all artifacts at once. Serenity does the same thing but it needs to stick around for a turn. A lone Disenchant doesn't help you much either vs decks that run multiple enchantment and artifacts.
Serenity would help you mostly vs enchantress which, if the metagame is aggro, might be played more. I have no experience in the matchup but wouldn't black be a good choice either? Discard like Duress, Inquisition or Therapy. And black adds more benefits like Perish since most creatures (excluding Merfolk or Gobs) played in Legacy are still green. And weirding can take care of the creatures STP can't take care of like Emrakul and Progenitus.
Basically Im saying things we all know already but I believe those are good reasons for not running white.
The reason I want to run W is that it provides us with cards that can destroy both artifact AND enchantments (leave alone StoP in MD, which is just great!).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelis
If I wanted to aim at artifacts only, I'd run more Serenities. This might be an evenbetter idea than running Meltdown and Shatterstorm because their manacost are just too high for me.
E. Plague is still a problem for mono R and Rb. I dropped Rb (and thus discard in form of Cabal Therapy) because I think it just disrupts our aggro plan (Discard is really killer in early turn - unfortunately that's when we are busy with spamming creatures).
Regarding Emrakul and Progenitus: Progi has never been a threat for us in my eyes. Emrakul on the other hand (who reall IS a threat) can be dealt with more effectively by Stingscourger. Most often you see Emrakul enter the battlefield via Sneak Attack and/or Show & Tell. Against a sneak-attacking Emrakul we have Stinger as an answer via Vial (which Weirding can't) - while we have the chance of putting Matron and/or Stingscourger into play when our opponent plays Show and Tell (both of which ensure that Emrakul doesn't hit us next turn). Plus WW doesn't remove Emrakul and Progi entirely because of their reshuffle-trigger.
When we have hard times dealing with creature Pyrokinesis is IMO just as good as Perish. However, IMO sideboarding is not about dealing with creatures (sure we should spent 2-3 slots on extra removal) but mainly it's about dealing with combo, graveyards and stuff that kills us (like Moat, Humilty, Plague, Deeds, Jitte, Swords, etc.). Artifact and enchantment removal can even take the aggressive part of manadenial and shut down opponent's vials.
All in all: C. Therapy, Toughtseize, Perish and the like are toys - but what we need is tools.
I don't believe that the mana cost of Shatterstorm (and to lesser extent Meltdown) is too high at all. You'll be able to chump against Affinity block, especially in a build with MWM, until turn 4 and then destroy everything on their side of the battlefield and win. I really don't understand your fear for affinity even though it is a tough matchup. You only have to survive the first couple of turns and have shatterstorm do the rest.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoboLord
Engineered Plague is indeed not a nice card. But first of all goblins has cards to deal with a single plague (Chieftain, that 3/4 guy). And secondly it's not that Engineered Plague is on the table turn one*. You have time to put down 1 or 2 creatures or vial, and depending on the build you can fuck with their mana base, and play disruption turn 2 or 3 (depending if they're on the play or not).
* there are exceptions of course like dark ritual (which isnt played that much anymore) into Plague, or a 2nd turn plague when your opponent is playing Mox Diamond but thats would just be bad luck.
If you are too busy putting out creatures the first two turns why do you consider Serenity an option vs Artifacts? Does not the same line of reasoning you use against discard apply? That means it wont come down before turn 3 either. So in case of the affinity match up it destroys their artifacts on turn 4 as well, but with a bigger chance of being destroyed since it has to survive a full turn (although I must admit it seems not that likely Affinity actually runs enchantment removal since its not in their colors).
To me the question is if there are enough troublesome enchantments that validates running enchantment removal? I'm not convinced myself. And I want to stress again that Serenity has to stay on the board for a full turn. To me thats a very big downside.
It depends greatly on the amount of Stingers one plays (I think most lists only run 1 or 2?) and if you're actually able to set one up with a matron. In any case when it comes to those creatures there's still no reason to choose white over mono red or even black (I would still leave in 1 Stingscourger in Rb). Although, now I come to think of it, Retribution of the Meek might be a very good alternative over Perish. It does get rid of all problem creatures Goblins has trouble dealing with when it comes to our usual removal (Gempalm, Bolt).Quote:
Originally Posted by GoboLord