Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

  1. #21
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    SB Dragonlord Dromoka doesn't let opponent cast spells on your turn. Which means they can't counter your things, can't cast anything off Demonstrate, and can't even counter the Dragon. Is that unnecessary overkill?
    Before even addressing that question, WG4 is a hard ask on a manabase like this. Etherium-Horn Sorcerer has the advantage of being in enemy colors (which lines up well with the invasion sac-lands), none-the-less sharing a color with the key card and Otawara pushing the deck into UR anyways. Regardless of where it is on the spectrum of good to overkill, I'm skeptical it's in contention for good enough for rewiring the manabase to support him.

    EDIT: I'd entertain the notion of an alternative WG build since there is a WG4 Cascader as well, but again, there is no Sol land that provides WG so without even investigating it it seems dubious.

  2. #22
    Member

    Join Date

    Sep 2011
    Posts

    4,089

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by Rationalist View Post
    Before even addressing that question, WG4 is a hard ask on a manabase like this. Etherium-Horn Sorcerer has the advantage of being in enemy colors (which lines up well with the invasion sac-lands), none-the-less sharing a color with the key card and Otawara pushing the deck into UR anyways. Regardless of where it is on the spectrum of good to overkill, I'm skeptical it's in contention for good enough for rewiring the manabase to support him.

    EDIT: I'd entertain the notion of an alternative WG build since there is a WG4 Cascader as well, but again, there is no Sol land that provides WG so without even investigating it it seems dubious.
    Yeah, too bad, the mana is awkward. Guess you're limited to RUG colors and minimal colored costs.

    God-Pharaoh's Statue could work to limit enemy counterspells and free Demonstrate spells?

    If you face a lot of hate you can't beat (Blood Moon, multiple sphere effects), it might good to board in alternate win conditions like Chandra, Awakened Inferno or Carnage Tyrant and just win the game with a big hard-to-remove uncounterable threat instead of trying to remove every piece of their interaction.
    Last edited by FTW; 09-15-2022 at 12:51 PM.

  3. #23
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    So Jarvis Yu just tweeted out some thoughts about this deck and Bob Huang reached out to me on twitter and asked me to follow him so he could PM me some thoughts. I'll sum up whatever they say here, but my immediate takeaway specifically to Jarvis' comments is that I really should be running a Gemstone Cavern or two at least in the board.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    If you face a lot of hate you can't beat (Blood Moon, multiple sphere effects), it might good to board in alternate win conditions like Chandra, Awakened Inferno or Carnage Tyrant and just win the game with a big hard-to-remove uncounterable threat instead of trying to remove every piece of their interaction.
    I kind of like this thought.

  4. #24
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    After talking with Bob Huang who feels more stable mana has import vs. Delver I'm currently testing out this change

    -3 Crystal Vein
    -1 Tinder Farm
    -1 Svyelunite Temple

    +2 Hickory Woodlot
    +2 Gemstone Cavern
    +1 Vesuva

    (I'm skeptical on the Vesuva but worth a test).

    If it's good, might lean farther from Sakashima's Apprentice and closer to Sweet-Gum Recluse as mana combinatorics change. Corelated worsening of Commandeer not yet factored in.

  5. #25
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    So more accomplished voices convinced me to experiment going down to 6 Invasion/FE Saclands to enable T3 + T4 jam playpatterns vs. Delver with 4 Hickory Woodlots and Gemstone Caverns. Also to try move away from focusing on Blue Maindeck to support Commandeer in the sideboard which may be questionable at best. Given that, I worked the logic in building the rest of the manabase and the cascade suite back up from scratch, and I drew up an infographic of the decisions I made in why.



    This is leading me to a maindeck that looks like this: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/5105321#paper

    The sideboard here is incredibly rough, and we can add Consign // Oblivions as necessary to continue to bounce hate. The real question is, can we make fast-combo matches palatable, and if so how?

  6. #26
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Thinking of trying out a Dwarven Ruins version that aims to play Maddening Hex Turn 2 out of the board to help with the combo matchup: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/visual/5107960

    (Trying to pick off some of the problematic fast combo opponents at the expense of some of the others)

    Ran 100 simulated open hands mulligans included, assuming I was willing to Mulligan down to 3 to find it (I appreciate that isn't necessarily a strong position). I also assumed I was on the play because the mana for that is weaker given Gemstone Cavern.

    • I got a Turn 2 Maddening Hex or Curse of Shaken Faith in my opening 7 with 0 Mulligans 37 times.
    • I got a Turn 2 Maddening Hex or Curse of Shaken Faith in my opening 7 with 1 Mulligans 21 times.
    • I got a Turn 2 Maddening Hex or Curse of Shaken Faith in my opening 7 with 2 Mulligans 8 times.
    • I got a Turn 2 Maddening Hex or Curse of Shaken Faith in my opening 7 with 3 Mulligans 12 times.
    • I got a Turn 2 Maddening Hex or Curse of Shaken Faith in my opening 7 with 4 Mulligans 5 times.
    • I FAILED to get a Turn 2 Maddening Hex or Curse of Shaken Faith in my opening hand 17 times.


    Here's the logic behind the 4/0/2/2 split between Pheonix/E-Horn/Apprentice/Recluse in this version, along with a couple other takeaways that fall out of the math included below.



    Relevant Takeaways: Otawara and Boseiju are slightly harder to active in the Dwarven Ruin "Red" set-up, so that's a sacrifice that doing this entails. Also, Maelstrom Wanderer is also slightly harder to hard-cast. On the pro-side, the sequencing with Dwarven Ruins and Creative Technique is more flexible than with Sulfur Vent or Tinder Farm, so shifting to the Red version does make it easier to go T3 Creative Technique, T4 Jam again since you can get the Red out of Dwarven Ruins for a 5 cost spell on 3 without sacrificing it. Also, for what it's worth, average creature quality does go up. (5/3 Flyer > 3/6)

  7. #27

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Just a few assorted thoughts.

    -For the red list, given that you have 4 SB cards that turn off Keruga and don't need it to be a blue card for Commandeer, is that better as a 15th SB card?

    -Should the Mountain be a Volcanic Island? It makes casting Wanderer, Otawara, and Consign a bit easier and the deck already has a zillion targets for Wasteland.

    -Regarding the Wanderers in the sideboard, is the idea to bring those in when you bring in removal so you have more density? They stood out to me at first but that seems like a reasonable plan.

  8. #28
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by LennonMarx View Post
    -For the red list, given that you have 4 SB cards that turn off Keruga and don't need it to be a blue card for Commandeer, is that better as a 15th SB card?
    It definitely is. Came to that same conclusion before the next time I actually ran the list. Without Commandeer Keruga is a pretty mediocre 3+5 Drop 5/4 with an occasional cantrip or two.

    Quote Originally Posted by LennonMarx View Post
    -Should the Mountain be a Volcanic Island? It makes casting Wanderer, Otawara, and Consign a bit easier and the deck already has a zillion targets for Wasteland.
    That's an interesting argument. Personally I'm probably going to stay on Mountain for now just due to Assassin's Trophy being a card and playing in paper in the Seattle Area I think increases the chances of running into a GBx fair pet deck, but the MTGGoldfish "Recent Placings by Card" Show only 6 or 7 AT lists and I would expect that resource to be biased towards overrepresenting it than under representing it given the issues with how it accumulates data so I could easily be wrong on that. I'll definitely stay conscious of if/when being a basic actually ends up meaning anything to me, and if/when I end up with Mountain and short of Blue Mana.

    Quote Originally Posted by LennonMarx View Post
    -Regarding the Wanderers in the sideboard, is the idea to bring those in when you bring in removal so you have more density? They stood out to me at first but that seems like a reasonable plan.
    The primary idea of the Wanderers were protection vs. Flusterstorm and Mindbreak Trap, since they largely combo off with a Cascade Trigger that survives either protected in the stack below the "active" portion. They're just a little safer against opposing cards and I wanted to the ability to lean more in their direction post-board. They might not actually be worth the space, and potentially should just be represented a bit more heavily mainboard, but that's the idea at least.

  9. #29
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    So I went 3-1 this Monday night, specifically going

    2-0 vs Reanimator
    2-0 vs UG Omnitell
    2-1 vs 8-Cast
    0-2 vs Mono White Hatebears by "Mr. Lee"

    I believe the final two matches here are going to end up being posted on the 90's MTG Youtube Channel in some short amount of time. The exact list I piloted is here: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/5115283#paper



    REANIMATOR (Jeremy Edwards)

    The Reanimator Matchup is not good. I went 2-0 largely on variance being my friend, but even if it can be won I don't think this will ever be favorable without some new card being printed.

    Game 1 he had to take too many mulligans to remain competitive, and I just combo'd off.

    Game 2 I start on Leyline of the Void. He Fragmentizes it T1 and he just combos off before I do and reduces my hand to lands. Luckily he's not on the Tin Fins line although I suspect he may have it as a plan B and he just passes back to me with a Griselbrand, an Archon of Cruelty, and knowing I have no action in hand. The deck is 1/3rd action though so I do manage to topdeck it and then I combo off. I fail to get an Emrakul or a Maelstrom Wanderer off the combo, but what board I do produce is just "beefier" than his (see image above) so we play "combat-magic" for a couple turns and I win.

    Takeaway: I'm honestly skeptical of the Leylines of the Void. While I did manage to win the match, the first Leyline I mulled to was immediately answered (because Reanimator is pretty used to answering a single Leyline), and even the second Leyline that I got off of Comboing was immediately answered as well. The cost of including these Leylines, however, was that there was actually only a 50% chance that my combo was going to work in Game 2. Since I started it off with a Cascade Spell and one Creative Technique in the graveyard, I had a 3/6 chance of Cascading into a Creative Technique and a 3/6 chance of cascading into a Leyline of the Void against a pre-existing Griselbrand *and* Archon of Cruelty. Now once I get to the first Demonstration the math gets a lot safer for me, but that's a heck of an initial coin flip to volunteer for. Bob Huang convinced me to jam them on Monday and he's a more experienced and accomplished tournament Magic player than I am so I ceded the point. This experience didn't take away my skepticism of the card, however, and while I'll keep testing it I'm tempted to go down to 3 copies, unconventionality be damned, both to reclaim the sideboard space AND to improve my ability to Combo safely in such matchups. Hitting a redundant Leyline is not the same thing as hitting a redundant Maddening Hex is the relevant matchups.

    UG OMNITELL (Do not recall name)

    UG Omnitell is one of the more intimidating blue matchups, but not too intimidating.

    Game 1 I jam the combo, he can't force of will both copies, but I end up Demonstrating him into an Omniscience. He then uses the Omniscience to Cunning Wish for that Blue/Red card with Niv-Mizzet's Head in the art to grab yet more cards that cantrip into yet more cards in order to find a sufficient density of countermagic to stop the Combo after it already gained a larger amount of momentum, forcing me to pass the turn. Stopping the Combo after the first couple demonstration points though used up most of the resources he had in hand, so he plays a 2nd Omniscience, a Coatl, and then passes the turn back to me. I combo again and I win.

    Game 2 I combo, I demonstrate on the first CT giving him a cantrip or a coatl or something, and then, feeling like I'm in the clear, I stop demonstrating and he concedes to the combo noting that me continuing to demonstrate "was his out".

    Takeaway: I still feel like I need to start off Demonstrating against Omnitell opponents because immediately exposing the combo to countermagic is so much worse than rolling the die once or twice, which is often just giving them a cantrip. There's definitely a right time to stop though, and I don't yet have the experience to be very confident in making that call. It was an easy call to make in Game 2 here because of the nice pulls I got off the combo already, how few resources he was on, and just doing my best to read him as a player, but I expect there are situations where the call is much closer to the line.

    8-CAST (Do not recall name, despite the fact he told it to me after the match)

    I enjoyed this match a lot. 90's MTG was recording the top tables on Monday so at this point I'm 2-0 and being recorded.

    Game 1 He starts on a Chalice on 1 and an Urza's Saga strategy. I jam the combo, demonstrate him into a Force of Will, but continue to combo. I demonstrate him into another Force of Will (assuming I remember correctly), and continue to combo. I then cascade for 8 minutes or so copying Emrakul with Apprentice and shuffling more copies of Creative Technique back into the deck. Eventually he concedes.

    Game 2 He keeps what I recall as a no-lander. I eventually combo, demonstrate him into a Kappa Cannoneer, and he Force of Will + Force of Negations me to stop the chain. On his turn he hits me with Kappa. I then combo again on my turn, he Force of Wills one more time to cut down the size of the combo, but I still get a something like 7 or 8 creatures. However, I don't hit Emrakul or Maelstrom Wanderer and I gave him a Kappa Cannoneer and a Master Thopterist. He is at 18, and I swing for 18 points of haste with the Pirates. He chumps one of them with the Thopterist, and on his turn he kills me with the Kappa Cannoneers I gave him that the rest of my creatures can't block.

    Game 3 The details are a little fuzzy here, but he double Force of Wills my first attempt to combo, my demonstration giving him a Kappa Cannoneer, and my Sakashima's Apprentice choosing to come down as a copy of that same Kappa Cannoneer. He than plays a better fair game than my Mid-90's lands and 1 Kappa and passes the turn back to me. I draw more action of the top, I combo, he forces one of the copies and the other hits Emrakul off the top. At this point he is at 16 life with 7 permanents. I'm at 11 Life with 2 Permanents, one of which is Emrakul. I swing for 15, he sacrifices his entire board except the Kappa that, again, I gave him, and he goes to 1 and there are only 3 permanents on the battlefield. He then attacks me with the Kappa and I go to 2. He then passes the turn back to me and I end it.

    Takeaway: I might be overvaluing hands with 1 piece of action post-board against blue decks that are going to bring in Force of Negation. Also, the fact that Kappa Cannoneer is unblockable is a real hole in my "giant boardstate pass the turn" backup plan. Matchup still seems pretty favorable though so I think the goal here is just improving my actual play.

    MONO WHITE HATEBEARS (Lee Hung Nguyen - twitch.tv/1mrlee)

    Well this matchup is a nightmare. I hope 90's MTG lost this footage.

    Game 1 He floods the board with hatebears including both Thalias. I wait until the last possible turn, bounce Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, and begin to Combo. Since he still has Thalia (3) I reason that I need to actually hit Emrakul to win the game, as no amount of hasty creatures will be able to attack him in the first place. This means demonstrating. I demonstrate him into Ethersworn Cannonist.

    Game 2 I board in both the Frys and switch in the Boseijus over Otawaras. He starts doing fair white creature stuff, and just start playing lands. He Cataclysms me back down, so I just keep focusing on sequencing my lands in the way that seems both the safest to me and lets me hold up interaction when necessary as I have both a Fry and a Boseiju in hand. The turn before I combo I make the call and Fry his Thalia (3). I then combo holding up Boseiju with an untapped Hickory Woodlot as an answer if necessary. As I hit CT we begin talking as I try to work out whether or not I should demonstrate. Once I mention I was still thinking this through, he points out that he had already begun shuffling. This induces me to make a call on the spot and, partially for simplicity's sake since he already shuffled and partially because I think the 1 Fry still in the deck makes the expected outcome of the "lowball" combo potentially insufficient to beat him in a fair game from the point he was already at. I quickly think about the various hatebears in my head, that I still have the Boseiju up for Cannonist, and Thalia (2) would still let me get two more CTs beyond the 2 I'd immediately be putting on the stack and concede that I'll just choose to demonstrate on the first CT. He immediately hits Archon of Emeria. After momentarily regretting that fact that this was on camera, I extend the hand.

    Takeaway: So I ran the numbers after the game ended. He was running 2 Archon of Emeria, 4 Thalia (2), and had 22 other spells left in the deck. Thalia 2 is a bad hit for him, but not that much worse than me never demonstrating since both end up with a total of 4 CTs that go off on my end. Given that that makes Archon of Emeria the only real "disaster" hit from his deck, I can't actually convince myself completely that what I did was wrong. But it certainly FEELS like I was being foolish, right? He's playing mono-white hatebears. Game 1, I demonstrate, he immediately hits a hatebear, he wins. Game 2, I demonstrate, he immediately hits a hatebear again, he wins. I feel like I'm the fool in this scenario, but when I try to think about this analytically I can't fully convince myself that I am. The logic for risking the 1st demonstrate makes sense to me as even demonstrating once will prevent the other Fry (which I have a 1/4 chance to hit on the next Cascade, a 1/3 chance to hit on the one after that, etc) from ending the chain. ... But that's exactly what I'd conclude if I *was* the fool, right?

    All in all, between this week and last week I've gone 7-1, and powered through Reanimator and Flusterstorms. However, after that 0-2 loss on camera, which involves me playing my opponent's card and locking myself out of the game 2 games in a row, I kind of feel like Bart Simpson in that episode with the cupcake.



    EDIT: Supplementary Thought - While no one has done it against me yet, I have noticed people bringing in Surgical against me and Bob did mention that when he did 'serious testing' of the deck he did get Blue Blast + Surgical'd. Is it worth boarding 1 copy of Aeve or Temporal Fissure into the deck against decks with high amount of countermagic as well as Surgical in order to hedge for this outcome?

  10. #30
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)



    Just publicly recording some combinatorics calculations based on the Leyline of the Void issue from the previous post. If uninterested, feel free to ignore.

    Chance of Leyline in hand of 7, 4/60 Cards in Deck: 39.95%
    Chance of Leyline in hand of 7, 3/60 Cards in Deck: 31.543%
    Chance of Leyline in hand of 7, 2/60 Cards in Deck: 22.146%
    Chance of Leyline in hand of 7, 1/60 Cards in Deck: 11.667%
    Chance of Leyline in hand of 7, 0/60 Cards in Deck: 0%

    Chance of Leyline 3 Hands (2 Mulligans), 4 in Deck:[1-(1-.3995)3] = 0.7834595499 ≡ h[4:3]78%
    Chance of Leyline 4 Hands (3 Mulligans), 4 in Deck:[1-(1-.3995)4] = 0.8699674597 ≡ h[4:4]87%

    Chance of Leyline 3 Hands (2 Mulligans), 3 in Deck:[1-(1-.31543)3] = 0.6791857954 ≡ h[3:3]68%
    Chance of Leyline 4 Hands (3 Mulligans), 3 in Deck:[1-(1-.31543)4] = 0.7803802199 ≡ h[3:4]78%

    Chance of Leyline 3 Hands (2 Mulligans), 2 in Deck:[1-(1-.22146)3] = 0.5281078072 ≡ h[2:3]53%
    Chance of Leyline 4 Hands (3 Mulligans), 2 in Deck:[1-(1-.22146)4] = 0.6326130522 ≡ h[2:4]63%

    Chance of Leyline 3 Hands (2 Mulligans), 1 in Deck:[1-(1-.11667)3] = 0.3107624324 ≡ h[1:3]31%
    Chance of Leyline 4 Hands (3 Mulligans), 1 in Deck:[1-(1-.11667)4] = 0.3911757794 ≡ h[1:4]39%

    Chance of Leyline 3 Hands (2 Mulligans), 0 in Deck: 0%
    Chance of Leyline 4 Hands (3 Mulligans), 0 in Deck: 0%

    Specific # of Leyline Chances (Hypergeo)

    (1) in hand, 4 boarded in: 0.33628 ∴ (0.33628/{0.33628+0.05934+0.0038+0.00007}) = 84.17732609% ≅ 84% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 4 in deck
    (2) in hand, 4 boarded in: 0.05934 ∴ (0.05934/{0.33628+0.05934+0.0038+0.00007}) = 14.85393877% ≅ 15% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 4 in deck
    (3) in hand, 4 boarded in: 0.0038 ∴ (0.0038/{0.33628+0.05934+0.0038+0.00007}) = 0.9512127963% ≅ 1% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 4 in deck
    (4) in hand, 4 boarded in: 0.00007 ∴ (0.00007/{0.33628+0.05934+0.0038+0.00007}) = 0.01752234098% ≅ 0% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 4 in deck

    (1) in hand, 3 boarded in: 0.28188 ∴ (0.28188/{0.28188+0.03252+0.00102}) = 89.36655887% ≅ 89% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 3 in deck
    (2) in hand, 3 boarded in: 0.03252 ∴ (0.03252/{0.28188+0.03252+0.00102}) = 10.31006277% ≅ 10% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 3 in deck
    (3) in hand, 3 boarded in: 0.00102 ∴ (0.00102/{0.28188+0.03252+0.00102}) = 0.3233783527% ≅ 0% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 3 in deck

    (1) in hand, 2 boarded in: 0.2096 ∴ (0.2096/{0.2096+0.01186}) = 94.64463108% ≅ 95% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 2 in deck
    (2) in hand, 2 boarded in: 0.01186 ∴ (0.01186/{0.2096+0.01186}) = 5.355368915% ≅ 5% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 2 in deck

    (1) in hand, 1 boarded in: = 100% of Leyline-Inclusive Hands with 1 in deck

    Weighted Chance of Cascading into CT with 1+ Leyline in Hand, Organized by Leylines Boarded In, Given Above Distributions, No CT Removed

    4-Boarded In: [0.8417732609*(4/7)] + [0.1485393877*(4/6)] + [0.009512127963*(4/5)] + 0.0001752234098 = 0.5878244762 ≅ 59%
    3-Boarded In: [0. 8936655887*(4/6)] + [0.1031006277*(4/5)] + 0.003233783527 = 0.6814913448 ≅ 68%
    2-Boarded In: [0.9464463108*(4/5)] + 0.05355368915 = 0.8107107378 ≅ 81%
    1-Boarded In: = 100%
    0-Boarded In: = 0%

    Weighted Chance of Cascading into CT with 1+ Leyline in Hand, Organized by Leylines Boarded In, Given Above Distributions, 1 CT Removed

    4-Boarded In: [0.8417732609*(3/6)] + [0.1485393877*(3/5)] + [0.009512127963*(3/4)] + 0.0001752234098 = 0.5173195825 ≅ 52%
    3-Boarded In: [0. 8936655887*(3/5)] + [0.1031006277*(3/4)] + 0.003233783527 = 0.6167586075 ≅ 62%
    2-Boarded In: [0.9464463108*(3/4)] + 0.05355368915 = 0.7633884223 ≅ 76%
    1-Boarded In: = 100%
    0-Boarded In: = 0%

    Combined Probabilities

    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 4 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 0.5878244762*h[4:3] = 0.4605366995 ≅ 46%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 3 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 0.6814913448*h[3:3] = 0.4628592411 ≅ 46%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 2 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 0.8107107378*h[2:3] = 0.42814267 ≅ 43%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 1 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 1*h[1:3] = 0.3107624324 ≅ 31%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 0 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: = 0%

    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 4 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 0.5878244762*h[4:4] = 0.5113881663 ≅ 51%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 3 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 0.6814913448*h[3:4] = 0.5318223655 ≅ 53%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 2 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 0.8107107378*h[2:4] = 0.5128661943 ≅ 51%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 1 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: 1*h[1:4] = 0.3911757794 ≅ 39%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 0 Leyline into the Deck, No CT Removed: = 0%

    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 4 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 0.5173195825*h[4:3] = 0.4052989673 ≅ 41%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 3 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 0.6167586075*h[3:3] = 0.4188936854 ≅ 42%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 2 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 0.7633884223*h[2:3] = 0.4031513857 ≅ 40%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 1 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 1*h[1:3] = 0.3107624324 ≅ 31%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 2 Mulligans, Boarding 0 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: = 0%

    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 4 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 0.5173195825*h[4:4] = 0.450051203 ≅ 45%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 3 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 0.6167586075*h[3:4] = 0.4813062177 ≅ 48%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 2 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 0.7633884223*h[2:4] = 0.4829294798 ≅ 48%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 1 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: 1*h[1:4] = 0.3911757794 ≅ 39%
    Chance of Both Hitting Leyline and then Cascading into CT, Up to 3 Mulligans, Boarding 0 Leyline into the Deck, 1 CT Removed: = 0%

    Conclusion

    Looking at the distributions above, I feel like my initial instinct of 2 is the sweet spot for Leyline of the Void. If we're making the conclusion that Turn 0 Leyline + Turn 3 Win is acceptably competitive vs. a dedicated fast graveyard combo deck, the first Leyline is buying a lot of competitive games and the second Leyline is buying another 10% or so on top of that. Past the 2nd Leyline though you can see how the combined probability numbers aren't actually increasing that much, and in some situations are even going down, all because of how they are interacting with the combo itself. These numbers are slightly unfair because I'm not accounting for when you start off on Creative Technique which let's you mitigate the issue by Demonstrating immediately (creating two "streams" on the stack allowing one to brick off and hit a Leyline safely) making the entire game more competitive in your favor, but I'm assuming v. Reanimator it is a higher priority target for their discard (which is why I did the parallel calculations for when 1 CT is removed from the deck but we're still starting on a Cascade spell) and accounting for opposing discard and topdeck probabilities is a much harder calculation for what strikes me as pretty minimal insight, so I think it's best just to assume that away and note that the actual picture is very slightly better across the board than the pure combinatorics here suggest.

    So for current testing purposes (9/23/22) I'm going to go down to 2 Leylines (-2 Leyline of the Void), add the Aeve to protect the deck re: Surgical v. decks like Delver (+ Aeve, Progenitor Ooze), and look for another card to sideboard that perhaps has CMC>5 and can either be relevant in the matchup, is just another good sideboard card for unrelated purposes, OR, if we want to try to get clever, is a card that's good in the matchup but is more acceptable to Cascade into to water down the Leyline "whiffs".
    Last edited by Rationalist; 09-23-2022 at 03:28 PM.

  11. #31
    Member

    Join Date

    Sep 2011
    Posts

    4,089

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Congrats on your 3-1.

    It sounds like Leyline is iffy due to limiting your combo. Then again, you should have enough combo starters that you can go off again if you miss on the first branch. You also need a turn 1 answer, otherwise they race you. They're the more explosive combo deck. You have ~0% chance of winning if you let them go off on turns 1-2 (Griselbrand -> draw 14 -> 3x Grief/Unmask discarding your hand, Serra's Emissary on creatures). Whereas you might be able to win a game where you start with Leyline but whiff on the first branch. Does that factor into your math?

    What does the rest of your sideboard look like now? If most are 6+ mana or lands, you should be fine.

  12. #32
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    Congrats on your 3-1.
    Thanks. Top 30% isn't too harsh a cut though, realistically, and 5/16ths of players should go 3-1 on a given night.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    It sounds like Leyline is iffy due to limiting your combo. Then again, you should have enough combo starters that you can go off again if you miss on the first branch.
    If I have the time and resources, sure, but I'm assuming I'm under pressure in the matchup.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    You also need a turn 1 answer, otherwise they race you. They're the more explosive combo deck. You have ~0% chance of winning if you let them go off on turns 1-2 (Griselbrand -> draw 14 -> 3x Grief/Unmask discarding your hand, Serra's Emissary on creatures).
    I'm not sure I agree entirely with your assessment here. I'm not saying I'm confident your instincts are wrong, I'm just not where you are. Yes they're more explosive and yes if they go off Turn 1 it's *bad*, but if they have Griselbrand + Serra's Emissary and I live to combo they still lose to Emrakul, right? That's greater than 0%.

    As I see it, the "stock" list of Reanimator is currently attempting to employ Discard on the Opponent -> Reanimate Griselbrand -> Draw a huge amount of cards -> Shred the Opponent's Hand -> Pass the Turn to the Opponent with no relevant spells in their hand and an unassailable boardstate that they have the resources to reconstruct if necessary. If I make it to turn 3 (or a lucky Turn 2 with Gemstone Cavern) and Combo though I'm still probably going to win, so the real issue is 1) 'Do I live that long?' and 2) 'What cards do I have access to if I do?'. The Game 2 I won against Reanimator in the post above, they did combo first, draw 14, and shred all the spells out of my hand. However, since my deck is a bit under 1/3rd action, I just high-rolled slightly, top-decked on Turn 3 and won anyways; because they still didn't do 20 damage to me before my 3rd turn.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but the thing that current stock reanimator doesn't seem to be focusing on is actually ending the game quickly; because, frankly, they generally don't need to. If you have Griselbrand, Archon of Cruelty, a full sculpted hand, and your opponent is only holding lands, that's basically game over against most every deck in the format. However, I don't think we're subject to the exact same assumptions here because of how massively redundant our 1-card combo is. I'm constantly top-decking "the combo" (any castable spell) when I need to in all sorts of matchups because that's just how the deck is built.

    So, if I can just make it to Turn 3 - which despite the fact I haven't run the numbers here I believe is more likely than not - there IS another way out that can be explored here, yes? I'm not saying any of this is enough to make the matchup "good", this is very far from a foolproof plan here, but given the abnormally diminishing returns on Leylines of the Void 3+ compared to most other decks, I think this is the territory to explore for the next sideboard slot for the matchup.

    Have you ever seen the film "Moneyball"? You know the part where Brad Pitt says "If we play like the Yankees in here, we're going to lose to the Yankees out there."? This is kind of how I feel about the Leyline of the Void situation right now. We are worse at using Leyline against Reanimator opponents than really any existing deck in the format I can think of that's in the market to do so, and Reanimator is consciously tuned to beat their better Leyline of the Void plans. I think we need to find some unique point of leverage to exploit so that we're not just the worse Leyline deck which they'll plow over anyways, and I think that unique distinction is the fact that even after they shred our hand, we're still a 'hair's breath' away from winning on Turn 3 because all we need is to topdeck a castable spell.

    So, if we have reasonable confidence we have a couple turns to work with as an alternative resource, maybe we explore ideas to ensure that, even with an "empty hand", we simply get that card when we need it and win anyways.

    Maybe something in this kind of a space ...



    I haven't run the numbers, I'm not actually saying that's the card (in fact given that it only makes 1 mana I wouldn't be shocked to find out the combinatorics are better just on a cycle land), but if what's really killing us isn't the opponent's boardstate (which we can go over the top of if we combo), or the opponent's actual clock (because even if they combo on Turn 1 they don't actually tend to WIN on Turn 1), but simply the fact they draw infinite discard spells, maybe we can play into that. And yeah, we'll still Leyline. The first two are pretty good and I'm still willing to mulligan relatively far to reach them if necessary, it's just that the 3rd Leyline does so little and it feels like - to go back to the previous metaphor - we'd just be doing a much worse imitation of the teams the Yankees are already beating anyways because we'd be stepping on our own feet to employ the usual tools.

    So, you know ... let's see if we can force the Yankees to play hopscotch. I could be wrong; again, I'm just explaining where I'm at mentally.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    Whereas you might be able to win a game where you start with Leyline but whiff on the first branch. Does that factor into your math?
    Not really; the math above basically assumes that you lose every game where you don't combo on Turn 3 and you win every game that you do. It doesn't have that particular nuance plugged in, but, you know, it doesn't account for the games where the opponent just destroys your Leyline and combos off without difficulty because they mulliganed to enchantment hate either. I think the only practical way to approach this kind of analysis (at least if you're doing it manually like I am and not with some kind of sophisticated game simulation program) is to interrogate some narrower condition and then simply keep the numbers you grind out in the appropriate context. It's a game with a lot of variance and I'm not able to model the entire game; what I can easily model, however, is the point at which additional Leylines start shutting down as many Turn 3 lines as they're opening up (under the supposition that Leylines are successfully opening up Turn 3 lines in the first place, which means the calculations above are implicitly overvaluing them withing the stated context if anything).

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    What does the rest of your sideboard look like now?
    Recent changes are very untested, but in theory I'm currently here:

    2 Boseiju, Who Endures
    2 Fry
    1 Cosign // Oblivion
    2 Leyline of the Void
    1 Aeve, Progenitor Ooze
    4 Maddening Hex
    2 Chalice of the Void (On the fence with these, currently in per Pro suggestion)
    1 Something?

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    If most are 6+ mana or lands, you should be fine.
    I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Do you mean it means "I should be fine boarding in 4x Leyline"? If so, I don't think I agree (points at math above).

  13. #33
    Member

    Join Date

    Sep 2011
    Posts

    4,089

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by Rationalist View Post
    If I have the time and resources, sure, but I'm assuming I'm under pressure in the matchup.
    With a full grip shouldn't you be able to go T3 6-drop T4 6-drop with relative ease? So many cascaders in the deck. If so, it's not game-ending to whiff on the first one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rationalist View Post
    I'm not sure I agree entirely with your assessment here. I'm not saying I'm confident your instincts are wrong, I'm just not where you are. Yes they're more explosive and yes if they go off Turn 1 it's *bad*, but if they have Griselbrand + Serra's Emissary and I live to combo they still lose to Emrakul, right? That's greater than 0%.
    Sorry, I was not clear due to using shorthand.

    I meant two different scenarios:
    A) T1 Griselbrand. They draw 14. They cast 3 Unmask/Grief effects and shred your hand on turn 1. You have no nonlands left in hand. You now cannot go off unless you randomly topdeck one of your win spells by turn 3 (in a deck with 38ish lands). They might make a 2nd creature too. Archon of Cruelty would be devastating.
    B) T1 Serra's Emissary on creatures. You have 3 turns to go off and must hit Emrakul, otherwise loss, since you cannot block or attack otherwise.

    You're right that B is easier to come back from, since they have not disrupted your resources to go off, but it is not the worst case scenario. It was just one option. It's one of their weaker starts.
    A is more common and more dangerous. Especially if the 2nd creature is Archon (speeding up the clock & discarding a land).

    There is also
    C) T1 Chancellor of the Annex. The tax makes it awkward. You either pay 6 for CT or cast a cascade spell and let it get countered. Even then, most of the branch spells will get countered.

    Overall, the point is that Reanimator is faster and has broken starts that can stop you from going off. In combo mirrors, most combo decks can't afford to let Reanimator go off first undisrupted.

    Therefore, should a turn 3 goldfish without hate count as a "win"? In your math it does, but in practice many of those will be losses. I think that skews the results towards fewer Leylines.

    Although perhaps you're right in that they're tuned to beat Leyline so it's not enough and not worth disrupting your engine. If so, what else would you run instead? Just try to race? Karakas and Otawara, Soaring City may help.


    I like Maddening Hex in here. Chalice of the Void seems bad. For the marginal disruption you get (stop Flusterstorm and Deafening Silence?), it cascades poorly. At least if you cascade into Leyline you've reset a hate piece, while cascading into Chalice @ 0 doesn't do much against most decks.

  14. #34
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    There is also
    C) T1 Chancellor of the Annex. The tax makes it awkward. You either pay 6 for CT or cast a cascade spell and let it get countered. Even then, most of the branch spells will get countered.
    Eeew, you're right, I haven't been taking Chancellor into account. Good news is I don't think he's in the current stock lists. Bad news is he's probably totally still in Rando #4's pet or non-stock Reanimator deck, so he's still a very real threat I haven't been taking into account since I've just been staring at the current stock list.

    Mmmm.

    Good feedback, thank you, just feedback that makes me frown and go "Mmmmm.".


    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    Although perhaps you're right in that they're tuned to beat Leyline so it's not enough and not worth disrupting your engine. If so, what else would you run instead? Just try to race? Karakas and Otawara, Soaring City may help.
    I'm not sure yet, really. I just finished the "diagnosing problems" part of the cycle and am in the "rough brainstorming" phase. I'll run anything that seems promising past you here, but I'm not there yet myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    I like Maddening Hex in here.
    I do too. It's not that hard to Turn 2 it against fast spell-based combo decks and even if it cuts a combo chain short T2 Maddening Hex into T3 6/3 Haste + Maddening Hex is absolutely fine by me in the relevant matchups.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    I could easily believe you're right here. Again, I don't currently have a great defense of the card other than default testing things Bob Huang messages me about until I can verbalize why it's wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    For the marginal disruption you get (stop Flusterstorm and Deafening Silence?), it cascades poorly.
    It doesn't stop Flusterstorm due to how Storm works and I'm not actually too bothered by Deafening Silence, I just play spells that produce 3+ Random Creatures through the Silence and quickly outmuscle a lot of opponents while simultaneously fishing for Emrakul. The idea is inclusive of where Chalice on 0 has non-0 value though, but again, I'm not really defending it and could easily believe you are correct, I'm just explaining why it is currently there as it isn't logic-less, just arguably sketchy.

    Anyways, a lot of good feedback and I thank you for it.

  15. #35

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Speaking of Chancellor of the Annex, could it be useful in the sideboard against fast combo? Slows them down, cannot be cascaded into except with Wanderer, and is still kinda useful when flipped with Technique...

  16. #36
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by snugar_i View Post
    Speaking of Chancellor of the Annex, could it be useful in the sideboard against fast combo? Slows them down, cannot be cascaded into except with Wanderer, and is still kinda useful when flipped with Technique...
    That's actually rather interesting. I mean ... I don't think I'd dare try that vs. Reanimator because they'd reanimate it against me and it definitely means something else to a T3 combo deck like us than to a T1 combo deck like you usually see it from, but ... that's just a really interesting thought.

    Hmm.

  17. #37

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    I played the red version to 3-1 last night in a local event. Beat Pox and RUG control twice, lost to Death's Shadow but I think I could have sequenced differently and had an out. The sideboard could have had 13 mountain goats, the only cards I boarded in were Aeve and Boseiju (I only have 1 in the SB at the moment since I only own 3). Aeve is a great add, btw, every opponent brought in Surgical aside from Pox. I think a 2nd in the board might even be reasonable if you expect the room to be as grindy as the one I was in.

    Edit: I did still have Keruga in the sideboard as I forgot to take him out before I went to the shop. I had 1 game on the night where I paid to put him into hand and was on the 5/4 beatdown plan, against RUG control, but I drew a cascade spell the next turn and won from there. His value isn't 0, but having had the option I don't want it again. What I will say is it was a great ice breaker. I haven't played in any live events in ~8 years and "Here is my weirdo companion, take your time reading" is a great way to introduce yourself.
    Last edited by LennonMarx; 10-14-2022 at 07:19 PM.

  18. #38

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    I played a red version of this week at a weekly and went 4-0. My take on it doesn't have any green cards, except wanderer. Using Boarding Party, Minotaur, and Phoenix as my cascaders.

    I beat Nicfit, Cheerios, Esper selfmill big creatures, and Storm.

    Curse of Shaken Faith x4 and Maddening Hex x4 in the sideboard did good work for me. I am not super happy with consign.

    Deck is fun and powerful, I just accept there are matches I cant win and hope to avoid them. Would I run this in a big event probably not. But fun for weeklies.

  19. #39

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Quote Originally Posted by Rationalist View Post
    I believe the final two matches here are going to end up being posted on the 90's MTG Youtube Channel in some short amount of time.
    Found one of them - Temur Cascade vs 8 Cast

    Thinking about putting this deck together and trying it out at the local weekly. I don't have any Boseijus or Otawaras though, and they are out of my budget currently, so the deck would be more glass-cannony than usual. Fortunately I already have the Cities and Tombs and the Taiga I don't even need when there's no Boseiju...

    There are some things I don't quite understand and would appreciate an insight:
    - Why do you play so many lands when you only need 3 to go off?
    - From the video it looks like you don't really want to Technique into a 6-mana Cascader, hoping to hit an Emrakul or at least a Wanderer, so why only play 3 Emrakuls and 3 Wanderers? Would it be wrong to go to 4-of both? And how about a couple Apex Devastators?

    Thank you for creating this thread. The deck looks like a fun thing to try at a local event

    EDIT: Is Teferi's Isle a bad Sol land? You have to play it turn 1 and then it only gives mana on turns 3 and 5 (if I understand it correctly)...
    Last edited by snugar_i; 10-22-2022 at 07:26 AM.

  20. #40
    Well, Attempted Rationalism at least.
    Rationalist's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    King County
    Posts

    121

    Re: 'Mississippi River' (All In Creativity Technique Combo)

    Appreciate the recent feedback here. There's more I want to respond to when I have the time, but yes, I do think that Teferi's Isle is a bad land. It only makes mana once in its first 4 turns on the battlefield, and that doesn't happen until turn 3. Unless one is incredibly thirsty for blue mana, I'd rather play a 2nd Crystal Vein, or if I was determined to get blue mana specifically, I'd rather play a Svyelunite Temple again.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)