Tales of the Lackey and Mongoose

[Citrus-God]

I was listening to L. Wells (a great song by Franz Ferdinand btw), I came across this gem on SCG. I also have credit those two and their playskills, as I have decided to play Threshold much more differently as of now, as well as a much more different view of Goblins, as 4 Tinkerer became one of the best metagame options. The way Bardo and Machinus played out the game was enough to tell you the intracies of this match-up, and how the match-up should be played.

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/new...cle/13386.html

I love this article, and I encourage those who play Goblins and Threshold religously to check this article out. It can mean a lot.

[Nightmare]

Pretty good, and about what I had expected, results-wise.

[Bongo]

Very good article, great work!


In my own experience, UGW Threshold has to have a really good draw and flawless play to win against Goblins.
Overall, the matchup is not good for Thresh, and the 3 Tivadar's Crusade and 4 Hydroblast prove this. Without TC, sideboarded games are very lopsided.

I also have found Chalice of the Void to be an awesome sideboard card, certainly more powerful than Crypt in this match. It's an absolute must-counter and can end games right there.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I really question the legitimacy of results with these lists. I would've thought that when testing for broad metagame purposes, the obvious decision would be to use as generic a pair of lists as possible, but this has not been done. 4 basic lands in Threshold? Four maindeck Meddling Mages? 8 Fetchlands in mono-red Goblins? 4 maindeck Tinkerers?


These lists seem to tilt the matchup heavily for Goblins. Mage is little besides awful in this matchup, whereas Tinkerer is broadly weak in the metagame but crucial in this particular matchup. Already running 8 Fetchlands, he didn't even run a pair of Taigas to give access to Tin-Street Hooligan, who's infinitely better against Equipment and a threat in matchups where Tinkerer is naught but a Squire, but is slightly worse against Pithing Needles. The use of extra basics is deceptive here, as it seems to make Wasteland worse. With a curve topping out at 2, however, the threat to worry about should be color screw, not trading land for land, and the extra basics also make Port more effective.

I'm not even going to touch on the cantrip-base of that Threshold list. Also, and I'm not trying to be a dick to Bardo about this, but whatever his flawed political views, we know that Machinus is a very, very good player, whereas Bardo is, well, the scourge of ten man tournaments. Bardo's skill level is really, as far as I'm concerned, an unknown, as I don't think he's ever shown up to a large Legacy tournament (not his fault, as they're several hundreds of miles away, but still).

[Bardo]

Also, and I'm not trying to be a dick to Bardo about this, but whatever his flawed political views, we know that Machinus is a very, very good player, whereas Bardo is, well, the scourge of ten man tournaments.

'No offense taken. But note that I'm not "hundreds" of miles away from large Legacy events, I literally live thousands of miles away from any. Living in Portland, Oregon is sweet as hell, but organized Legacy is pretty dodgy here.

As for the lists, Machinus' list won the last SCG DFD, a result which is good enough for me. The Threshold list shouldn't be terribly controversial; two similar examples can be seen here and here.

[Machinus]

Honestly Jack, if I hadn't seen you at a Legacy tournament I would ask if you had ever played the format. Fetchlands and Tinkerer are insane, and they win games (and tournaments). You're complaining about a list that has had success and whose strength is acknowledged by many good players in this format. I'd really like to find some legitimate point to discuss with you, but your post is at best the confused rambling of a non-player, and at worst a spiteful attempt to degrade my success.

My deck is well-built, and so is Dan's. We specifically chose the best lists to write this article about. I would run this exact 75-card list at the next Legacy event; if I were to play threshold I might have some minor changes, but I know Dan has a lot of confidence in his list, and he's played the deck a little more than I have. The cantrips and basics are definitely optimal, and a very important part of the deck.

Basically, you don't have the credibility necessary to criticize our lists.

Regarding playskill - I've played Dan online quite a bit, and he's definitely a strong opponent there. He hasn't had a chance to demonstrate his abilities in a large tournament setting (whereas I have), so this is a valid objection if anyone cares to raise it. However, Dan has done an incredible amount of work on this deck (and the archetype), and even though at small tournaments, has played regularly against some talented players. If any discrepancy that remains, I included it in my analysis by saying that the results are slightly high in Goblins favor.

[kirdape3]

The results mostly conform to our testing except ours were more heavily weighted in Goblins' favor game 1 (I think I broke Tom for a 7-3 score alternating play in the first game). Goblins just keeps coming with a stronger early and late game. Where Threshold has the advantage is in the midgame - you've just amped up your creatures to 3/3 untargetables and 4/4s for G and G1 respectively, whereas Goblins is still bound by it's mana and/or trying to ramp a Vial to end it. If Threshold waits too long, Goblins will simply leverage it's superior cards (Serum Visions, meet Goblin Ringleader. Even Mystic Enforcer doesn't particularly like fighting a Siege-Gang Commander and a bunch of lands) into a game win.

Even with fully competent players on both sides, game 1 was a bloodbath and the sideboard cards just try to either blunt the early Lackey rush or stretch the midgame advantage to take advantage of a slower offense. Meanwhile, Goblins gets anything from the best combat trick available to them (Tormod's Crypt) to cards that defend themselves against Threshold's countermeasures (Red Elemental Blast) to the backbreaking threat of Chalice of the Void set at 1.

I personally only think that Chris' list has two few lands in it (we're running 24 and loving every second of it - if you're flooded you'll just draw a Fact or Fiction, Demonic Tutor, 5 power for 5 mana, or a Medallion/Fires of Yavimaya on legs and get out of it) and I don't particularly think that Needle is awesome in Dan's list. Otherwise, these are pretty solid examples of what these archetypes look like.

[Bardo]

I don't particularly think that Needle is awesome in Dan's list.

Dear god, if I wasn't running the Needles, I would have been destroyed. AEther Vial is such a jack-hammer to the nuts. But I really don't want this thread to turn into a discussion of the lists we used. I'd rather take that to the appropriate thread in the LMF.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Honestly Jack, if I hadn't seen you at a Legacy tournament I would ask if you had ever played the format. Fetchlands and Tinkerer are insane, and they win games (and tournaments). You're complaining about a list that has had success and whose strength is acknowledged by many good players in this format. I'd really like to find some legitimate point to discuss with you, but your post is at best the confused rambling of a non-player, and at worst a spiteful attempt to degrade my success.

My deck is well-built, and so is Dan's. We specifically chose the best lists to write this article about. I would run this exact 75-card list at the next Legacy event; if I were to play threshold I might have some minor changes, but I know Dan has a lot of confidence in his list, and he's played the deck a little more than I have. The cantrips and basics are definitely optimal, and a very important part of the deck.

Basically, you don't have the credibility necessary to criticize our lists.

And yet you do know better than this, so your post is in fact little more than a flame-bait, and your claim that you'd like to find a legitimate discussion point seems quite hollow as there existed several that you could have picked up on, instead of simply deciding to call me a n00b in more words.

You've played a different build of Goblins are every Duel for Duals to my knowledge, so saying that criticism of this decklist amounts to a personal attack is ridiculous on multiple levels.

The actual strength of the decklists is, however, not the issue. The point I am raising is that these are not the standard decklists. Four-of maindeck Tinkerer is not normal. Portent, conversely, is now pretty much par-the-course for Threshold. Mental Note vs. Predict is up for debate, but maindeck Meddling Mages are distinctly on the decline. Whether or not you think you've "improved" the deck is irrelevant, unless your purpose is to trump your own builds, as the purported aim of your article was to explore the matchup for the general metagame. Doing this with builds that have substantial deviations from the normal builds, which change the matchup significantly, is not therefore the logical thing to do.

Also, no, fetchlands in monocolor decks do not, have not, and will not ever "win games". This is factually 100% effing wrong, unless you mean they can randomly win games for your opponent if they happen to play Stifle or Ankh. At best they involve trading a small amount of life for a very small amount of deck thinning (or effective deck thickening if you've already resolved a Ringleader).

[Volt]

Um, sorry to interrupt. Just wanted to say that I enjoyed the article. Looking forward to part 2.

[Bardo]

Whether or not you think you've "improved" the deck is irrelevant, unless your purpose is to trump your own builds, as the purported aim of your article was to explore the matchup for the general metagame.

As major contributors to our respective archetypes, our goal was to use the best lists available--in our estimation--for this exercise. If there are deviations, I wouldn't declare them "substantial."

There is, in fact, no universally accepted "fully optimized" version of these decks. There are just pundits and developers (like ourselves) who feel their version of these decks is "more fully optimized" than other versions.

Just wanted to say that I enjoyed the article. Looking forward to part 2.

Thanks. I hope it runs soon. This article has been in the SCG inbox for a long time, along with the next installment of my Legacy Metagame series.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

As major contributors to our respective archetypes, our goal was to use the best lists available--in our estimation--for this exercise. If there are deviations, I wouldn't declare them "substantial."

There is, in fact, no universally accepted "fully optimized" version of these decks. There are just pundits and developers (like ourselves) who feel their version of these decks is "more fully optimized" than other versions.

Then you should stick to the variants that cause the least disruption within the matchup. Obviously a build that runs 4 Tinkerer is going to play the matchup very differently than those without so many answers to Needle (the vast majority). Even the Mages, which are much less of a deviation, are still not common in the Main anymore, and substantially hurts Goblins performance. What's worse is that in this instance the two problems compound each other, as Mage relies heavily upon Needle to be effective in the Goblins vs. Thresh matchup, as without Needle on Gempalm and Vial, a Mage on Warchief or Siege-Gang is rarely going to be relevant. When facing down such an unusual number of answers to Needle, Mage is pretty much relegated to being a Grizzly Bear that can't block Piledrivers.

[Cait_Sith]

I have analized the article and this really helps me solidify my decision to play Solidarity/Spring Tide.

[Jankwolf]

To TheInfamousBearAssasin:
I am on your side and whole heartedly agree with your view points. Those decklists arent the standards but look more like tweaked lab experiments.
And i was under the impression that most goblin decks ran with a splash to deal with said artifacts...or in the off chance an enchantment.

At Machinus and Bardo:
Question...


The only thing md Meddling does is stop a second pending threat that is going to come onto the table, while the first one may have gotten through.
What is the point of having it Maindecked?
As for playing 4 Tinkerer...WTF? Its a cool idea but with goblins clock and the ability to fetch them out via matron wouldnt two have sufficed in this case?

[Eldariel]

I'll just go ahead and suggest that you play at least 20 games pre-board, since those numbers appear to be very rough on the edges, especially since you yourselves admitted that you were getting a hang of it only after a few games.

[Nightmare]

The flames and personal attacks end now, or warnings and infractions begin to be distributed. Thread Watched.

[calosso]

As for the lists, Machinus' list won the last SCG DFD, a result which is good enough for me. The Threshold list shouldn't be terribly controversial; two similar examples can be seen here and here.

For you information, Machinus did not beat me in the DFD.I conceded to him so I could go home.

I am certain I would have won this match-up since my build was suited to beat the mirror.

[Bardo]

The only thing md Meddling does is stop a second pending threat that is going to come onto the table, while the first one may have gotten through.

Wow, I had no idea maindeck Meddling Mage is such a big deal here. This is odd, to say the least. Does anyone remember a deck called "NQG?" That is, Mages, but no Dryads.

Chronologically, a list of T8 Threshold/Gro deck with or without Magi in the maindeck:

1st Place: BA2: 4 Mage
7th Place: GP Philly: 4 Mage
8th Place: GP Philly: 3 Mage
1st Place: GP Lille: 4 Mage
2nd Place: GP Lille: 2 Mage
5th Place: GP Barcelona: 3 Mage
1/2nd Place: Kadilak's DLD 1: 0 Mage (Alix Hatfield)
1st Place: SCG DFD 3: 3 Mage
4th Place: Kadilak's DLD 2: 4 Mage
7th Place: Kadilkak's DLD 2: 0 Mage (Jesse Hatfield)
8th Place: GenCon 2006: 4 Mage
2nd Place: Mana Leak Open: 4 Mage
2nd Place: SCG DFD 3: 0 Mage (Jesse Hatfield)
3rd Place: SCG DFD 3: 3 Mage

Threshold 8s with maindeck Mage: 11/14 (79%)
Threshold 8s without maindeck Mage: 3/14 (21%)

And without exception the Threshold decks that didn't run maindeck Mage were played by two people, Jesse (2 Top8s) and Alix Hatfield (1 Top8). Now, the point of this isn't to debate the merits of Meddling Mage in the maindeck or not. But it should be clear that this isn't some rogue and experimental deviation, when 79% of the Threshold decks that ever made Top 8 ran Meddling Mage in the maindeck.

maindeck Meddling Mages are distinctly on the decline.

Where exactly is this coming from?

For you information, Machinus did not beat me in the DFD.I conceded to him so I could go home.

Ah, thanks for clarifying.

When facing down such an unusual number of answers to Needle, Mage is pretty much relegated to being a Grizzly Bear that can't block Piledrivers.

The point of our exercise was to take the versions of these decks that we would take to a tournament and see how the match would play out if we were paired together. We found that when Goblins went first, it almost always won (80%) and when Threshold went first, it usually won (60%).

[Nightmare]

As much as Virginia seems to think they define the metagame, it simply isn't true. I spent three pages defending maindeck Meddling Mage, largely from Urbahn and MadZur. While they certainly are the most adamant about how bad it is, their sentiments haven't resounded to a decline in MD Mage anywhere but in their own metagame. Calling a non-mage list the "Generic List" when it's so obviously not seems incorrect. I'd go so far to say that there isn't even a generic list available, considering how hotly the cantrip selection discussion continues to be. Nor should there be, because while certain cantrips serve different - albeit similar - purposes, it's perfectly reasonable that they could be as metagame dependant as any other card in the deck. In an aggro-dominated metagame, Mental Note will probably be the superior choice over Predict/Portent. Perhaps the same wouldn't be true in a control meta, where the potential card advantage is more important than speed.

[Watcher487]

Personally I just have a more ranged question:

Why would you expect a Goblin on U/G/W Thresh match-up? I know you both stated that these 2 decks are the Decks to Beat right now.

I personally haven't played against U/G/W Thresh when playing Goblins, shoot I haven't played against U/G/W Thresh since Big Arse 2.

I would picture more of a resource to beating both decks, with what is useful in thier repective match-ups and what to do in a heavy Aggro or Aggro-Control field, especially with your own respective decks.

I feel that taking the format to one match-up is insane especially with the amount of different decks from many different metagames out there. It makes Legacy feel more like Type 2 which is just dumb in the end.

But overall, I did like the article. It's not really an article for Legacy players as a whole but more for People preparing for GP Columbus.