My experience with Czech Pile is I don't want the game to go long, because they have plenty of ways to establish 2-for-1s. I see it the same way I viewed the old Miracle matches, where if I didn't even have a Recruiter of the Guards, I couldn't really afford to play the long game when they have Entreat the Angels and Mentor. I think I'd rather play an extra Magus of the Moon to increase the probability of locking them out, rather than trying to grind them out with a card I may not even be able to cast/ combo with. It's about 55% of having one or more Karakas by turn 7, and it's going to be quite a lower with other factors (e.g having Pia and Kia ready to resolve, Wasteland, having Karakas ready, etc.) But if you frequently grind them out with P&K, I'd be interested in retesting it.Originally Posted by iatee
Even given a substantial number of matches, it's difficult to establish with any confidence "oh yes I feel extra flooding with 24 lands after this many games" when this could easily be confirmation bias. And perceptions of flooding also vary match to match: how many lands at a given number of turns is 'too much'? I guess the other relevant question is given that you do draw the extra 24th land, how much does this help us vs how much does this hurt us? So an optimal solution is difficult to obtain.
I broadly agree with what you're saying, but if you go too far in that direction it becomes impossible to make any sort of claim ever. There may not be an optimal solution to our manabase - just like there's never going to be an optimal decklist for any constantly shifting meta. But you play a lot of games and you make adjustments based on long-term patterns you' observe - that's just how deckbuilding works. You can avoid confirmation bias in this process by...well...avoiding confirmation bias.
After reading your report again I noticed you bring in canonist vs Miracles iatee. Has that been particularly good? Is it just to shut off a string of cantrips? Also you’ve played 1 relic-warder for a long time. Other than the obvious stuff (blade decks, sneak/omni, the mirror) when have you found it to be good that you always play one?
I've also been playing a singleton Leonin Relic-Warder for many moons now, and I guess its effectiveness very much depends on your local metagame. Pre-board, it's a very potent tutor target when an "unexpected" permanent threatens to make you lose the game. Prime target in that regard is Sylvan Library for me, but snagging away a Molten Vortex or even Sulfuric Vortex at the right moment also wins games. I also like the way it hates on Chalice of the Void (at one mana less than Flickerwisp) and Mox Diamond et al. It also provides really great utility in the mirror, where it works as a one-sided Phyrexian Revoker for equipment and Aether Vials.
Granted my evaluation of its value might be skewed, because I've been on the very lucky side of it turning up in my hand far too many times. It's really just priceless to reveal it from a Show and Tell, and neuter Omniscience on the spot. Even if all else fails, it's a 2-toughness body for CMC 2, which isn't completely useless even without a decent target for its ETB trigger.
It's still very much D&T, just with a bit of 'flavor'
4 Flickerwisp
3 Mother of Runes
3 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
3 Stoneforge Mystic
3 Serra Avenger
3 Sanctum Prelate
2 Recruiter of the Guard
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Mangara of Corondor
1 Thalia, Heretic Cathar
1 Daxos of Meletis
4 Aether Vial
4 Path to Exile
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Batterskull
1 Necropouncer
8 Plains
4 Karakas
4 Cavern of Souls
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland
2 Kambal, Consul of Allocation
2 Harsh Mentor
2 Orzhov Pontiff
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Meddling Mage
2 Cloudchaser Kestrel
1 Hokori, Dust Drinker
1 Leonin Relic-Warder
1 Sword of Feast and Famine
I love the main for the most part, but there are two obvious cards I'm still testing. So far Necropouncer is wicked. It's a lot more subtle to see, but you're only getting a 3/1 the turn you drop it. Beyond that, it's the P/T bump and haste you want. I won a few games off the surprise factor of vialing in something, suiting it up, and swinging right then. Haste is a nice effect to have when you need to put pressure on.
Daxos has been cool so far, but I usually forget that I can cast the crap he exiles. If he pulls your opponent's removal, or Kommand, or a dude, they're in for a rough ride. Ever cast a Ponder off a Wasteland? That was cool too. I nicknamed him Yasuo for those of you familiar with League of Legends.
Harsh Mentor is a mean little dude. He's really good in the mirror, or vs anything that relies on Deathrite or fetches. Possibly decent vs Elves also, although most of their mana dorks are unaffected and that's really where the issue with that matchup lies.
Kambal can use the same justifications as Canonist for the most part.
Meddling Mage is another one I've had my eye on for years and always wanted to play. If there ever was a deck it belongs in, it feels like it's this deck. Naming creatures with it seems good, considering I have Prelates for everything else. Being able to prevent ridiculous bullshit (True Name, Leovold, Kommand, Emrakul, etc) before it becomes an issue seems very good.
Kestrel I initially included to hedge some bets against DoN and Eldrazi.dec. Blowing up the former, and giving the latter a color to enable Mom seems useful. It turns out to also be yet another card to bump up the Show and Tell matchup, not that we need much help there. While also blowing up crap like Sylvan Library, Deed, Leylines, and whatever else is annoying. Plus fringe uses for detaching equips from pro-white dudes, consolidating the colors of opponent's creatures for Mom, machine gunning down an opponent's x/1 dorks with DoN in play, etc.
If only there was another little monowhite/human dork that hated on graveyards... Or blew up artifacts... OH Relic-Warder... Thanks iatee, completely forgot about that guy. Seems better than the 4th Prelate.
Last edited by DarthVicious; 09-22-2017 at 01:43 PM.
Ethersworn Canonist has always been fine against Miracles since it shuts off Snapcaster - before Top's banning I would bring it in when I didn't have enough strong anti-Miracles cards to bring in. That was partly why I brought it in in the games I did - but also I think it's gotten better now for two reasons:
- They've replaced Top with more cantrips, so they don't play draw-go as much and have to cast a ton of cantrips just to find action
- Vs. Mentor specifically, Canonist didn't stop you from dying to double-Top, but now it stops them from going crazy.
Relic-Warder is indeed a fixed card in my sideboard, and it's been so consistently good for me over the time that I'm surprised he isn't considered a fixed spot in the DnT 75. Using one sideboard spot to ensure that you have a tutorable, Aether-Vialable disenchant always seems worth it.
Outside of the obvious Stoneblade/SnT decks and the obvious enchantment/artifact based decks (Enchantress, Aluren, MUD, Painter) there's a pretty wide set of matches where he can usually provide some sort of disruption. vs Reanimator and Storm, you can sometimes pick off an early Lotus Petal and if you're lucky you can get a high-value target like Dread of Night, Animate Dead, LED, etc. It might not always have a target vs those guys, but it's cheap and it's disruption, so you play it. Vs. Eldrazi you can generally pick off a Chalice, and sometimes you'll get a Jitte. Vs. those Big Red decks there is no shortage of targets - it's mana disruption, it eats Chalices, it eats Bridges. Vs. Lands he's similar to Revoker - Mox Diamond or Molten Vortex - but if they do Vortex him, the trigger stack ensures that it's gone forever.
There are some downsides to the card, he's a WW-not human but you often need him out early, which means the number of games I've had to put a Cavern on Cleric is definitely >0. And then there's the fact that they can get their stuff back, which is not the case with a Disenchant or Council's Judgment. But those cards aren't tutorable, don't attack for 2, and don't get to come into play for 0 mana via Aether Vial. I hope they print a better Relic-Warder one day, a pushed Disenchant human would be really nice. But until then I think he's the best option we have.
Necropouncer is way too expensive to play. In fact, I wouldn't play it even if it was 3 cmc. This deck already has a hard time casting Batterskull. Playing Thalia + Wasteland means you're going down on mana pretty often. There's also the fact that without blue cantrips, it's within variance to be stuck on 2-3 lands for a long time.
I also test a human build and of those cards you mentioned, Daxos is really interesting and I never considered it before. Thanks for the idea!
I've tested Kambal and Harsh Mentor and they were awful in a diverse range of match-ups. They're too situational and require fairly specific scenarios to be effective. I consider Meddling Mage to be a sideboard card. But I just never found the room for it.
Dark Confidant is easily one of the best reasons to go a 4 Cavern of Souls build. It's a must kill threat. Many of the games I win against Czech Pile is when Confidant resolves and they either don't have removal or got locked down by 4 Mother of Runes + 4 Chalice of the Void. Bob helps eliminate aspects of variance in the deck by ensuring you hit your land drops but also have plenty of threats. What is great about Bob is that he is decent in both the fair and unfair match-ups.
I have mixed feelings about Wasteland and Port. I definitely don't believe 4 Port is necessary when it's 90% a late game card and usually not necessary in multiples. 8 colorless lands ruin a lot of good keepable hands. If you play 4 Cavern of Souls, you have even more reason to cut some 1-2 Ports because it makes Wasteland quite good against you. Sometimes we just have to appreciate the simple basic Plains.
Necropouncer and Batterskull usually only cost meto get into play...
I do have 2 Confidants sitting around, and I do like that 'Bob from Accounting' idea. Maybe I'll shuffle some stuff around to fit him in the main. You'll have some fun with Daxos too ;)
I've played against Mentor with this deck, and just one of them in play deals a lot of damage. Either my opponents play around him and don't use their abilities (which leads to me winning) or they take a boatload of damage over the long run ignoring him (which leads to me winning... usually). Just like so many other cards in this deck, he's another must-answer creature if they're built around using abilities. Like we are with D&T, like Deathrite, fetches, equipment, Lands, etc. Kambal I haven't tested a lot myself, but it seems like he'd be really good vs Storm and somewhere between decent and playable vs cantrip.dec. I use him in my Karlov EDH and I know what he can do if he's ignored, if he's not ignored then one of our other must-answer dudes will beat their face in.
There are times when I can feel what you're mentioning about the manabase, sometimes basic plains is the best land on my side of the table, as weird as that sounds. But I have 4 Ports and I'm using them dammit. Wasteland is the one I want to see the least often, it's the easiest one for opponents to play around. Fetching basics does nothing to stop me from Porting them down. On top of that, after I Waste something, I'm down a land also. It's like the best use of it is to leave it untapped on your side of the field.
My experience is good 3-color deck players don't try to play around Wasteland. One of the first few tips a 3-color Delver player receives is to simply fetch duals unless you know a Blood Moon is coming, because getting a basics + dual in play just means you're stuck with a basic after a Wasteland; conversely, fetching two duals will at least get you more colors. The only time this is bad is if your opponent has multiple Wastelands. But with Deathrite Shaman and cantrips, it's not that easy to mana screw a tri-color deck in Legacy (unfortunately). If Deathrite Shaman gets banned, this deck will receive such a big power boost as everything gets better: mana denial, more Swords to Plowshares for other creatures, pushing more damage, etc.Necropouncer and Batterskull usually only cost me
I do have 2 Confidants sitting around, and I do like that 'Bob from Accounting' idea. Maybe I'll shuffle some stuff around to fit him in the main. You'll have some fun with Daxos too ;)
I've played against Mentor with this deck, and just one of them in play deals a lot of damage. Either my opponents play around him and don't use their abilities (which leads to me winning) or they take a boatload of damage over the long run ignoring him (which leads to me winning... usually). Just like so many other cards in this deck, he's another must-answer creature if they're built around using abilities. Like we are with D&T, like Deathrite, fetches, equipment, Lands, etc. Kambal I haven't tested a lot myself, but it seems like he'd be really good vs Storm and somewhere between decent and playable vs cantrip.dec. I use him in my Karlov EDH and I know what he can do if he's ignored, if he's not ignored then one of our other must-answer dudes will beat their face in.
There are times when I can feel what you're mentioning about the manabase, sometimes basic plains is the best land on my side of the table, as weird as that sounds. But I have 4 Ports and I'm using them dammit. Wasteland is the one I want to see the least often, it's the easiest one for opponents to play around. Fetching basics does nothing to stop me from Porting them down. On top of that, after I Waste something, I'm down a land also. It's like the best use of it is to leave it untapped on your side of the field.
My problem with Mentor is it's irrelevant against a whole variety of combo and aggro decks. Death and Taxes isn't aggro enough to leverage the extra damage over turns, and this is assuming that they have something to activate because often they don't. if Mentor could leverage its damage to creatures for meaningful card advantage, it would be worth playing.
It's the same reason Kambal was terrible in testing: the life gain/loss doesn't translate to meaningful advantage consistently. Of course Kambal is good against Storm, but even there, it's a 3-mana card that takes up spot for things like Ethersworn Canonist and Sanctum Prelate (arguably better options and more versatile). Kambal is not universally relevant to play in the main and not powerful enough in the side.
I had the opportunity to put Daxos into play today but unfortunately, I already locked the game out with other creatures. I'm 95% sure he isn't worth playing but I want to at least have some fun with him.
Last edited by grayryker; 09-23-2017 at 03:52 AM.
Sorcerous Spyglass has been superb in testing. There were games where I played 1 in main and games where I just played 1 in the side. Both times, it saved me the game. Being able to see your opponent's hand so that you can proactively lock a key piece rather than reacting to it with Revoker is a big deal. I think those who play traditional DnT will find this card is worth playing because it can not only lock down mana better than Port a good majority of the time but also have other valuable functions.
are the top 8 decklists of EE going to be released on mtgtop8, mtgdecks etc.? i cant find them. and since it was a major event i would guess so.
Scroll down past Vintage and you'll see Legacy decklists: http://eemagic.com/allDecks.php
How does it lock down mana better than Port, exactly? It literally only hits fetchlands.
I agree it's a fantastic card, I don't agree that it locks down mana. The scenario of naming their fetch to "deny mana" is, in my opinion, a fluke, even if occasionally it works. Lands are by far the most common card in literally all but 2 decks IN THE GAME. The percentage to draw one not named by spyglass is high.
I don't think I will use it in DnT. Right now I think Revoker is still better main and needle side. Revoker can name LED/Petal, and needle is faster, and in game 2 I don't think the extra info is worth the extra mana in games past the first one.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Sorcerous Spyglass is a Revoker/Needle for noobs. You should know the metagame and you should be able to deduce depending on the gamestate what card would screw you over the most. Revoker is giving us a body which DnT is build around and Revoker being able to needle mana abilities is also huge when playing against something like ANT or TES. In all other cases I would prefer needle because it's a turn one play, when I bring in needle I probably already know what card to name anyway.
Hilarious. I use the word "can" and you go all crazy on me. Fetchlands are the most common type of lands in the game, so it's not a rare fluke that you name a fetchland off a spyglass when your grixis delver opponent is running 8 fetchlands. How often do you port mana on turn 2? Spyglass comes down on turn 2. But anyways, the main point is that it 'can' be a mana denial tool.
Knowing the metagame doesn't equate to knowing what cards your opponents have, genius. Knowing what your opponent has to sequence your plays, potentially drop them down 1-2 mana, and not being forced to blind name a card they may not even have (because 90% of the time, the opponent is playing multiple problematic cards) are the main reasons to play Spyglass. And note I'm not saying this card replaces Revoker, which mainly will stay in the deck because it serves as a creature in a vial deck. But the difference in their ability to denial is significant. The problem with Revoker is that it's a very reactive card. When you see a problematic permanent on the field, it's just more rational to the permanent you see instead of something potentially more dangerous hidden behind your opponent's hand. The information you get from Spyglass mitigates these problems and its lack of body is often better, rather than worse.
And yeah I could easily say "Spyglass is also huge when playing against something like Lands or Infect" but it's a terrible argument. A rational person knows the utility of each card. Again I repeat: this card isn't going to replace Revoker; what it has is legitimate strengths in being played in the main or side over other cards.
[/QUOTE]The problem with Revoker is that it's a very reactive card. When you see a problematic permanent on the field, it's just more rational to the permanent you see instead of something potentially more dangerous hidden behind your opponent's hand. The information you get from Spyglass mitigates these problems and its lack of body is often better, rather than worse. [/QUOTE]
I wouldn't call revoker a reactive card at all. If you know the match up, you should know what to name. I am very seldom caught off-guard with a revoker, unless we are playing against a deck with multiple good targets, but knowing where you are in the game there is usually an obvious target.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
"Can" suggests "should" in the context of theory crafting. Porting on turn 2 is different; it doesn't waste a card, but yes, porting a land on turn 2 happens close to 15% of my games. Its worth noting that my opponent can't "draw out" of a port's tempo-grab, but they can a Spyglass, and if they do, Brainstorming away the named fetch becomes an awesome play, effectively time walking you.
Before, playing two of each blue fetch was a good idea (and a non-0 number of Grixis and 4c control players already do this). Now, if this Spyglass catches on, it will move file folders from "good idea" to "mandatory counter-strategy." Having said this, back in Saviors of Kamigawa, people suggested this same strategy with Needle. As it happened, though, players quickly noticed it to be a 1-2 of in the board, because even though it's uses across legacy are broad, only occasionally is it a necessary element to not losing. It's a surgical instrument specifically for the stymying of a game-winning (e.g. Griselbrand) or game-stopping effect (e.g. DRS against Reanimator). What it is not is a mana-denying element of an aggro-control list. It never panned out as a good enough strategy to do so, and now Spyglass will be no different.
I do think you can use Spyglass better than actual DnT players, since you are on the stompy side of it.
/My thoughts
Crazy isn't the worst thing I've ever been called on these boards, so I guess I'll take it...
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
What kind of nonsense logic are you using? How is can = should in any context? One is optional and the other is suggesting imperative. Learn the difference. I can also name situations where glass mana denials better than port but not only is that irrelevant to the discussion it is pointless to cherry pick one specific scenario and say "aha card x is better than card y".
Again, I don't know why you are bringing up pithing needle. Naming a fetchland with needle is 90% a bad play, especially if you are blindly naming something that could be in hand. Stop it with these terrible comparisons please. What a bunch of people talked about in standard numbers of years back has no relevance in evaluating needle as a mana denial tool (i.e it shouldn't be). Mana denial is not why people play needle in the 75 and yet you are making this strange comparison.
The problem with Revoker is that it's a very reactive card. When you see a problematic permanent on the field, it's just more rational to the permanent you see instead of something potentially more dangerous hidden behind your opponent's hand. The information you get from Spyglass mitigates these problems and its lack of body is often better, rather than worse. [/QUOTE]
I wouldn't call revoker a reactive card at all. If you know the match up, you should know what to name. I am very seldom caught off-guard with a revoker, unless we are playing against a deck with multiple good targets, but knowing where you are in the game there is usually an obvious target.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]
Again, depends on the match and the pacing. If I'm playing against red sneak attack or old miracles, it's obvious what to name at any stage of the game. Play against any artifact based deck and elves and this is where you don't have a single obvious target.
You aren't hearing me. I gave you the context, and even stated as much. I'm trying to be polite and give you my point of view. I've done so, but you are being intentionally dense, not giving thought to my words. This is apparent in your response. I never made a reference to standard, in fact there were no fetches in CoK block standard. I mention this as an example to my statement of "You aren't hearing me."
90% bad play? Let's say one player Gitaxian Probes paying 2 life and drawing a card after seeing they only have one land that is a fetch, it's way worse to name the fetch with Pithing Needle in this scenario than it would be if you instead had the ability to turn 1 Spyglass? There's no guarantee that you see something to even name in either scenario. At that point the scenario with Pithing needle is probably the better one to be in as at least you don't have to cast it, and maybe there is something better to cast now that you have more information anyway.
Naming a fetch in this format is short-sighted and mostly irrelevant in my opinion, corner-cases notwithstanding, and we don't play things in this format because niche uses. It's just not a viable or sustainable strategy for winning.
I frankly don't care if you listen or give thought to what I'm saying, but this has happened often since you started posting, and I just can't find a reason to have more interaction with you. I wish you the best.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
