This isn't true. In the mirror, the player who can play his Goblins wins. Between two good Goblins-builds, Lackey isn't going to connect most of the time and Vial gets Tin Streeted or Tinkered. That leaves you to hardcast your creatures with your lands. A deck with 22 lands takes an aeon to get up to 4 in an average game, especially since your opponent can use Wastelands and Ports to delay you should he be in an advantageous position to do so. Goblins isn't a deck that runs out of cards, especially not in a match-up where there's no countermagic involved. Between Matrons, Ringleaders and Siege-Gangs, you might as well have infinite cards in hand. When you have infinite cards, the player who can play more of his cards wins. Obviously, that player is the one with more mana! Your Ringleaders are worthless if they sit in your hand when you're stuck at 3 lands, Siege-Gang Commanders even more so. A good Goblins-build is going to destroy your Aether Vial and kill your Lackey. Once you do the same, you both are left to topdecking enough lands and the player with more lands in his deck is always the candidate to topdeck more lands, thus having an advantage.Originally Posted by ASSASSIN
I run as many as 24 lands total, because of the mentioned factors. I haven't lost a mirror match since starting with this number. Yes, some games are lost to unanswered Lackeys and bad draws, but most of the time, my superior landbuild and the fact that most builds don't even run MD artifact removal for Vials means that I'll have an easy time smashing them, and thus far I haven't lost two games in a row when I'm in such an advantage in the mirror. Not only that, but against any deck which has the capability to destroy/stop your Vials and Lackeys, you need to be hardcasting creatures with converted casting cost of 5. That means you'll want to draw 5 lands straight, and even more since you run Rishadan Port and Wasteland. Furthermore, you want to draw two red sources by turn 3 which means that 14 is woefully too low a number. Even furthermore, in the green splash you want to draw GR for turn 2 Hooligan, further making the mana more relevant.
As a synopsis, playing more lands makes your deck more consistent, allows you to fight better against the decks that are prepared for you and allows you to be more reckless with your mana denial lands. It also makes your most common match-up, the mirror, better.
Finally, remember that when you're playing the most powerful, or one of the most powerful, deck(s) in the format, you're mostly in an advantage against your opponent as long as you get your mana right. Therefore, your #1 priority is to get your mana right, since the less games you lose to bad mana, the lower your chances of randomally losing a critical round in a tournament and getting knocked out of the Top 8 are. Your opponent is doing his very damn best killing you. You've got enough of an opponent there, so make sure you don't need to fight your own deck while at it. This is even further highlighted by the fact that Goblins are one of the very few decks that can keep hands with 5-6 lands and one-two business cards if those business cards happen to be Matrons and Ringleaders, preferably with a Rishadan Port available in the landbase. That's because you can generate the nigh' infinite flow of cards from that one creature. That's an added reason to play lots of mana, you aren't hurt as bad as normal decks when you're flooded, especially with Wastelands, Rishadan Ports and 8 fetches. Of course there're match-ups where you can't keep those 5-6 mana source hands, but against anything even a bit slower, or counter-reliant, especially if some of the sources is a Vial, you're well off with manaheavy hands.
It is a very interessant point of view. But if you read my precedents posts you have responds in more of you questions.
1-You can play 8 fetches and bilands, so that justifie one or two land in plus. But me I play 21 lands but only the 8 mana denial and moutain (13).and 8 fetches.
Fetches are not adapted to gobbo if he is monocolore, I think. And that because in gob you don't necessary want a hand with 3 lands, you can wait a little or survive with only 2 lands. And shuffle you library is not a avantage in gobbo, the lost of PVs is a handicap in match-up aggro or aggro-controle.
2-No in mirror. When you have 4 fanatic, 4 gempalm (and pioche help for have land), matron for shearch gempalm, sharp and 4 pyrokinesis and if the opponant must destroy lackey, vial and warchief you have really the time for have 4 land.our Ringleaders are worthless if they sit in your hand when you're stuck at 3 lands
3-[quote]I haven't lost a mirror match since starting with this number.[quote]
In more of 50th of games against gobbo with a part against good players (but no necessary famous) I play I lose only one, against the worse player of worlds and because I have a TOTALLY mana full (14 lands and 6 gobs two time O_o)...
4-You may be but no me. SGC is not a biggest card in my gob conception. He is usite only with a vial in 5 for can sacrifie in the same turn but I prefer regulary to leave vial in 3 or 4. I play it in two exemplary but if in a metagame I want slot in MD for a splash I'm agree for cut one.you need to be hardcasting creatures with converted casting cost of 5.
5-So if I play a 43lands gobbo my deck become mort consistent ? LOL. No, have a good number a land, a good harmony into mana death and mana full. If you cut lands you can't play the deck anough fastly and if you add land you have less interessants spells.playing more lands makes your deck more consistent
6-I prefer keep a hand with two vial or one vial and one lackey and one land. I begin and put one land and directly solicite opponant reaction. If he haven't I win with all my goblin in hand. If he have he play this FOW, daze and he lost a turn or he lose two cards. If you keep a hand whit only matron and ringlader you can begin play only in turn three and if they are counter with a counterspell or a daze (why don't handicap this controler in turn 3) you lose.Goblins are one of the very few decks that can keep hands with 5-6 lands and one-two business cards if those business cards happen to be Matrons and Ringleaders
7-Against a deck why have counter you want play most turn one for force it to react. And after you want have more spell. Haven't match-up in you would keep a hand with 5 lands matron or ringlader. It is a longer hand, easy countrable.Of course there're match-ups where you can't keep those 5-6 mana source hands, but against anything even a bit slower, or counter-reliant, especially if some of the sources is a Vial, you're well off with manaheavy hands.
You partage the opinion of toad for the number of land. For me 21 (without fetch and splash) si a good number, 22 is a standard number and the good number if you play fetch, 23 a high number and 24 is a perfect number for have always mana full. But you're a little famous so is not a proof of ignorance or lack of test.
We speack specially of the mirror. Are you agree for test a few games in MWS even if this program has not reprensentative of the reality.
You still need to draw a Mountain in your opening hand unless you have a Vial. 16% of the time, 13 lands will leave you Mountainless. Out of those, 4% will be cases where you've got Vial and a disruption land, a risky keep (you lose the mirror against opponents that can destroy your Vial), but often a keep nevertheless. That leaves you to mulligan 12% of the time just for mana issues. With 16 lands, you eliminate a good 6% of the non-land hands, leaving you with 10% of no-Mountain hands and 8% of no-Mountain, no-disruption land+Vial hands. I don't know about you, but if I had the choice, I'd rather choose to play with 6 cards 8 games out of 100 as opposed to 12 games out of hundred (of course you mulligan for other reasons too, so the numbers are higher than that; specifically, one-landers are rarely keepers).
Hardly, when you play your third land and Warchief, he'll respond by killing it. Once you pass the turn, he'll play Ringleader. Then he plays SGC and you're in deep straits.
[QUOTE=ASSASSIN;136460]3-[quote]I haven't lost a mirror match since starting with this number.Yea, that happens. However, statistically that's 'getting lucky'. Also, if the opponents you've played against have played 21-22 lands, winning against them doesn't prove your point. My point is that with 24 lands, I've been winning the mirror very consistently against players with 22 lands. It seems like my 24-land build is at an advantage against a 22-land build, not only from a theorethical perspective, but also in practical experience.In more of 50th of games against gobbo with a part against good players (but no necessary famous) I play I lose only one, against the worse player of worlds and because I have a TOTALLY mana full (14 lands and 6 gobs two time O_o)...
Well, you SHOULD cut him if you only run him for the Vial, then he isn't worth it. I run him because he wins games alones and he keeps doing so all the time. 4 creatures in a mirror is huge. Most of the games I lose in attrition against Goblins are to topdecked SGCs. Simply, the card is a ridiculous bomb and being able to play ridiculous bombs ensures that you win. My Goblin Fish played SGC as its only bomb and it still beat normal Goblins getting Ringleader Chain off on many occasions by simply chaining few SGCs, hurling some tokens and just winning. 4 creatures that double as burn-spells for 5 is nutty, hence why we play SGC.
Obviously the point isn't overdoing it, but maximizing your chances of winning. That means keeping your Ringleaders, Lackeys, Warchiefs and Vials effective while still playing the maximum number of lands. It's further more important if you intend on hardcasting Warchiefs like in matches against good non-combo decks (those that bash your Vials and Lackeys alike).
Sure, but you still have turns to topdeck and if you have the said Vial and they have a slow clock, you can just ramp Vial and win. Basically, having the mana to cast everything you topdeck is pretty awesome in a deck that can topdeck into a bunch of cards that read 'I win' all over them. That's how you beat Threshold that held your initial barrage too.
Sure, I'm up for games whenever. We'll have to generate a large enough sample size to ensure that the results aren't too badly skewed by the used program or statistical anomalities though.
I know ASSASSIN by a french website but i don't agree with some things he said:
- SGC is minimum in 2 because as Eldariel said, it's a bomb and he wins a match alone
- 22 lands is a minimum if you don't play any fetchland but 24 is a good number if you play fetch
- in the mirror, the player who will win, is the one who gets his vial quickly, and more lands than the other. and sharpshooter is a win card for the first player who has it
@ASSASSIN: i have never played IRL against you but you know that a lot of player who played against you said you are very lucky, so when you spoke about your hand with 2 lackey or 2 vial or 1 lackey and 1 vial, you couldn't be objective
Sharpshooter rarely wins matches when you're playing with Gempalms and Mogg Fanatics. He just rarely gets to untap and even if played with a Warchief in play, you'll only get to kill some 1/1s as most of the relevant Goblins are actually 2/2 (or Fanatics, which still kill the SS). Vial would be good if everyone and their moms didn't play enough stuff to blow it up. That's what changed the nature of the mirror so much, the widespread adaption of large number of MD Tinkerers or Tin Street Hooligans.
This did change the mirror. It also put even more importance on running a higher land count. 22 lands just doesn't work anymore.
My point exactly. Since you can't rely on having anything but lands to cast your spells with and you need to assume your opponent will be pressuring your landbase, you really need to have as many lands as you can cram in without hurting your overall build to actually have a shot at using your bombs.
No. SI is more affected by Chalice @ 0, while Belcher is more affected by Chalice @ 1.
Chalice @ 1 turns off the following in SI:
Dark Ritual
Culling the Weak
Chalice @ 0 turns off the following in SI:
Lotus Petal
Chrome Mox
Lion's Eye Diamond
Shield Sphere (blocker against fast aggro allowing sculpting)
Phyrexian Walker (see Shield Sphere)
Culling the Weak (requires Shield Sphere and Phyrexian Walker to resolve)
Now, considering SI runs between 14 and 16 cards that actually make mana without any outside effort (4 land grant/fetchlands, 2-4 land, 4 petal, 4 mox), and cards that make mana are the primary bottleneck in beginning your combo, what is the more effective Chalice setting?
Now, looking at Belcher (we'll take CRET Belcher, because it seems to be the only thing with a semi-standard list), Chalice @ 0 hits:
Lotus Petal
Chrome Mox
Lion's Eye Diamond
Chalice @ 1 hits more with:
Dark Ritual
Rite of Flame
Wild Cantor
Tinder Wall
Here, Chalice @ 1 is much more effective, especially when you consider that Belcher has 22 potential initial mana sources ( 4 land grant, 2 lands, 4 petal, 4 mox, 8 spirit guides).
There is still a remaining point that nobody I know is sane enough to play SI at a large tournament (and I wrote the primer on it!) without massive changes (which aren't public I don't believe) followed up by Chalice @ 1 being monumentally too slow against CRET Belcher. Chalice @ 0 seems to have about a 50/50 shot of actually stopping CRET Belcher from going off, perhaps less depending on the ration of them attempting an ETW for a bajillion tokens.
BZK! - Storm Boards
Been there, tried that, still casting Doomsday.
Drawing my deck for 0 mana since 2013.
Of course You have more land in hand. But when you compare only the mana death of the two deck you cheat. If you compare the 5/6/7 lands it is a point for me. And thank you for all % but for that I prefer the personal resentment and I haven't a lot of mana death. I have more mana death than you, it is sure but we don't have the same conception for the when play gobbo. You want 5 lands in turn 5 (or 6), I don't want the 4e land in turn 4.You still need to draw a Mountain in your opening hand unless you have a Vial. 16% of the time, 13 lands will leave you Mountainless. Out of those, 4% will be cases where you've got Vial and a disruption land, a risky keep (you lose the mirror against opponents that can destroy your Vial), but often a keep nevertheless. That leaves you to mulligan 12% of the time just for mana issues. With 16 lands, you eliminate a good 6% of the non-land hands, leaving you with 10% of no-Mountain hands and 8% of no-Mountain, no-disruption land+Vial hands. I don't know about you, but if I had the choice, I'd rather choose to play with 6 cards 8 games out of 100 as opposed to 12 games out of hundred (of course you mulligan for other reasons too, so the numbers are higher than that; specifically, one-landers are rarely keepers).
Yes it is only lucky, but MTG lucky, I explain what I mean with that after.Yea, that happens. However, statistically that's 'getting lucky'. Also, if the opponents you've played against have played 21-22 lands, winning against them doesn't prove your point. My point is that with 24 lands, I've been winning the mirror very consistently against players with 22 lands. It seems like my 24-land build is at an advantage against a 22-land build, not only from a theorethical perspective, but also in practical experience.
And when we speack about mirror and you speak about your win, it is an invitation to speak about mine.
If I have vial I like all my mana denial because I can use it each turn. My better departure is a vial T1, rishadan T2 (and if it is possible lackey in EOT but it is only a bonus :D).Sure, but you still have turns to topdeck and if you have the said Vial and they have a slow clock, you can just ramp Vial and win. Basically, having the mana to cast everything you topdeck is pretty awesome in a deck that can topdeck into a bunch of cards that read 'I win' all over them. That's how you beat Threshold that held your initial barrage too.
******** player hate (really) me in my habitual store because against they I can or bless they with a lackey or put a vial and in the same time destroy her mana base or clean her hand and play after ringlader and matron. But I help they for have fastly the ******** :D.
I'm agree. I add your msn adress.Sure, I'm up for games whenever. We'll have to generate a large enough sample size to ensure that the results aren't too badly skewed by the used program or statistical anomalities though.
When it is destroy directly after, he only put three 1/1 whitout abilities. With vial it is really a bomb but without no.- SGC is minimum in 2 because as Eldariel said, it's a bomb and he wins a match alone
sharpshooter is a kenny and put it with warchief is possible but warchief is too one of the first target of blast so the opponant can kill warchief in response to sharp and sharp after.- in the mirror, the player who will win, is the one who gets his vial quickly, and more lands than the other. and sharpshooter is a win card for the first player who has it
Play 24 land, 3 SGC, 1 sharp and the 8 essential playset. So you can't play any skirk or tinkerer, it is sad.- 22 lands is a minimum if you don't play any fetchland but 24 is a good number if you play fetch
And fetches don't change the number of lands in beginning hand and in the first turns.
I speak about difference of planification of the game. I propose to compare hand you keep and I keep for see the difference. We analyse the beginning hand in the first games against a unknow person.
I play 3 Gempalms and 2 SGCs with 24 lands giving me room for 3 Tin Streets. Obviously I don't play Sharpshooter. Anyway, we played the games, split pre-board (3-3) and post-board Assassin won 4-2. However, the fact was that the player with the more mana still won the games, for some reason it just was more often him than me (alright, so my playing was pretty horrid, even I saw my mistakes...about half a turn too late). Also, we both got MWSed a lot with 20+ cards of the same type piped in multiple games, which unfortunately does affect the outcomes ('no, your lands aren't in the next 20 cards' or 'all your following 20 cards produce mana'). Anyway, the reason for our different builds turns out to be the difference between the French and the American meta; the French metagame doesn't seem to contain much artifact removal (specifically, few builds run Tinkerers and/or Tin Streets), very much like back in American meta half a year ago, so Vials are much more reliable and thus the extra lands are somewhat optional. Anyway, I'm fairly sure it'd turn into my advantage if I played properly and we played offline, but his build is perfectly valid as it serves him in his meta.
I recently tried that out, but didn't like it too much. It might just be me, but I felt like 3 Hooligans were too many. I ended up going back down to 2 Hooligans and up to 3 SGC; I feel like this optimizes Lackey connections, and gives me more bombs to drop in the late game. However, I do run the third Hooligan in the board, since it's quite useful in some matches and especially in the mirror. Have you been happy with your configuration when not playing against the mirror?
Also, in your build with 24 lands, how many fetches do you run? I've seen lists with anywhere from 4 to 8. Personally, I use 6.
8 fetches, I feel that's the minimum for consistent green access on turn 2. Besides, I can afford not drawing lands in the midgame after I'm up to 5-7 lands, so having multiple fetches at work there helps. And yea, I've been happy with Tin Streets. Haven't faced a deck that didn't care outside combo-decks yet. I love the third SGC, but I love Tin Street even more, so no dice there. I can't for the life of me find enough boardspace for everything I have, so boarding another Tin Street is totally out of question for me. As it stands, I already have less slots than I'd want (I only have 7 anti-combo slots as opposed to the 8th I'd want, and only 5 anti-Plague slots as opposed to the 6, no graveyard hate and only 3 anti-enchantment/artifact cards as opposed to the 4 and only 3 mirror-cards as opposed to the 4. That's 1 less at basically everything than I'd want, but I feel like that's the size of a compromise I can do).
Let's not discriminate. People from all countries are equally capable of being completely wrong and having no grasp of the intricacies of a deck.
I mostly agree. It's not so much the 22 that kills me, though, as it is the 14 red. Too often I sit there with Mountain, Wasteland, Port, and a handful of Warchiefs. I do fine with 22 when I only run 6 Waste/Ports. But since I much prefer having the full mana disruption, I'd say 23 is the way to go.
[PARAPHRASE]How many fetches? How many Tin-Streets?[/PARAPHRASE]
I run 7 fetches with 23 Land. I feel 4 Duals and 4 basics is a comfort zone for me, and I like having the full 8 Waste/Ports too.
As for Tin-Streets, I'm also of the school of thought that runs only two (Though currently my Goblins build is RW for complicated sideboarding reasons.) I find I can steal more combo matches by swinging Lackey into SGC, and I win more control matches by randomly topdecking Siege-Gang Commanders at the perfect time than I can count.
I really like the Brightstone Ritual idea to handle EtW. It seems to be picking up with belcher and TES, so I don't think it would be that silly. I have thoughts on the Ritual and EE which would also help against it, but is definitely not as sweet. EE would also be great against slivers, which IMO is becoming popular. Thoughts? Would these be good in the board?
I've recently discovered Brightstone Ritual is incredible in the mirror, also. Losing that mana battle and fixing to get slaughtered? Not for long. Need to close your opponent out? No sweat.I really like the Brightstone Ritual idea to handle EtW. It seems to be picking up with belcher and TES, so I don't think it would be that silly. I have thoughts on the Ritual and EE which would also help against it, but is definitely not as sweet
Opponent nailed you with a Lackey and dropped Siege-Gang? Tap one, Ritual for 5, drop out a Siege-Gang of your own. Fun times ensue!
Wouldn't brightstone be a little lack luster when your behind? You need at least 3 goblins to even make it a dark ritual and with an active siege-gang in the example you described they would ping a goblin in responce and leave you 1 mana short. The card is gamebreaking in a race situation/creature stalemate, I'll assume, but in the described situation gimmie Pyrokinesis.
Each goblin in play, not only your own.
Otherwise, it would be a cruddy card.
Besides, I assume they are tapped out after they cast their commander + cycle gempalm to kill your blocker...
Last edited by Mijorre; 06-09-2007 at 08:39 AM. Reason: ...to clarify further...
Suddenly! Pints of beer! Thousands of th~ ... Nope. Never mind.
Speaking of manabases lately I had some trouble with my testbuild while playing against Stax (or rather I was testing Stax and constantly felt I didn't have the best Goblindeck to test against). Before you laugh at me or say that the Goblinplayer was just bad I don't think skill was a factor in the problems I encountered (we also switched roles between matches).
So here is my problem: I was testing against this list
4 Goblin Lackey
4 Aether Vial
4 Goblin Piledriver
4 Goblin Warchief
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Ringleader
3 Siege Gang Commander
3 Mogg Fanatic
3 Gempalm Incinerator
1 Goblin Sharpshooter
3 Tin Street Holigan
4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
2 Taiga
5 Mountain
From the sideboard I add 4 Krosan Grip.
So as I already mentioned I had problems with my mana. Mainly the fact that I had more fetchlands than actual fetchable lands but also that I had 10 ways to get green mana but once both Taigas were Wasted I was out.
Of course I know there are ways to play around Wasteland and against Stax it is naturally hard to keep the manabase intact but I felt that it was harder than it should be.
Is there any advise you can give me? I thought about cutting the fetchlands to 6 and add 2 Taigas and I also want to cut a Goblin to add the 24th land but I'm not sure what the best options are. Up to now this list was solid against most of the decks I tested with but in long games that involve LD on both sides I was dissappointed with this manabase.
"Anybody want some . . . toast?" —Jaya Ballard, Task Mage
Just add 2 more Taigas, cutting 2 fetches. I think 23 lands is fine. IMO I would not go above it. But it should not be that hard if you just wait to play Taigas, so then you can use Tinny. Other than that the list looks fine.
Yea, i didn't even bother reading the card, thats just sick then, i ought to try that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
