[Deck] Armageddon Stax

[I'm a TROLL]

Armageddon (I've said this before if you read this whole thread and the 1-2 before it) is the best card in this deck (just like Bane said). Period. Armageddon is very good against Legacy in general because it punishes tight mana curves, low land counts, and the use of fetches (i.e. most of the format). Take Thresh for example, in a typical list they play 17-18 lands with 6-7 fetches. It's not unusual for them to use 2 fetches to get their first two lands. If I 'Geddon off two lands and a mox, it's a 4-for-4 trade (3 lands and Armageddon for 2 lands in play and 2 fetches), but my recovery is 22 lands plus 4 Crucibles in my remaining deck while he has 13-14 lands left in his. This often swings 'tempo' in my direction which is HUGE agains a deck like Thresh.

I've not seen a list of Rispal's opponent's, but if you are a good Magic player (at World's) and know your Stax deck (as I'm sure he did and many on this thread are/do), in a tournament of 100s of players of varied ability, 4-1 with a sub-optimal list is not an unreasonable outcome.

But try solving a Landstill-heavy meta, try solving a Survival-heavy meta - those are our real challenges.

Are you saying Rispal has a bad deck? the guy is playing in worlds and doing well!

how does the suggestions me a DeathScrythe made not help against landstill and survival? espcially survival. Adding a draw engine to find o ring on the survival is amazing.

[I'm a TROLL]

Armageddon needs to be included as an automatic 4-of, period. It's the trump card of the deck IMO, the one that swings the game in your favor, the one that lets you breathe a sigh of relief after it resolves. Plus its the feared card of the deck, the one your opponent hates to see resolve.

jazzykat, I don't think Tangle Wire is really all that great in this deck. I've tested with four of them in my Angel Stax build (which basically had more Angels and Wraths instead of Armageddons), and they just end up being annoying on your side of the table. Plus, Angel does her job by buying you more time as well, as she can regain life lost to Ancient Tomb.

Also, I'm a strong supporter of making the deck as consistent as possible, playing only 4-ofs of cards essential to the deck instead of throwing in random silver bullets. Like others have said before, the deck has no tutors and no draw, so the single of double copies of Moat/Kor Haven/etc. reduce the overrall effectiveness of the deck. The only cards in my list that there are not at least 4 of are Exalted Angels (the win condition anyway) and Mishra's Factory (I couldn't fit in any more with the tight land structure, even with 26 lands). I feel four of each card makes the deck much more solid, albeit a little less versatile to feared decks. Have faith in what the deck is supposed to do.

But if you have a draw engine you can set up a large armageddon. You only need to find one!

[The Wes]

Angel stax and Geddon stax arn't the same thing. Geddon stax relies on geddons and tabernacle effects along with prisons to keep creatures at bay, not quite what the list you linked to does. The point of this deck is to set up a geddon.

So, out of the at least 4 geddon stax lists on the page you linked, one (that looks pretty damn subpar) agrees with you. The other 3 using at least 4 geddons. Thanks for the help.

I have to agree with Fred Bear pretty much 100%. More quality ideas, less crap. Consistency wins games.

[I'm a TROLL]

Angel stax and Geddon stax arn't the same thing. Geddon stax relies on geddons and tabernacle effects along with prisons to keep creatures at bay, not quite what the list you linked to does. The point of this deck is to set up a geddon.

So, out of the at least 4 geddon stax lists on the page you linked, one (that looks pretty damn subpar) agrees with you. The other 3 using at least 4 geddons. Thanks for the help.

I have to agree with Fred Bear pretty much 100%. More quality ideas, less crap. Consistency wins games.

I just said set up geddon. I also linked the wizard Chris Coppola's lst that doesnt use geddon. I wont even go that far, but you should get the idea.

[The Wes]

But your changes make you less able to get a geddon, less able to make the best of a geddon, less able to recover from a geddon. Also Linkin Pac makes some going points, though I do think some one ofs and two ofs in the land structure can be allowed. Chris Coppala's deck also doesn't use tabernacle effects or prisons and relies on wrath, a little different.

[I'm a TROLL]

But your changes make you less able to get a geddon, less able to make the best of a geddon, less able to recover from a geddon. Also Linkin Pac makes some going points, though I do think some one ofs and two ofs in the land structure can be allowed. Chris Coppala's deck also doesn't use tabernacle effects or prisons and relies on wrath, a little different.

No, i'm playing a draw engine. I play 2 horizion canopy. I draw more cards than you and set up better than you,

[The Wes]

Actually, I play 1 horizon canopy, and have since it came out. It doesn't provide early game draw, only mid to late at the expense of a land drop. I play more geddon effects and half your draw engine. I'm betting that leads to being able to geddon consistently earlier more often.

[I'm a TROLL]

Actually, I play 1 horizon canopy, and have since it came out. It doesn't provide early game draw, only mid to late at the expense of a land drop. I play more geddon effects and half your draw engine. I'm betting that leads to being able to geddon consistently earlier more often.

One of the most important things about this deck is knowing when to geddon. I think you maybe panic and hit the armageddon button. this is not necessary and be sure you dont panic and cast armageddon randomly. you shouyld focus on setting up the board first and not worry.

[Nihil Credo]

No, i'm playing a draw engine. I play 2 horizion canopy. I draw more cards than you and set up better than you,

Calling 2 Horizon Canopy a draw engine is like calling 2 Krosan Tuskers mana acceleration.

Also, weren't you the one advocating cutting a Crucible? Bad Magic, indeed.

[I'm a TROLL]

Calling 2 Horizon Canopy a draw engine is like calling 2 Krosan Tuskers mana acceleration.

Also, weren't you the one advocating cutting a Crucible? Bad Magic, indeed.

I always have a crucible and two crucibles is really bad. Unless you are suggesting adding a way to play another land a turn, I dont see how this helps.

[The Wes]

Once again, with all the lock pieces geddon stax is supposed to be playing, hitting the geddon button what it wants to do. It is designed to geddon and be able to capitalize on it. I've played geddonstax for over 2 years now in legacy in both the midwest and the east coast, I help'd design the geddon stax deck with a friend that won starcity's online tourney two winters ago and it overall hasn't changed much. I'm not sayign all my ideas are the absolute best or anything, but I'm saying I've played this deck a pretty damn long time and I'm pretty sure I dont' just panic and cast armageddon randomly.

Oh, and LOL to Nihil...

Also, please look up consistency. People will destroy your crucible or you can sac the extra to smokestack, either way, you always want one.

[Nihil Credo]

I always have a crucible

Four-leaf clover, marked cards or Rosemary's Baby-style pact?

Unless you are suggesting adding a way to play another land a turn, I dont see how this helps.

It doesn't help. It just dismantles this claim:

I play 2 horizion canopy. I draw more cards than you and set up better than you

Those 2 Canopies (which, for the record, I'm not in principle opposed to) certainly don't make you better than Wes at setting up Armageddon. Particularly not when you play three freaking Crucibles.

[The Wes]

Ok, then real question, not trying to be meant or anything, only trying to understand your deck. What list are you currently playing? How does it play against some of our harder matchups, such as landstill or survival? Why play a larger variety over more consistency?

[T is for TOOL]

It seems several people have forgotten some of the basic forum rules of the Source.

1. Don't double post.
2. Proper grammar and spelling are expected.
3. Posts lacking content are not acceptable.
4. Inflammatory posts are not acceptable.

If anyone keeps it up I WILL start handing out infractions.
-TOOL

[Skeggi]

Good morning everyone, I'm awake and ready to jump back in the fray :)

Armageddon needs to be included as an automatic 4-of, period. It's the trump card of the deck IMO, the one that swings the game in your favor, the one that lets you breathe a sigh of relief after it resolves. Plus its the feared card of the deck, the one your opponent hates to see resolve.

Plus it has a pretty cool name!

Four-leaf clover, marked cards or Rosemary's Baby-style pact?

Teach me, master! ;)

Back on topic:

But if you have a draw engine you can set up a large armageddon. You only need to find one!

What do you mean by a large Armageddon? Let the opponent actually have over 3 lands and risk the chance of them casting (alot of) stuff? I'd rather not give them that chance. Early Armageddon shuts your opponent down, you win, they lose and cry.

[I'm a TROLL]

I'd like to refer to this:

I love how so many people have forgotten than stax is a tempo deck (not the popular catch up "geddon at pendrell vale") and that by cutting tangle wire, they forfeit one of the best tempo cards in the game.

Taken from the thread "[Deck] Twisted Metal - reviving mono-brown/silver Stax" while we are not playing that exactly, the principles are exactly the same. Our lock is generated easier, we have way more versatility, and we actually have a draw engine Of course we have access to better lock peices, but the concept is the same!!

Good morning everyone, I'm awake and ready to jump back in the fray :)



Plus it has a pretty cool name!



Teach me, master! ;)

Back on topic:



What do you mean by a large Armageddon? Let the opponent actually have over 3 lands and risk the chance of them casting (alot of) stuff? I'd rather not give them that chance. Early Armageddon shuts your opponent down, you win, they lose and cry.

Sort of. I think we need to look more towards our friend Jonathan Rispal who went 4-1 at worlds. I don't know if people are just too lazy to look him up the list or what so I'll post it:

Main Deck

60 cards

4 Ancient Tomb
4 City of Traitors
4 Flagstones of Trokair
1 Gemstone Caverns
1 Horizon Canopy
2 Mishra's Factory
4 Plains
1 The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale
1 Tundra
4 Wasteland

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 lands


3 Magus of the Tabernacle

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 creatures

1 Armageddon
2 Bottled Cloister
4 Chalice of the Void
2 Crucible of Worlds
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Enlightened Tutor
4 Ghostly Prison
4 Mox Diamond
1 Oblivion Ring
1 Ravages of War
4 Smokestack
2 Tangle Wire
4 Trinisphere

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31 other spells


Notice how he was able to take the deck and run well without relying on armageddon or crucible and he doesnt even have exhaulted angel to back him up. With the angel in the deck we have a great win conditoin that flies and has life link. we play a bit of fast mana to get us going thus i say we can cut back on a couple smokestax. I also always forget the bottled cloister as a draw engine. It seems everygame I have the crucible/horizoin canopy but I also play a couple cloister

[Skeggi]

I also always forget the bottled cloister as a draw engine. It seems everygame I have the crucible/horizoin canopy but I also play a couple cloister

Yes, I've seen the list, and I'm convinced that if he had more Armageddons he might have gone 5-0, but that's all speculation so I'll leave it at that.

Anyway, I'm pretty reluctant to even try Bottled Cloister, it's simply too fragile: the risk of losing your hand in the RFG zone is too big.

1 Gemstone Caverns
1 Tundra
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Enlightened Tutor

Gemstone Caverns and Tundra are obviously to fuel Engineered Explosives. You have to know: Engineered Explosives = outdated tech. The Enlightened Tutor is debatable, but too often a dead card imo: actually there's more against it than to include it.

Point being: I'm doubting that list. Alot.

[Aleksandr]

I'd like to refer to this:



exhaulted angel



It starts to suck - once we learn to spell Threshold correctly, we promptly find another nonsense.

[Fred Bear]

Bad Magic,

To a certain degree, I was saying that the Rispal maindeck is a bad list - IN GENERAL. I would never use it as a starting point for testing and I don't think that my testing would send me down any of the same roads. IN GENERAL, I would estimate that his plan was to give himself a 35-55% chance against the field in game 1 and then allow himself to board into the consistency that we are all searching for (or board in a toolbox for the specific opponent). Many of his selections are questionable-to-bad in my opinion... Gemstone Caverns? Tundra (just to support EE for 3-4, I guess)? 4 Flagstones and only 5 Plains? Enlightened Tutor + 4 Chalice? etc. I DO NOT think Rispal is a bad player, but I'm guessing that he used his playskill to his advantage with a list like this. And, again, I have never seen who his opponents were. 4-1 against a field of that size says nothing about deck quality (over 50 decks were 4-1 or better, including everything from Landstill-to-Aluren-to-Belcher-to-Whatever).

In regards to specific choices...

Gemstone Caverns is terrible. The effect is arguably ok 50% of the time, you only draw a 1-of 12% of the time (6% you will see the effect). In Stax, this will cost you a card to provide an additional colored mana on your turn 1. We play a mono-colored deck and 7-8 2-mana lands and 4 Mox Diamonds. Why waste your time with Gemstone Caverns?

Bottled Cloister wins the award for best looking card on paper. It's a permanent... It's an artifact... It only costs 4 mana... It draws you a card per turn... It's just as good in multiples... BUT... Krosan Grip exists, Vindicate exists, etc. etc. I'm the first to admit that you shouldn't not play cards because of the answer, but Stax works because it provides inevitability (You WILL win, eventually). All draw engines do is speed up the process. If I'm in position to win and I play a draw engine, the engine is 'win-more' and you could probably get better mileage out of other lock pieces. If I'm working to set up my lock, I want an engine that doesn't come with this kind of risk (would you trade your hand for the potential of an extra card for a couple of turns). I'm not saying it isn't great in certain situations, but in general it is sub-par.

Horizon Canopy. I'm with Nihil in that I'm not completely against them, but as a 1- or 2-of, please stop refering to them as a 'draw-engine'. You have a 50% of seeing one by turn 11 playing it as a 2-of and it doesn't become an 'engine' unless you have at least 4 other mana sources (1 for the Canopy activation plus 3+ to play a permanent) and a Crucible out (to replay the Canopy). Again, you will speed up your inevitability late game at best, otherwise, it's a random effect.

Tangle Wire is another odd card. It's awesome in Vintage. It blows in Legacy. I shouldn't say that, there are a couple of situations where it is very good in Legacy, but against 90% of the field - it blows. It does nothing to slow down Goblins without other support. It does nothing to slow down Threshold without other support. In nearly every situation, it requires another card/permanent to provide any type of useful effect. If we had the ability to play, say 5 free, mana-producing artifacts, we'd be in business - sadly we don't get those jewels.

Enlightened Tutor is extremely anti-synergistic with the goal of the deck. Chalice at 1 on turn 1 is probably one of the strongest plays Stax will make in our format. After that, Enlightened Tutor is a dead draw. Trinisphere on turn 1 is another, obviously, strong play for Stax. A tutor for 3 is slow but has potential. A tutor for 3 that costs a card and a draw is unplayable. Stax relies on creating situations of virtual card advantage. Playing cards that are REAL card disadvantage is just plain bad.

I could criticize the list all day, but that's not my point. My point is that Rispal's list is NOT a typical Armageddon Stax list and shouldn't be refered to as such. Pointing to a list which isn't your own and defending choices with 'he's a good player because he was at World's' does little for the discussion. I desperately want to make my Stax list better (I don't care that I don't make a lot of friends playing it), but I've (and many others here) have put a lot of effort into my list and can explain the 'why' better than 'trust me' or 'it just works'. I've tested all the cards (except Gemstone Caverns, I mean c'mon) Rispal used and I can tell you why I still play some and why I don't consider others unless I know certain things about the meta I'm playing going to be playing against.

To the Stax community,

I do like to see what people are having success with in the Stax shell, but I think we all need to be able to tell what works against the field and what works against a specific deck/meta situation. Armageddon works against the field... Suppression Field works against certain decks/metas... Maybe as a collective we could list out the cards we have each tried and where they work and don't work.

-FB...

[Skeggi]

I agree on all of Fred's points listed above. So I guess this is a +1