I saw a friend play this deck at a small local tournament last week (Montreal, Canada, about 30 players). I was playing UGRw-Threshold and I really didn't want to face this deck (I managed to finish first on tie-breakers but was lucky not to face him, he finished second - we didn't have time to play the Top8).
Anyhow, as a Threshold player, I was wondering what Threshold build gives BaseRuption the most trouble: UG, UGW, UGR (control build) or UGR (tempo build) ? In particular, does the mana-denial plan (Stifle + Wasteland) give you a hard time ? I guess it's not that bad because of Chrome Mox, but then again, that too can be Stifled. Is Burning Tree Shaman really that good against BaseRuption ?
In general, what do you consider to be the deck's worst match-ups ?
Congrats on the deck, it's really nice and I can't wait to play it/play against it.
I was testing out a few changes, and I was having some good results.
Lands
3 Underground Sea
3 Tundra
2 Tropical Island
4 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
1 Island
Creatures
2 Meddling Mage
3 Dark Confidant
2 Shadowmage Infiltrator
4 Tarmogoyf
1 Doran, the Siege Tower
1 Gaddock Teeg
1 Jace Beleren
Spells
2 Vedalken Shackles
4 Daze
3 Counterbalance
2 Sensei's Divining Top
3 Swords to Plowshares
4 Force of Will
2 Chrome Mox
4 Brainstorm
2 Portent
1 Mox Diamond
1 Midnight Charm
2 Ponder
Sideboard
4 Engineered Plague
3 Spell Snare
2 Threads of Disloyalty
3 Pithing Needle
3 Vindicate
I was testing out a few changes, and I was having some good results. If you have any questions just ask.
Lands
3 Underground Sea
3 Tundra
2 Tropical Island
4 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
1 Island
Creatures
2 Meddling Mage
3 Dark Confidant
2 Shadowmage Infiltrator
4 Tarmogoyf
1 Doran, the Siege Tower
1 Gaddock Teeg
1 Jace Beleren
Spells
2 Vedalken Shackles
4 Daze
3 Counterbalance
2 Sensei's Divining Top
3 Swords to Plowshares
4 Force of Will
2 Chrome Mox
4 Brainstorm
2 Portent
1 Mox Diamond
1 Midnight Charm
2 Ponder
Sideboard
4 Engineered Plague
3 Spell Snare
2 Threads of Disloyalty
3 Pithing Needle
3 Vindicate
I'd like to hear your opinion and reasoning behind MD Jace Beleren, Mox Diamond, and Midnight Charm.Originally Posted by Cane818
YOU'RE GIVING ME A TIME MACHINE IN ORDER TO TREAT MY SLEEP DISORDER.
Yes, those are some very odd choices. Why would you cut 1 Chrome Mox for 1 Mox Diamond with only 16 lands in the deck?
What does Midnight Charm add to the deck in your opinion?
and so on.
Do you actually mean that you got some improved results with your new list, or do you just say, that eventhough you made some very odd choices, the deck still functions pretty well? I'm actually not so fond of your list.
The only thing I find nice is Gaddock Teeg. He might actually be a very good (but fairly obvious) addition to the deck, since he could probably be much better than Meddling Mage in this deck, completing the "lock function" of the Counterbalance engine.
@aTn: I'm happy to see that Baseruption finally finds some followers on the other side of the Atlantic, as well. Actually, I don't know how the UG Threshold matchup is, but I can tell you about the UGr and UGw Threshold matchups. I basically covered it in the opening post already, UGw is a little better because it has much less removal than UGr. Burning Tree Shaman is pretty bad for this deck, because he can be quite painful if you're relying on the Sensei's Top engine, but as far as I kow, BTS has become an uncommon choice for UGr Threshold.
P.S. one funny anecdote: Germagic.de, the huge German deck database, actually titled Remi Fortier's winning deck from PT Valencia "Baseruption", because of the high amount of similarites... http://www.germagic.de/dc/deck.php?id=10988
Sometimes you have to read between the minds.
++ T8ing all over Europe since 2005 ++
++ Team aYb - all your base (are belong to us) ++
Have you guys tested Trinket Mage in the deck yet? It seems very strong, as it gets all sorts of tools to cover the Counterbalance engine, and grabs SDT.
It's also a 3c card so it can get around opposing Counterbalances and grabs EE for opposing Counterbalances as well.
ICBE - We're totally the coolest Anti-Thesis ever.
"The Citrus-God just had a Citrus-Supernova... in your mouth."
Changes:
Doran, the Siege Tower
I feel that he is a better fit for this deck as the 5 beater. He makes shadowmage infiltrators hit for 3. He is easy to play with this mana base, and he dose not have delve that may hurt Tarmogoyf. Also he can help with the goblin match a bit by stopping piledriver.
Gaddock Teeg
This is very obvious, but no one said it so I thought I should at lest bring it up. He helps with the lock. Hes a wonderful card. If you need justification for that well I am sure if u look around you can find a forum topic or two talking about his strengths and weaknesses, or I can post links if needed.
Jace Belere
This card is a great source of card draw. What u do is play him, use his first ability, and get his loyalty to 5. Than all u do after that is use his second ability. When he dies he is food for tarmogoyf. If by some chance someone decides to attack him or use a direct damage spell towards him well that is less damage that could have targeted my life total.
Mox Diamond
Tell you the truth I never have a problem playing it. You could run the third chrome mox if you want its really not much of a different either way. The only thing is if you could play either chrome mox or mox diamond I would prefer to play mox diamond.
About the charm. I like the different charms. I feel that people do not see them coming and they all have a little bit to offer. But if you don't like it thats fine. I have had some success with them.
I must say I really like the declist and seeing it in action at the German Legacy Champs I was rather impressed. I see a few potential problems though and I was wondering if you have considered them up until now?
a) The manabase: The 4 Stifle 4 Wasteland Grow List will cripple this dec. Since to operate smoothly (meaning always being able to play any card it draws) the dec needs 3 different lands in play so as to be able to produce all 4 colos. This is a condition 8 LD spells are very capable of thwarting in the face of 19 mana sources. This will often leave you backpeddling, a situation the many high casting cost cards (3 drops) make hard to recover from.
b) The Goblins Matchup: I know this no longer is as big of an issue as it used to be but it seems horrendous. Partly due to the reasons mentioned above and partially due to the fact that many cards in the dec simply suck in the matchup (most noticably Mage, BalanceTop, Finkel and Shakels) and one has 0 solutions for a Vial and only Force and Swords versus Lakey turn one on the play.
c) The Danger of cool things: Tombstalker? Hacks you for seven with Bob. Is this an issue? Is he better than Enforcer, whom you could support just as easily and who pwns tombstalker.
And for the life of me I cannot understand the 3 bobs especially seeing that there are 3 finkels in there who serve essentially the same function but are IMHO drasticly inferior in every situation except for imprinting in moxen.
d) The role of agressor? One thing I love about Grow is that it can switch modes so easily, but you are working under the premise of always being the aggresor. Simply put I believe this to be a major design flaw since there are many matchups (mainly the 2 mentioned above) where you will find it very hard to be in a commanding position.
So with all these points of criticism do you think it feasible to build the dec with a mere 3 colors (UBG removing mage and replacing swords with demise and maybe adding thoughtseize against combo or adding a Trinket mage engine for more flexibility?) eliminating many of the above mentioned problems but obviously reducing the decs overall power level. So what do you think?
Cheers from Stuttgart
mackaber
Lands
4 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
3 Underground Sea
3 Tundra
3 Tropical Island
Creatures
3 Meddling Mage
3 Dark Confidant
4 Shadowmage Infiltrator
4 Tarmogoyf
1 Doran, the Siege Tower
Spells
4 Force of Will
3 Daze
3 Counterbalance
3 Sensei's Divining Top
2 Vedalken Shackles
4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
3 Swords to Plowshares
3 Chrome Mox
Sideboard
SB: 3 Threads of Disloyalty
SB: 2 Vindicate
SB: 3 Extirpate
SB: 3 Aegis of Honor
SB: 4 Thoughtseize
You bring up valid points, but having tested this deck more than any other deck, to the point where I got bored of it, I think I have some equally valid rebuttals.
First of all, the manabase: Your suggestion of cutting it down to 3 colors doesn't change the fact that 4waste4stifle thresh will slaughter the deck. This is a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, as the deck has at least some game against *every other deck in the format*. If they don't run 4 stifles and 4 wastelands AND DRAW THEM, they don't have a 100% win.
I agree that goblins can be an issue, but 7-8 answers to a turn 1 lackey is plenty. On the other hand, my list runs Doran, which deals effectively with the drivers and stops most attacks, often long enough to swing for lethal with Finkel.
I agree with you 1000000% on the Tombstalker argument, which is why I run Doran. The deck now curves out at 5, with the only 5s being Forces. Unfortunately, I have a nasty habit of flipping between 5 and 7 of my 7 3cc spells over the course of an average game. >_> Call me talented.
As for being the aggressor, I have to say that it is an aggro-control deck. The general premise behind this type of deck is not to be the aggressor, but to gain early tempo advantage and use that to gain board control around turn 4-5 at the latest, then beat with efficient creatures like Goyf and Doran. Also, please note that Doran makes Finkel beat for 3 and Bob for 1, hence my list running 4 and 3 in that particular order.
As for my own list, Aegis is amazing against Burn, which is a big deck on magic-league, and Thoughtseize is the current testing slot. Any suggestions would be appreciated. :)
Why would you run Aegis of Honor when you can just run Circle of Protection: Red, similarly crippling burn/sligh and also skyrocketing the success of your Goblins match?
It's a metagame call. NOBODY runs goblins on magic-league, or else I would be running cop:red as you say. But goblins really isn't an awful matchup, I'd put it better than 50/50 most of the time, based on my admittedly limited testing with the matchup. But as I said, nobody runs it, so I'm not terribly concerned.
I don't it's too smart playing only 3 Dazes as you wish to have one of those in the early, early game. Therefore i think it's odd cutting one.
Honestly, I agree, but I had to drop something to keep it down to 60, and it seemed like the most droppable card.
Suggestions? I dropped 2 lands from the former build and added 3 moxes, hence the need to drop a card.
Disagree. It's a question of when the deck should focus. Daze is, as you point out, excellent in the early game, but is mediocre to terrible later on.I don't it's too smart playing only 3 Dazes as you wish to have one of those in the early, early game. Therefore i think it's odd cutting one.
Therefore, if you play a deck that expects to end the game by turn 4-5, Daze is a clear four-of. But if your deck plays for a longer game, the chances to draw a "bad" Daze increase. Thus, you privilege cards whose power is less depending on the turn you draw them.
YOU'RE GIVING ME A TIME MACHINE IN ORDER TO TREAT MY SLEEP DISORDER.
I just have a quick question... as a threshold player/ landstill player... how would you say those MUs would go from your perspective...
I have found that the stifle/wasteland package has proven time and again to fuck with people's manabases and I think that your manabase would be severely affected by such cards...
Your creature base seems a little week. while having good affectes, they cannot hold their own against larger threats such as nimble mongoose and the such...
How in the world do you support shackles?
Chrome mox is only good if you have a confidant or shadowmage in your opening hand to make up for the tempo loss, and threshold usually runs countermagic and creatures removal (UG being the exception with only bounce)...
Landstill on the other hand will chump all of your dudes, and sweep the board again and again with cards like pernicious deed and N.Disk.
I guess what I am trying to say is... play stifle for the wasteland issues... while chrome mox can lead to some silly opening plays, it also makes the deck inconsistant, and finally, run some better creatres... you can easily run a creature base of...
4 tarmogoyf
4 jotan grunt
4 dark confidant
2 meddling mage
1 doran the seige tower
that gives you 9 guys as big or bigger than opposing goyfs (they only run 4), and 9 guys that power over mongeese...
The 4 confidants want to be played, because while you only want to see one in a game, you want it to stay on the board and with only 3 sometimes you can loose your draw engine for long enough for them to kill you.
I would drp the shackles for more removal like 4th swords and ghastly demise (perhapes edict).
I totally dislike nearly every change you've done to the list in the startpost.
Tombstalker has had the role of the 5th Tarmogoyf. Doran isn't even a threat on its own. That wouldn't be a good argument not to play him, since Doran has great synergies with Shadowmage Infiltrators as well as opposing Engineered Plagues, but his manacosts of GBW in a blue based 4 color deck make it nearly impossible to support him.
Another important aspect is the fact, that there's no need to cut Tombstalker. The only point you've mentioned why you want to cut him is its anti synergy with Confidant and Counterbalance. But those rare circumstances of the gamestate shouldn't be the reason to cut that great guy.
Most of your opponents will focus their removal on your Tarmogoyfs, as they should, so the split of Finkel/Pikula as 3:3 is totally enough for the carddraw.The 4 confidants want to be played, because while you only want to see one in a game, you want it to stay on the board and with only 3 sometimes you can loose your draw engine for long enough for them to kill you.
As you've resolved a Counterbalance, you rarely need the Confidant, since CB generates enough cardadvantage to control the rest of the game.
To the point with the Chrome Mox and its disadvantage:
Well, Baseruption runs 3 Confidants, 3 Finkels, 3 Counterbalances and 2 Shackles. That are 11 cards to compensate the disadvantage of the Mox.
But you are right that Baseruption has some problems in the current metagame because of the high amount of stifles/wastelands and its high manacurve.
That's why Team ayb hasn't piloted the deck since 2 months now.
I would like to write more about your changes, but I don't have that much time.
Last edited by Oddball; 11-10-2007 at 07:50 AM.
+++Team AYB (All your Base)+++
*bump
A build very similar to our / Windux' current list
http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=22732
was piloted by LSV and Nassif to 1st and 10th place of the GP. Congratulations!
The decks look somewhat similar but they diverge by like 20%. The creatures and CB lock are whats similar.
Actual cards for simplicity: (3 vindicate, 3 chrome mox, 1 top, 4 land, 2 creatures, 1 daze)
I am trying out Baseruption. Based on Nassif's and a few other lists I came to the following build. The most "odd" choice is to run 2 more creature as most current lists only play 12 max or less. So 2 Sowers are creature No. 13/14. They are just mediocre in some matchups but provide 4cc for Countertop. There are some SB slots it can be switched against. These slots are very Meta dependant. It could easily be Grunts, Meddlings Mages or Gaddocks as well altough my first choice probably would be Gaddock because the fit nicely into the CounterTop lock piece.
Heres the list:
//Lands
1 [TSP] Academy Ruins
3 [ON] Polluted Delta
4 [ON] Flooded Strand
3 [U] Tropical Island
3 [U] Underground Sea
2 [B] Tundra
1 [U] Plains
1 [U] Forest
2 [U] Island
Comment: 20 Lands, as much Basics as needed (To avoid non basic f*** and Price of Progress in particular). 1 Academy Ruins: If its out its probably good with EE which can be fetched and recurred.
//Creatures
2 [LRW] Sower of Temptation
2 [FD] Trinket Mage
2 [DIS] Trygon Predator
4 [RAV] Dark Confidant
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
Comment: 2 more then usual. No random Tombstalker. Sower can be boarded against a better suitable creature at times also Trinket Mage could be boarded or creature count can be reduced up to 10 for additional solutions.
//Spells
2 [LRW] Ponder
4 [CS] Counterbalance
4 [5E] Brainstorm
3 [NE] Daze
4 [AL] Force of Will
4 [U] Swords to Plowshares
1 [FD] Engineered Explosives
1 [FD] Vedalken Shackles
3 [CHK] Sensei's Divining Top
Comment: Pretty obvious. Artifacts as one offs except Top. All because of Trinket Mage.
// Sideboard
SB: 1 [FD] Engineered Explosives
SB: 2 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 2 [ALA] Rhox War Monk
SB: 2 [SOK] Kataki, War's Wage
SB: 1 [RAV] Darkblast
SB: 2 [UL] Engineered Plague
SB: 1 [IA] Hydroblast
SB: 1 [U] Blue Elemental Blast
SB: 1 [BOK] Umezawa's Jitte
SB: 1 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus
SB: 1 [DK] Tormod's Crypt
Comment: SB choices are very broad for this deck. What I had in mind is to have some GY hate (that can be fetched by Mages, although that might be too slow) => Crypt/Relic. Something against Swarm and Tribes => Plague/Darkblast. Grips are pretty standard, just 2 because of Trygon Predator main. Rhox War Monk proved itself in aggro matchups like Goyfsligh in a Bant Threshold version I recently played. Kataki is a Meta choice for me that could easily become Gaddock. Some more Anti red Counters (pretty standard) => BEB/hydroblast. Just 2 because I thought about boarding out Ponder instead of lets say Daze. Not sure if this will work out. Some more artifacts to fetch with Trinket Mage => EE/Jitte.
Shackles unfortunately isn't Trinket Mageable. Might be better just running more copies of things instead of Mage.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
