How about goyf actually being a clock, unlike all the other critters in this decks asides from grunt.Originally Posted by pi4meterftw
@Maverick... THANK GOD someone has their head on straight here... Its like i've been talking to monkeys or something... I would say something, then they would say something that wouldn't make sense to any normal person (i.e. no rational explanations besides the fact that they thought they were right), then shit would be thrown EVERYWHERE!
It was actually quite disturbing.
I actually posted my list in the tempo thresh thread... It seems to fit under that category better.
Do you criticize landstill for not having a clock? Also, I believe we've shown a bit of the math we did. I don't see how that's not rational. We don't want a clock. I mean we'd put a clock on our opponent if it was at no cost, but we're ready for the long game so a clock is pretty pointless unless we need to finish the match, which isn't tough against most decks.
Goblins has no countermagic
ANT has no creatures
landstill has no clock
merfolk can't generate a large storm count
Nassif thresh has no land destruction
How come I don't hear you making retarded criticisms like this? It's not an argument to name one thing our deck doesn't have. Here are other things our deck also doesn't have:
Green, red and black.
storm count/storm
Actually I can't name that many things our deck doesn't have as far as overarching concepts such as these. That may be because we... actually took the time to practice good deck design. Just saying...
Just to make it clear, I never claimed that goyf belonged to this deck. I just said that Goyf and Grunt are NOT dyssynergic.
Funny enough, I think that the best role for goyf in this deck would NOT be to beat early but to hold opponent's creature. But really I doubt the green splash would justified by goyf inclusion. Knight of the reliquary would be better and it's probably still not justified.
Heya, just wanted to point out how the games went by the AN/Doomsday player point of view.
The first game was usually quite easy, with your deck only having FoW, Daze and Wasteland as disruption. This means like the same package tempo decks run, minus Stifle, Spell Snare, etc. It's not a bye, but should definetly be in AN favour.
Matches 2/3 are an entirely different thing, cause permanent hate cards are joining the fight. Thorn of Amethist is definetly good, and aura of silence, albeit slow, is nonetheless painful. In the first 4 or so matches we played I SB wrong (didn't know the deck), bringing in cards against hate bears (MM, or even true believer) and losing one matchup to an unexpected Thorn.
I don't know what are you siding in the other matchups, but only considering combo decks, it would be a better move to sideboard an Ench/Artifacts and hate bears (Glowrider, True Believer, MM, Aven Mindcenson, etc) split, so that the ANT player just have to draw the right removal spell instead of just a random disenchant effect.
Currently Playing: Nourishing Lich.Deck
Current Record: 1-83-2
How have you liked this deck in testing, if you've tried it yet?
You played very well, I'll admit that whenever I play a g1, I actually feel kind of relieved when I win. I think against average players, I can pull a 50-60%, and against practiced players it's negative. Also, depending on build: some players don't play doomsday, which was a REALLY important thing in our games. You may have noticed I was engaging in silly plays like once I reduced your life total to 10 or so, immediately I swordsed my 5/5 wayfarer (off jitte) and was ready to dump the jitte counters to require you to storm up to 13 or something. This was how I shut piceli out game 1 most of the time, because it makes IGG loop kills almost unreachable, and at 10 life Ad nauseam is also pretty pressed to pull off storm count 13.
But doomsday just puts you at 5, gives you like 6 more storm count. I'm wondering why more people don't play this lock, cause definitely not every storm combo deck I've played has doomsday. Maybe it takes up too much space cause you have to run meditate and top. I, too, wasn't able to put you on combo early enough g1 of match 1, cause you opened with a blue dual and a top or something, which could easily be other stuff, and then turn 2 you still played ponder and brainstorms.
Doomsday is the big problem, and mage is pretty bad against decks that have 3 ways to win. True believer lets you start your combo first and then find an answer, so it's bad. We want our hate to stop you from casting Ad Nauseam or whatever else, not to let you draw 10 cards first, and then produce the answer.
We'll happily run more thorns if the matchup starts to become prevalent. Right now the 2 sideboard slots we dedicate to this deck is because 2 SB slots is pretty cheap and we do still want to win the MU, but I don't see it all that often.
They were fun games. Thanks for your perspective. I retract that statement about the difference in matchup vs. piceli and green one being just a statistical fluctuation, I think I did much better against piceli partly due to luck and partly due to no doomsday.
Enlightened Tutor is too good against other combo decks. The only card we could possibly cut would be 1x Thorn of Amethyst, but even if I know that you're running only disenchants, is Glowrider actually better than Thorn of Amethyst?
Obviously if the combo player knows our decklist precisely, they'll have a slight advantage, so there's a modicum of information advantage if we draw Glowrider (and we don't lose because it's not Thorn... we only run 18 lands and 4 of them we want to use Wasting, and there's a big difference between Thorn turn 2 and turn 3).
Also, there's the disadvantage game 2 to Glowrider when almost everyone brings in hate thinking we have Meddling Mage. If we have Glowrider it'll just get Banished, but Thorn of Amethyst sticks them in a really tough spot.
Even if they lose game 2, they might still be reluctant to board out creature hate, thinking, "He has to have Meddling Mages also, because he's UW." It's only after playing 3-5 games that you'd come to realize that for sure, we don't have any mages and it's safe to board out creature kill.
So you're right: There's an information war going on, where the TES player tries to figure out exactly what we have and we try to make them think we have other stuff. But it's only after a number of games (or reading this thread) that the TES player will understand that they have to bring in Ench/Art removal and completely ignore creatures.
In a typical "best of 3" setting, we can probably get out of two games before they know for sure we don't have Mages (or Glowriders, etc.).
I'd like to add that this deck should perform way better against TES than how it does ANT, since TES runs 11-12 lands against the 14-14 ANT usually packs; moreover, it doesn't run any kind of fetch nor any basic land, so Wasteland=Strip Mine. Add to this the fact that you run Wasteland-tutors in the form of Wayfarer (which doesn't always work tho', since they'll be more likely to be behind you in terms of lands), free disruption, and you should be ok.
Post sideboard Thorn really hurts them; even when i played against pi4meter i found Thorn to be really damnly disturbing with ANT, i wouldn't even imagine with TES. To me it's the best kind of anti-combo tool avaiable for this deck, because it's impossible to go off with in on the board and it's more difficult to bounce it rather than, say, a Canonist. The NG player just has to keep a mana open to cast FoW on the bounce (unless it's KGrip or Wipe Away), and he's basically done.
@Pi4Meter: i should have boarded in a different way playing the hybrid version of ANT in all our matches , the point is that i didn't know your deck very well so i thought it to be a UW fish with a twist. Now if we're gonna meet again on the mws i'll try a different approach, even if i'm sure that you'll topdeck those 2 lonely thorns and i will screw like a bitch(joking, I'm very happy to be useful for testings, and I apologize if I wasn't worth of representing (DD-)ANT, but this deck scaries the shit out of me so much that I play like a real Combo-noob
).
-----------------------------------------------------
Avatar of kicks_422's creation and property
I am currently playing an extended version of this deck. I am still not an awesome pilot, but I'm practicing. If you want to test/practice as well, please contact me.
The list is:
// Lands
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
2 [BD] Island (3)
4 [DIS] Hallowed Fountain
3 [9E] Plains (1)
2 [DIS] Azorius Chancery
2 [DIS] Ghost Quarter
3 [ZEN] Misty Rainforest
// Creatures
4 [ON] Weathered Wayfarer
3 [ALA] Knight of the White Orchid
4 [DD2] Fathom Seer
4 [DIS] Court Hussar
3 [TSP] Serra Avenger
4 [ARB] Meddling Mage
2 [CS] Jotun Grunt
// Spells
3 [TSP] Ancestral Vision
3 [MR] Empyrial Plate
4 [BOK] Umezawa's Jitte
4 [CFX] Path to Exile
1 [DIS] Condemn
1 [RAV] Compulsive Research
// Sideboard
SB: 1 [CS] Jotun Grunt
SB: 2 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 [10E] Aura of Silence
SB: 4 [ALA] Ethersworn Canonist
SB: 2 [FD] Engineered Explosives
SB: 3 [TSP] Return to Dust
SB: 1 [LRW] Burrenton Forge-Tender
Some ideas to the 1.x list (which looks like it could work quite well against the Meta):
- The list might need 1 or 2 more Basics. The meta is pretty fast so you don't want to hurt yourself, especially with Fathom Seer bouncing Fountain seems too painful. Either cut Chancerys or reduce Fountain. The base can also be strenghtened by 2 Mystic Gates or Glacial Fortresses.
- Have you thought about 3-4 Chrome Mox? The Legacy list has 20 T1 plays (FoW, Swords, Mother, Wayfarer, Vial, Vision) while this has only 8 (Wayfarer, Vision, Condemn - Pathing on turn 1 is usually not a good idea). Because the fastest Aggro deck (Zoo) is pretty much the same in both formats I think you cannot play a so much slower version.
You'd have to cut Empyrial Plate which would make room for Vision, KotR and Avenger #4. This list plays a lot of card draw so I think it can easily compensate the card loss plus the Mox has synergy with Knight and Wayfarer.
- The metagame is pretty defined, so chances are high that you run into Dredge, Dark Depths, Hypergenesis or Zoo. Against Dredge I think you should play either Crypt or Ravenous Trap (or a 2/2 mix of both) instead of Relic because being forced to pay 1 and then leave 1 open forever slows you down too much. Hypergenesis will have 4 Firespout postboard without any doubt so there is no need to lose an early MM that had to be set on Hypergenesis AND the Canonist to it. Instead go for Chalice on 0. Against Zoo you need just one thing: Fast removal, as fast as it gets. Explosives just doesn't do it when they go T1 Lynx, T2 Geopede. So I would suggest to pack the remaining 3 Condemns there and they will work against Rubin Zoos big guys just as well. For the Depths/Hexmage matchup I have no ideas since their threads and solutions are so wide spread. My best idea would be Oblivion Ring because it deals with Confidant, Bitterblossom, Chalice and Hexmage and because it seems solid on the other matchups too, but I have no idea how that matchup would work out anyways. Just don't be overconfident only because of the Wayfarer/ Ghost Quarter engine. It helps, but does not win on its own.
4 Ravenous Trap / Crypt
4 Chalice of the Void
3 Condemn
4
I'm interested in testing this deck but have 1 worry. How does deck deal with CB decks. Especially when it hits play and all you have are 1~2 mana costing cards. Seems very dangerous. Also you have no way to protect your jittes or vial from any artifact destruction aside from the 7 counters.
If I am missing something please let me know. It seems when jitte gets removed you are depending on your smaller creatures to deal lethal damage. Which aside from Grunt aren't very big.
Counterbalance/Top combination isn't assembled every game.
You can win the game through a Counterbalance if you keep up land destruction with Wastelands and/or Wayfarer. With just two lands, it's very hard for them to develop their board while continuing to keep a tight Countertop lock against you.
Post-board, you get Aura of Silence, which is extremely effective against Counterbalance, both preemptively and reactively.
And probably most-importantly: Nobody is playing Counterbalance. If there's a matchup you can write off now, it's the Counterbalance matchup. There's more Zoo, TempoThresh, Goblins, Merfolk, TES, and Ichorid than CB right now. It's no longer the end-all-be-all of Legacy the way it was around the time of Chicago, so to me, the question of "how do you beat Counterbalance" comes behind the questions, "How do you beat: zoo, Tempo Thresh, Goblins, Merfolk, TES, and Ichorid?" Everything said, our matchup is like 40% against CB Thresh, so it is below 50%, and this isn't a great pick if your metagame is completely infested with CB/Thresh.
If CB is truly the ONLY matchup you care about, then you should obviously play Zoo, which gets like 60% or something. If you have a more developed metagame, I wouldn't worry too much about it.
... what else would you want? How many people do you know are packing like a thousand copies of Disenchant? I've never run into problems with my opponents running too many disenchant effects.Also you have no way to protect your jittes or vial from any artifact destruction aside from the 7 counters.
If I am missing something please let me know. It seems when jitte gets removed you are depending on your smaller creatures to deal lethal damage. Which aside from Grunt aren't very big.
Why would anyone think that Grunt is the only big creature in the deck? He's not at all more aggressive than Serra Avenger, and all the other creatures generate card advantage. I win maybe a third of the games without Jitte. It's generally a great trump card, but you'd be surprised how often it's not needed. I mean, compare to Tempo Thresh:
4 Goyfs, 4 Nimble Mongooses. And people think Tempo Thresh is aggressive and that we can't win without Jitte. Give me a break.
The basic lands suggestion is a good idea, but in reality I don't need that many lands, and all the nonbasics I'm already running are required. The chalice over ethersworn canonist is a great suggestion, and I take it. I didn't know that ETW, pyromancer's swath were not played. Chalice and ethersworn are both good against hypergenesis and elf combo.
It's much less important in extended to have a turn 1 drop because you can fill that void by playing a dual land. Also, the format is slower. Additionally, condemn is a reasonable play, meaning that we have 7 1 drops and an 8th that might occasionally be played targetting, say, a nacatl.
Over in the merfolk thread someone mentioned that them running Weathered Wayfarer in merfolk would be like running Lord of Atlantis in NoGoyf. He is blue and I was wondering what you guys thought of him as an efficient 2/2 for 2 beater. He also drops of vial pretty early if you happen to have one in play. I could see it being an issue if an opponent plays changelings, though.
I am the best ever.
Well done, sir!
Unrelatedly, here is my list where I have taken in some suggestions:
// Lands
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
2 [BD] Island (3)
4 [DIS] Hallowed Fountain
3 [9E] Plains (1)
2 [DIS] Azorius Chancery
2 [DIS] Ghost Quarter
3 [ZEN] Misty Rainforest
// Creatures
4 [ON] Weathered Wayfarer
3 [ALA] Knight of the White Orchid
4 [DD2] Fathom Seer
4 [DIS] Court Hussar
3 [TSP] Serra Avenger
4 [ARB] Meddling Mage
2 [CS] Jotun Grunt
// Spells
3 [TSP] Ancestral Vision
3 [MR] Empyrial Plate
4 [BOK] Umezawa's Jitte
4 [CFX] Path to Exile
1 [DIS] Condemn
1 [RAV] Compulsive Research
// Sideboard
SB: 1 [CS] Jotun Grunt
SB: 1 [DIS] Condemn
SB: 1 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 [10E] Aura of Silence
SB: 3 [TSP] Return to Dust
SB: 2 [LRW] Burrenton Forge-Tender
SB: 1 [FNM] Tormod's Crypt
SB: 4 [MR] Chalice of the Void
Again, this is the extended version.
This deck truly looks like a pile. With that said, I've given it a few spins, particularly against my own pet (UGB Intuition-Thresh), and the sheer draw-power seems to tend to smooth out what might otherwise be kinks. In fact, unless my opening hand sets up a stable manabase, it's very difficult for me to win the matchup. Part of that is simply due to not being entirely sure what I'm better off attacking; but a lot of it has to do with the first few turns of the game. If I can assemble two basic lands (Forest, Swamp) and make a Hierarch stick, then I can surf in under the radar: either NG starts developing their mana, or they lose. If that situation can be established, then I can win. Otherwise, I've found that Wayfarer and StP wreak too much havoc on my manabase, so that although it takes a number of turns before I actually lose the game, it's very difficult to recover from those early losses.
The back-breakers for me are Jitte and Mother of Runes. I can deal with MoM and Jitte easily enough, but there's so much draw power in the deck that the third Jitte tends to stick long enough to make a real difference, or MoM ends up allowing the little 1-power bastards through for the win. Of the games that I've lost against NG, I'd say the majority ended up being lost to those tiny 1-power fuckers. The problem, once you know what you're facing (a factor that can't be discounted), is that none of what you end up destroying is particularly important to the deck. Avenger and Grunt are obvious removal targets, but since the deck only runs two of each, it's not really a setback at all. This, in turn, forces you to expend valuable resources dealing with otherwise innocuous creatures. And you can do this for a number of turns, but eventually you run out of steam, while this deck has enough draw power to fight its way back very quickly. Given time and testing, I'm sure I could develop a more coherent strategy for my deck to deal with NG, since it has all the cards/removal it needs to be a difficult matchup for NG, but the fact will always remain that just about everything hinges on that opening hand. And that's not something that I can fix.
Now, like others, I'm not sold on the effectiveness of Vial or Visions. Vial, in particular, strikes me as a weaker link. I certainly understand the rationale behind running it, and behind running so few copies, but in the games that I've tested, I have yet to really see Vial enabling the serious Wayfarer shenanigans that it wants to. I think the deck would run just fine without it. s for Visions, I don't have a ready replacement off the top of my head.
Anyhow, there you are. Some small input. The deck definitely looks bad but it pilots well, and that's important.
EDIT: The list above looks much smoother to me, actually, even if it's more appropriate to Ext. I'll give that a spin as well, adapted to Legacy. PtE, in particular, seems more promising than StP, given the land-synergy and the fact that 1-power creatures have a harder time of it when StP gives the opponent all kinds of life-gain.
Oh yeah, and I prefer calling it Wayfarer-Fish to No-Goyf, since it's more descriptive of the deck. But that's just a personal quirk.
PtE is horrendous in the Legacy version because giving the opponent Basic Lands into play kinda messed up the Wayfarer/Wasteland plan.
Who suggested running PTE in the legacy version?
Oh I see. Yeah... that was an ext version. It would die in legacy. The duals are strictly inferior, the wastelands are far inferior, lack of countermagic etc. Also, path is indeed a horrible choice.
In his edit he explicitly says he wants to try PtE over StP in the Legacy version.
I fully realized that it was an EXT version of the deck, and as such it had some card choices that would be sub-optimal in Legacy. On the other hand, it looks to me like the deck has a little more cohesion in the EXT version proposed.
One of the choices that was particularly interesting, I thought, was using PtE. Again, I fully realize that it grants basic lands, and that this goes against the ideal Wayfarer-Wasteland tech combo. On the other hand, it also helps you to keep Wayfarer viable, since it helps your opponent's land count. The thought was that, to a large extent, the advantage given might be negligible if you consider how many and which basics most Legacy decks run, and if you consider that you're still disrupting the non-basic side of things. If the observation that one-power dudes are usually the ones that break through was accurate, then that helps to prevent Time Walking yourself four+ times with StP. I mean, it seems to me that creatures are only going to be cast on the other side of the board when the Wasteland tech starts to wear thin or become ineffective: at that point, your concern is less about how many lands your opponent has than it is with having your creatures connect quickly.
It was just a point of interest, nothing more. I'm not committed to saying it's better (or worse) in Legacy, just that it was a thought.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote