Ooh I love it when people are asses and do this:Originally Posted by Sevryn
Damn, if only we ran countermagic or enchantment/artifact removal in the 75, this wouldn't have happened.
I stand by what I said. Against aggro/control with slower clocks like UW Tempo or DnT, you should try to go off during their upkeep that is if you are to avoid Grunt, otherwise you might as well go off after their draw step. Both decks are slow so you can hit a lot of land drops and sculpt a hand that doesn't need Reset or a hand that can bounce Grunt. Keep in mind that you don't always need Reset to go off. Sometimes its better to go off in the opponents upkeep because giving him the draw could mean more countermagic to deal with. Especially if you can make 6-8 land drops like you can against any slow clock, chaining multiple Turnabouts together can give you the mana you need to go off and if not then you can pass to the draw step and keep going off with Reset. Besides, Solidarity has Cunning Wish for bounce and can even Cunning Wish for Stroke of Genius after the draw step. I don't think Grunt is hard to play around, especially since you can't really know when I'm going to go off. I can go off early if I think I have the right hand before Grunt comes down or I can wait for Grunt to die or I can Remand/Force your Grunt. It all comes down to how good of a Solidarity player you are facing and how familiar he/she is with UW Tempo.If you could cast it during the upkeep, it would just say, "Cast only during an opponent's turn." But it's specific to being AFTER the upkeep step, i.e. during the draw step at the earliest. Maybe splitting hairs, but it means that I can't die with Grunt out. They need to come up with a bounce spell for Grunt and if I have Mother of Runes/Vial, they need a bounce spell for that, too (or second Brainfreeze on my next turn). Throw in Ethersworn Canonist and Thorn of Amethyst (which both need bounce spells), and that's the gameplan.
The main gameplan is still the 4 dedicated hate spells and the Mother of Runes/Vials to protect those and all the countermagic. Wheel and Grunt are just four little cards we happen to have that cause some problems. Don't think like all you have to do to win is bounce a Jotun Grunt on turn 10.
The denotation is agreeable, but you seem to be implying that a good Solidarity player who knows what's in UW Tempo will consistently win, and that's just a lie. But I guess I'll see you next Saturday night! I'm looking forward to it, hopefully we can get some tournament going, but if not we can play some exhibition games or something.
Oh hell no if you can filter through your deck for enough hate I'm done for. Solidarity isn't good enough to handle too many pieces of hate; no combo is. Solidarity gives you an at least even matchup against everything but Dredge if you are a good player. I consider a truly good player to be one who is familiar with the majority of his matchups. The farther from goldfishing the match is, the more it should be tested. Combo can only play through so much hate. It depends on how much time you give me to hit land drops and sculpt a good hand with Force, and in game 2, Mindbreak Trap. Control matchups are far from consistent. I would say that Solidarity has a better chance of winning against control then most other combo decks do. Thats why I was surprised that you had such good results from playing against it. It didn't fit my expectations like those I have from playing against other control. Mindbreak Trap is the absolute nuts against control.The denotation is agreeable, but you seem to be implying that a good Solidarity player who knows what's in UW Tempo will consistently win, and that's just a lie. But I guess I'll see you next Saturday night! I'm looking forward to it, hopefully we can get some tournament going, but if not we can play some exhibition games or something.
What I was implying was that a good Solidarity player has a solid matchup against the slower non-counterbalance control decks. DnT is basically unwinable if the opponent gets down Cannonist + Mom and its the same case against UW Tempo. If a good player can play around Counterbalance of all things then I'd imagine they can also play around Grunt.
Playing you will be interesting. You already have extensive testing while I can have theorized more than I have tested, so we'll see how it goes. I'm too busy to make it to Artifax this week but probably the next.
Non-sequitur to the discussion going on about Solidarity, but I'd still like to throw this in: People on this thread have been mentioning sweepers such as Pernicious Deed an Engineered Explosives that can prove problematic to any low-curve list that plays permanents, and while playing UW tempo, I was never happy to see those spells resolve (because sometimes, you just can't do anything about really bad things from happening, right? :)).
I've been contemplating a singleton Pithing Needle in the board (which is tutorable by means of Enlightened Tutor, of course) to help avoid those cards blowing up the board. What do you think, could Needle prove worthwhile in an unknown metagame? It could also be used to turn off, for instance, effin' Sensei's Divining Top, which is probably the most annoying card in the whole format (if not game).
Not interested there, I enjoy reading about decks but I'm not going to bother playing a deck from which I know it doesn't fit my playstyle.
That said, it doesn't mean that one can't identify faulty reasoning. Your argument for not running green was that you get a weak manabase which can't consistently support UU or WW anymore - I said there wasn't a need for the UU and WW to begin with when you're making that splash. If you're saying that Serra Avenger > Tarmogoyf then it's all good - but atleast use that reasoning and don't hide behind a land issue that doesn't need to be there.
This is ridiculous. You have the audacity not only to unashamedly declare that you don't wish to play the deck in the thread the deck is being discussed, but then you demand that we recognize your deductions as valid?
I think it's possible for people to be smart enough to never have to test, but I don't even think Matt's that smart, and I'm definitely not that smart.
But you claim that you are privileged with so much intellect that lack of experience is no issue.
Furthermore, we never claimed serra avenger is > tarmogoyf, although it's probably true. I might even prefer SA to tarmogoyf as a white card, cause we seriously don't support the base of cards it takes to get tarmogoyf up to even a 4/5, and it's not even a guaranteed 3/4.
I also don't get why the relevant condition is that avenger has to be > tarmogoyf. It just has to be not the worst card in our deck (which is true).
Cause then we would cut something else, and since fathom seer is obviously not the worst card in the deck, we'd be stuck trying to satisfy WW, UU, and G, which is impossible in 1 land, impossible in 2 lands, ridiculously improbable with 3 lands (because G would be a light splash). Instead of just UU and WW which is impossible at 1 land, somewhat probable at 2 lands, and a triviality at 3 lands. This also fails to take wasteland, etc. into account.
Deed isn't a problem. EE isn't a problem. EE combined with a completely anti-UW tempo strategy can be a problem, but the option of hating out a particular deck is practically always available, and we don't pretend to be ready if someone tries to bring like 4 null rod 4 dread of night, etc.
But if he just brings a normal deck, then yes they're good cards, but it's not like you actually have to do anything to answer them. You just take the hit, don't overextend, and even if you're surprised it's no big.
Like yesterday, I thought I was playing against an aggro deck, so I extend 2 vials a jitte, an SFM, and a wayfarer. Bam, deed. I wastelock him to one land, and it prolongs the deed explosion from going off for a turn, but by the time he blows it up, I'm down 3 cards relative to him. But that meant it was his 6 rock cards vs. 3 UW tempo cards. I don't think our deck is twice as efficient as every other deck, so I think I got a bit lucky, so a deed for 5 things is kind of harsh, but more reasonable pernicious deeds that don't catch you by surprise hit for like 2-3 permanents, and then it's not even significant because those permanents drew you cards anyway.
Pithing needle isn't worth it. I don't really understand why you're interested in stopping top. The moment my opponent draws an SDT, bam -1 effectively, unless he wants to use a fetchland and 2 mana to cycle it away.
The moment my opponent plays SDT, on top of the sunk cost of a card, he also loses a mana.
I wouldn't stop something just because it's annoying. On the other hand, if it's teaming up with counterbalance, then it's not bad, but pithing needle is bad. It's kind of bad in the same way that stifle is bad, in that with both cards, you're praying to 1:1 with it. It's a victory to be able to even use the card to take a card from your opponent, and you would jump on the chance to stifle a silvergill adept trigger or whatever. But in reality, most of the time people stifle my vial things. Every so often, stifle forces a mana screw, just like every so often pithing needle nets "2 cards," but most of the time it's just like: how can this not be totally useless?
You would definitely not ETutor needle.
Wait so in order to have an opinion about Magic theory on a deck you would need to have played it? Please point me towards this unwritten rule! Just because I don't play a deck doesn't mean I can't have an opinion about it, I've seen videos about it and I played against it and moreover - like everyone on the forum here - I play Magic.
Quote me, please. If I haven't said exactly that perhaps it's time to not make up stuff and then use it as an argument, deal?But you claim that you are privileged with so much intellect that lack of experience is no issue.
Iit was exactly the question I asked you. I didn't claim you said it, quit putting words in my mouth already.Furthermore, we never claimed serra avenger is > tarmogoyf, although it's probably true.
Because it is Avenger that makes it impossible to play Tarmogoyf, that's exactly the point I was trying to make. If it wasn't for Avenger there wouldn't be a WW requirement and you can change your landbase accordingly. What you're saying is that it's impossible to change the landbase with that requirement. Then consider that Avenger and Tarmogoyf would more or less have the same role in the deck.I also don't get why the relevant condition is that avenger has to be > tarmogoyf. It just has to be not the worst card in our deck (which is true).
Note... the only UU requirement I see is Force of Will, am I missing something?
Yep. Fathom seer needs 2 islands to work.Note... the only UU requirement I see is Force of Will, am I missing something?
Alright fair enough, I hadn't considered it as such. That seems a lot easier to manage then Serra Avengers cost though, also consdering the phase in the game where you usually start to consider casting Fathom Seer (that's purely from the videos and playing against it). Are you saying that the main reason - Avenger + Tarmogoyf won't work is because of Fathom Seer?
Avenger is one part of the reason. Needing UU in the deck is another, fathom seer is an absolutely critical card advantage engine, and helps to protect you from non-basic hate when needed. Yet another reason is that we run Jotun Grunt, and he eats goyf's food. Trying to run 3 colors in an 18 land manabase is another.
Avenger is superior in this deck IMO to goyf - being able to swing and still do work on defense is huge. This deck doesn't have enough straight-out removal to take care of every creature that hits the board, so you need to have creatures to protect you.
Having a flyer is also _very_ relevant in a number of matchups: v/tombstalker, moat, etc. Even when you strictly don't 'need' a flyer, that just means she's going to be bashing for 3 every turn, hopefully with a jitte in hand.
Tourney report time. I was a little hesitant to write this report, since I was really disappointed with my results vs landstill, but reports that didn't turn out absolutely perfect will hoepfully help people not make the same mistakes I did.
My buddy and I got there about a minute or two before the tourney started - I was originally set with a bye, but the guy running the tourney said I wouldn't have a bye, as he knew there was at least one or two more coming. This kinda struck me as odd, since he had just started the round.. but whatever. About 10 minutes into the round, another player showed up. I was paired against him.
31 players total.
Round 1 v Merfolk
I win the roll, on the play. I keep a questionable hand, largely because the guy said he was new at legacy. That was a mistake by me. He gets a vial down, I don't have the counter for it. He sticks another vial , and gets them set at two and three. He proceeds to get a million lords in play, and I only draw into two swords.
Game 2 - on the Play: I bring in my grunt out of the board (to hopefully win lord wars w/vial) in for a wayfarer. This match plays a lot more like NoGoyf typically does v Merfolk. Counter some of his relevant spells, swords a lord, and get Serra Avenger in for some over-the-top beats. He hits top-deck mode (holding a land or two in hand), and cannot draw into anything that can save him. At one point he sticks a Jitte, but I have my own to blow it up shortly after.
I notice we have less than 10 minutes in round after game two. Guy takes a long time shuffling (or maybe it just seemed like it since I knew time was limited).
Game 3 - On the draw. He starts up with a semi-agressive draw. He gets some early beats in, but I start to stabilize the board (serra avenger and friends). We hit time in the round, the guy running the tourney gives us like 2 minutes at most before he comes over and tells us to start the 5 turns. I protest, stating that he started us late and that we should get makeup time. He states that he gave us some extra time already. I could have protested further, but it would have been fruitless. We start into our 5 turns, and it's clear it's going to be draw - even though the folk player had lost control of the board at this point. Gets to turn five, can't deal the 15 or so damage in one turn I'd need to.
(0-0-1) (1-1-1 games)
Round 2 v 4c Landstill
I put him on landstill early on since he has a stack of solder tokens (actually, soldier ally tokens but whatever). He drew his first round as well. I overheard him talking to his buddy about his 'tempo' deck and how he was looking forward to playing it next week. Turns out he has most of nogoyf in the mail, so he's familiar with the deck. Not exactly what I was looking for. Ah well.
Game 1 - I win the toss, and I'm on the play. Stick an early mom, and follow up with an attempted fathom seer around turn 3 or 4. This meets a counter. I have FoW and a blue in hand, but I didn't think it was worth losing that much for a single Fathom Seer. Turns out I was wrong. The game goes long (like it tends to with landstill). I end up cracking three(!) of his standstills, and then I hit a glut of land in my deck. (seriously drew 5-6 lands in a row) I don't put up anything scary on the board, and he's got a few manlands to stop my mom from pinging. He eventually gets there with his man lands since I can't get any pressure established.
Game 2 - on the play (sided in auras, tutors, thorn, etc - notably, no yard hate save Grunt). I try to aggro and fail miserably. I remember at least one or two occasions I ok'd a spell that I actually had a counter for and wanted to cast. It's a problem I've had even back when I was playing merfolk, I tend to ok spells too quickly without thinking. I get wayfarer active, but he's got a Life from the Loam. The game ends much like the first, getting beaten down by manlands. In retrospect, (well, as soon as I saw LtfL) I really should have boarded in yard hate. Landstill normally runs at least crucible - that was just one of the many mistakes made.
I'm pretty disappointed with my performance so far, seriously consider dropping after round two. Decide to stick it out.
(0-1-1) (1-3-1 games)
Round 3 v Lands
Game 1 - Win the roll, on the play - I don't remember a ton about game one, but I remember wastelanding him a few times early. This keeps him on four land for quite a while. I beat down with mom and an unmorphed fathom seer for quite a while, that combined with his fetching gets him down in life. He drops a moat, to which I vial in an Avenger. He doesn't have an answer for my flier, and I win a few turns later.
Game 2 - On the draw - I don't get wayfarer active, but I get double wasteland very early and stall him out on lands again. Weenie beatdown, just like game one.
Seems like he maybe kept questionable hands. Hey, at least my die rolls are going my way tonight.
(1-1-1) (3-3-1 games)
Round 4 v Merfolk
Start talking with my opp (he said he had to desideboard from the last round still), he's 2-1 and wants me to ID with him.. says his breaks are pretty good (pretty sure getting paired down = good breaks, right? =P) I tell him, I'm pretty sure we should be 5 rounds so drawing right now wouldn't be a good idea (plus, I can't afford another draw). He asks the tourney guy, he says it's only 4 rounds. Annoying, since I might have a shot at sneaking into T8 with 5 rounds. 4 rounds with 31 players would take a miracle for me to T8 at 2-1-1. I tell him that I want to play it, because an ID would completely eliminate me.
Game 1 - Win the roll (all 4! my rolling skills are top knotch!) - on the play. Keep a solid hand, and get down strong board position early. He drops a merfolk. About 5-6 turns in, I've got a very solid board position, and he asks me what to do if he hadn't de-sideboarded from the last round. I tell him I'm honestly not sure, he asks tourney guy and he gets a game loss. It wasn't that he didn't desideboard, he had a 63 card deck going into round one, and a 12 card sideboard. That's why I _always_ pileshuffle once at the start of each match, losing like this sucks. (though given the board, it was pretty much inevitable anyways)
Game 2 - on the draw - He keeps a hand he isn't terribly satisfied with. I wasn't in love with my hand either, but it seemed good enough on the draw. He doesn't drop much more than a cursecatcher all game, as he's stuck at one land for quite a big portion of it. I get down avenger and start flying over for damage. Game ends pretty quickly once that starts.
He makes a comment after the game that it sucks that he had to drop the first game (which is true) because he has a favorable matchup against my deck (which is untrue). I just go with it, and wait for the T8 pairings - which I almost certainly won't be in due to it only being four rounds.
(2-1-1) (5-3-1 games)
Pairings go up, I'm not T8. Ended up taking 11th overall.
I feel like I could have done better had I not played so terribly v Landstill - but getting screwed out of 10 minutes of gametime round one and not playing the 5th round probably had something to do with my placing too. Oh well.
Also, I tried out Shapeshifter in place of White Orchid as a singleton in this deck, and didn't cast it once. The one time I could have, I was in a winning position anyways. The fathom seer combo seems like teh sex, and it was nice having a blue card instead of a white one in that slot for FoW, but it didn't really come into play. Kinda starting to seem like a 'win more' card unless you happen to be facing down one of the legendary creatures.
Last edited by stuckpixel; 02-27-2010 at 03:06 PM.
Hei,
Whilst playing the deck last week against a counter/top deck (which didn't take this deck really serious, but that's another thing;-)) I noticed how weak we are (or at least: I was) when CB + top hit the table ...
There is basically nothing we can play anymore ... or am i missing something?
I'll go watch the movies now, haven't had time to check those out yet (shame on me :( ...)
Thanks!
As stated CBTop is one of the thougher matchups.
Key here is an active vial or trying to stick a wayfarer very early and then wasting their manabase (cbtop tends to run 3-4c these days).
Also playing a bit laid back, always to keep island(s) open and waiting for them to try and make a move to get cb on board so you can pierce is the right play I guess.
I have to be guessing since I just played this deck on mws and not for 1-2 years.
(But then CB-Top wasn't that scary for me because pierce,daze & fow is more counter than they play what makes you win the counterware and negate their lock)
The inventor will most likely have more to say.
Team Legal Actions.
yeah correct, but once it hits, it's basically game over ...
anyway, just watched the video's on youtube, thanks for that!
Well, being a Solidarity player I can't pretend I didn't read this. Saying DnT is unwinnable with cannonist and mom is a great great fallacy... DnT is almost a bye matchup. If they assemble this combo all you have to do is a) counter the cannonist or b) wish for a rebuild and cast it the next turn (Sloidarity plays rebuild in the sideboard against chalice at 1 and 2 at the same time). Against a deck without any counter or way to stop this and a slow clock, this is an extremely thing to do.
I have to admit that I haven't tested the match up against UW tempo, but in paper it seems a favorable match up: its clock is relatively slow and doesn't play counterbalance. On the other hand, if they assemble this combo, then maybe its an unwinnable match up, all they have to do is keep a counter for the wish.
Other thing is the jotun grunt discusion. The jotun grunt is only a threat if it comes down very early and puts the solidarity player in a quick clock. If you give time to the solidarity player, Jotun grunt is just a joke. The times I have won with a academy ruins or jotun grunt in play with a stroke of genius are incontable.
P.D.: Sorry if this is a little of-topic, but as I said before, I can't pretend I didn't read some things...
I decided to sleeve up this deck since I got the parts in recently (except I'm running Arid Mesa instead of Windswept Heath) and I've already watched a few of the videos, so I'm doing a bit of goldfishing until I can play against some friends. One thing I'm having some trouble with is deciding when to mulligan or not. Considering the deck is pretty land light, a one-land hand might be OK, but it seems like it would only be good if there is a Weathered Wayfarer or Aether Vial in hand as well. What do you all tend to look for when deciding to keep or mulligan hands in general? I know the matchup has some bearing on this, too.
Last edited by Tychoides; 02-27-2010 at 03:50 PM. Reason: Grammar 4TW!
Yeah, there are so many possible hands and opponents that you probably have to practice. I very rarely ship one land hands. They need to be pretty much devoid of one-drops (or wasteland-only no vial) in order to warrant a ship, since on average you'll get less than 2 lands in your six anyway.
I'd start by keeping all your one-land hands and also playing a lot of games starting from six cards to get you a good idea of how much a mulligan hurts/how much only having one land hurts.
A lot of it will be using your head. If you just have like one blue spell (especially if it's Brainstorm), you can wait on casting it, and your fetchlands should just get the basic plains. Yeah, you can bluff Daze, but this is completely retarded. I tried to do this for a while, but the benefit is that he holds his bomb two drop one extra turn (like he casts Goyf instead of Sylvan Library, big whoop), and the potential downside is that you lose your only land and the game.
If you just use your head, play conservatively with respect to basics vs. non-basics (and if it's your only land, don't fetch it into probable stifle), you will almost never get punished for keeping a one-land hand.
Well, being a Solidarity player I can't pretend I didn't read this. Saying DnT is unwinnable with cannonist and mom is a great great fallacy... DnT is almost a bye matchup. If they assemble this combo all you have to do is a) counter the cannonist or b) wish for a rebuild and cast it the next turn (Sloidarity plays rebuild in the sideboard against chalice at 1 and 2 at the same time). Against a deck without any counter or way to stop this and a slow clock, this is an extremely thing to do.
I have to admit that I haven't tested the match up against UW tempo, but in paper it seems a favorable match up: its clock is relatively slow and doesn't play counterbalance. On the other hand, if they assemble this combo, then maybe its an unwinnable match up, all they have to do is keep a counter for the wish.
Other thing is the jotun grunt discusion. The jotun grunt is only a threat if it comes down very early and puts the solidarity player in a quick clock. If you give time to the solidarity player, Jotun grunt is just a joke. The times I have won with a academy ruins or jotun grunt in play with a stroke of genius are incontable.
P.D.: Sorry if this is a little of-topic, but as I said before, I can't pretend I didn't read some things...Excuse me if this was unclear. Its pretty obvious that you can play around one piece of hate. Game 1 is certainly a bye against DnT, but Game 2/3 depending on the board, they can play Orim's Chant in response to your Meditate and they might also have a Grunt out or Vial in True Believer in response. DnT is slow but it can certainly put on a fast clock via Grunt and my point was really that the game is 'basically unwinable' meaning its very very hard to play through the right amount of hate, unless your opponent can't put a clock on you. This was my point. Excuse the ambiguity.Oh hell no if you can filter through your deck for enough hate I'm done for. Solidarity isn't good enough to handle too many pieces of hate; no combo is.
Its the same case against UW Tempo. If Forbiddian can get Cannonist down with Force backup...and Grunt.. then the matchup becomes 'basically unwinable' unless he can't put a clock on me.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote