Yeah Duressing out Vial is super badass when you play first. Problem is, sometimes you don't play first, and then you're boned! When your Duress reveals a bunch of dudes and maybe some burn or just eats a Daze, you're starting out on the wrong foot. I do agree on Jitte as a 3-of though, since it's not nearly as effective against tribal once they have a few lords out.Originally Posted by bakofried
But you're right, in the end I didn't really play the Gate. If I would have had Deathmark instead of Swords, I would have been in much better shape against EoT Lackey and various Lords! And I could have played a Cabal Therapy and stared at the Persecutor in my hand when staring down two lords, a Lackey, and a Piledriver instead of dropping a 20/20 and winning the next turn! And I DEFINITELY still would have beaten Belcher with a well-timed Spinning Darkness instead of Canonist!
Edit:
Holy shit I forgot to mention my obvious error in not playing Dystopia ("the best card in the deck")! Man would it ever have bailed me out against Goblins, Dredge, Merfolk, Goblins, Merfolk, Reanimator, and Belcher! HOW COULD I BE SO CARELESS?!?!
I'm guessing he's trying to be sarcastic...
Super Bizarros Team. Beating everything with small green dudes and big waves.
Wow, dude, I thought Hollywood was a little snippy with me, too, but you're completely over the top. And the man deserves a little credit, I mean, he's the author of the deck we're tinkering with in this thread, isn't he?
That said, your last three posts are so over the top that they wrap around from being offensive to be hilarious.
3 Hexmage, 3 Depths, no Persecutor, no Cabals is not an equivalent card pool. 18 lands that give you mana isn't either. I'm sure that configuration was a nightmare for mulliganing.
Your points are not incorrect, but you're making them from the perspective of a different card pool than the one in this thread. That deck you played is Bw Hex/Depths. And yes, it does make a difference as far as advice goes.
Hollywood isn't just fucking around when he says the list is VERY TIGHT. We had 40+ posts discussing changing TWO CARDS (adding a swamp). Weren't you here for that? I didn't agree that the list was that precisely tuned at first, either, but it is.
We finally have your list, and a list of your matchups, but no report that I saw. At this point, though, you need advice from another thread.
Indeed, Hollywood spends x amount of time (more than anyone in this thread i guarantee) testing the deck and tweaking it to a point where he plays it fairly well and has top 8'd in sizable tournaments. Then people trot out "the deck is slow" when it turns out they played a different build, and then chastise the creator of the deck for deckbuilding choices without explaining with testing?Wow, dude, I thought Hollywood was a little snippy with me, too, but you're completely over the top. And the man deserves a little credit, I mean, he's the author of the deck we're tinkering with in this thread, isn't he?
That said, your last three posts are so over the top that they wrap around from being offensive to be hilarious.
I'm not asking for advice, and I'm not saying my list is the perfect example of black control, or that it's any better than Hollywood's. I am saying that the general strategy does not work as well as some would suggest. There is not enough removal to match dedicated aggro decks, and not enough aggro to overwhelm control. You just have to hope that your discard hits enough relavent stuff in every matchup to make up for the rest of the deck sitting on the fence between between control and aggro and not really being stellar at either.
Hollywood decries Deed because it's reactive instead of proactive....the whole fucking deck is reactive! You let them do whatever they want during their turn, then try to clean up the mess during your turn, hoping you can keep up until they run out of steam. It's rope-a-dope, but while you protect yourself and slowly build your board, you eat away at your own life total with Bobs and Bitterblossoms. Then all it takes is some well-placed removal and a few swings to finish you off. Call it control if you want, but real control decks do not give their opponents nearly as much freedom as this one does.
Just look at the numbers! The format's premier aggro decks run 20+ creatures to your 12 removal spells, 8 of which don't target. Dedicated blue control decks run 12+ counters, with 8 or more removal spells on top of that, to your ~16 creatures (plus their removal often hits lots of stuff at once like Firespout and Wrath). Even Zoo has enough removal to deal with every creature in the deck! Hell, even with my crappy Zoo list that lacks Chain Lightnings and goyfs, I was still able to beat the Gate when I proxied up Hollywood's exact list. From the Zoo point of view, you just do what you do against other control decks: keep dropping threats, get them into burn range, win.
In the end though, I'm just tired of seeing Hollywood act like a condescending prick to anyone that questions the deck or his choices. Yes, the list is extremely tight. It has been thoroughly optimized to be mediocre against two of the major archetypes, and roll over and stick it's ass in the air for the third. Congratulations, get over yourself. To be fair though, if he gets first in that Jupiter-sponsored championships whatnot, I will personally mail you all my extra Chub Toads, and a one dollar bill altered to make it look like Washington is smoking a huge pole (I can make this alteration to the Chub Toads too for twenty American dollars).
P.S. - I only had to mulligan twice the entire day due to not having enough lands, but thanks for your assumption!
Well, e-peens aside, all of the decks in this thread seem to take that tack. You splash white for StP and Vindicate. I splash green for Deed and Grip. The debate is really just about what form of removal makes the cut in this deck, isnt it? No matter what you play, you're out to establish control before rolling out your own threats.
Thats not totally fair; having creatures in the deck does not mean you see them. Bob is a more efficient draw engine than, say, Standstill, and you're making them discard their gas as you go. Once Zoo truly is out-drawing you with creatures, you likely have BB or Persecutor on-line, and it's not a big deal if a 4/5 goyf sticks around. I'm not sayin' you're wrong exactly, but there's parts of The Gate that I think are designed to account for opponents with greater threat density.
I took some acetone and made Jace, the Chub Toad. I could use more.
Regarding the sideboard:
I hate dystopia. Sorry, but i freaking hate it. The only matchup that iŽd take the life-raping drawback this card has, is enchantress/solidarity. Its so freaking amazing how many life this card consumes.
Basically, when u board it in, you play it turn3. That means on Turn 6 it costed you 6 life allready and all that follows afterwards equals death.
In a control'ish deck like the gate, with Bitterblossom and Dark Confidant it is just not that good imo. I tested it out several times now and often i found myself not beeing able to balance the loss of life by gaining life with Jitte and Nighthawk. Its straight forward stupid. All your opponent has to do when you drop dystopia is to get rid of your jitte, then watch while you get eaten by your own card. The main problem is that i cant get rid of dystopia myself. Even when you took the board over and are about to win, it still eats life like hell....
I
srsly
hate
dystopia
I know that its the only answer to all those enchantments that Staxx and Solidarity play....and that will stay the matches that i will board it in. But It is suicide versus zoo, g/w aggro and loam -> screw this card in any aggro matchup!
You do realize you can just choose not to pay Dystopia's upkeep and let it die, right?
I am a freaking idiot.....o m f g
This belongs on ibash or something .... (mtgbash should be invented)
You are totally right.
Damn, playing magic for like over 12 years and i never thought of this....man im ashamed of myself :D
Back @ Topic:
Would you see an option to integrate SenseiŽs Divining Top in this list? I feel like it would be a great addition to Dark Confidant and since ur sorcery speed anyway with most of what you got, why not use their turn to dive a bit into you library :) ?
I think a 2off would improve this deck, but i seriously dont know what to cut. My first thought was to cut 1 Deathmark and 1 Hymn to tourach, but that "cutting hymn" part really is not where it should go on second thought...
Dear folks, at the moment i'am playing the gate and testing the follow sideboard suggested by hollywood (4 spinning dark, 3 faerie, 3 soul sipkes, 3 dystopia, 2 sword of light and shadow). Just some thoughts: against cemitery, i tried 4 planar voids and i have found that they work very well against dredge and loam, besides the fact that they simple makes tarmogoyfs, reliquaries and lavamancers useless. The problem is that they decrease the power and effectiveness of therapies.
Regarding the matchs against goblins: i think one problem agaisnt this deck is duress. Besides a vial or a werring weird we can do nothing to this deck with duress. Just a thought: considering we have therapies that can catch almost everything, can be good to replace duress with inquisiton of kozilek to reinforce the gate against goblins and elves.
At the moment i play this list: http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=36578
At least, i love the deck and i feel it is very flexible to any environment.
I thought of the same thing really. But with this deck is it so important to get creatures? There are tons of removals to take care of normal threats. What does Duress take that Inquisition can't? And vice-versa obviously.. By this I mean important targets..
P.S. @ Hollywood: Is the Sideboard posted in the opening the one you are currently testing?
Team Stimato
He told you a foil from Time Spiral was Summer?
This man must be a Jedi.
Duress can handle FoW, Moat and Planeswalker just name a few....
I at first was also mistaken, but Duress clearly is better here, cause of the removal you have for creatures anyway.
@Planar Void: They remove your Therapies, thats why i would not play them. I think flashbacking Therapy is way too important :) Besided you have FaeryMacabre or Leyline of the void as other Options that work just as well and dont "hate" your own graveyard ;)
What i ask myself at the moment is, if Extirpate may be an option regarding graveyard hate (instead of Faery or Leyline).
Some facts why i think about this card at the moment:
+It costs 1 mana, which is acceptable
+It has Splitsecond, so there cant be any tricks to get around it, it will resolve :)
+It (obviously) removes any nonbasicland card, which means you could even remove a dual that u have destroyed with a wasteland, maybe cutting him of a color - this ofc is just mindmagic, but the more options the better ;)
+It synergizes with your discard.
+It has instant speed
+/-It doesnt affect the board, but it at least affects the ongoing play in the way that your "problem" you target it on is gone entirely
-It sure is not as fast as the Leyline or the Faery. It costs one mana (y in comparision this is a downside)
Any 1 has tested Extirpate yet?
The biggest thing that Duress grabs that Inquisition doesn't take is Force of Will. Humility and other rare 4 cost spells (Armageddon, Smokestack) are in there too, but much rarer to see. I guess Jace would be another one, but the deck runs plenty of creatures to deal with Jace.
Inquisition grabs pretty much everything else that's relevant (I've been testing it in Eva Green and have been pretty happy with it).
I think that Extirpate deserves 4 slots in the SB of this deck. It can screw opponent's plans and is crucial in some MU's, not just Loam or Dredge. It's also great against Jace Control. This said I would also try and fit 2 other GY slots, possibly Crypt or Trap. Probably Crypt though. I'm not sure that Faerie is enough against dredge..
Team Stimato
He told you a foil from Time Spiral was Summer?
This man must be a Jedi.
I too run IoK, but just for the fact that it's dead less often. It can grab two of the most problematic cards: Counterbalance and Goblin Lackey.
On the other hand, Duress does the same with 'balance and Jace (who, by the way, can bounce creatures!)
So I'm strongly considering to go back to Duress... and everytime I'm there, I wish it was Inquisition far too often.
At Humility... Jitte and Sword still make your creatures a threat.
Doesn't Thoughtseize get all of those? Jace, Lackey, FoW, Humility, CB, Top, etc...
Duress is the right choice. Unlike Hollywood, I'm not convinced we don't need a sweeper, for blowouts. But if Gobs & Fish are the real issue, I've always liked Sword of Fire & Ice better than the Light & Shadow, as a card, anyway... /shrug.
You know, you say that, and you throw around little tidbits of information when it suits you, but you haven't posted a tournament report, so we're left guessing why you performed so badly.
Nobody has anything to say about SenseiŽs Divining Top, yet ?
:(
@Extirpate
Has any 1 tested it and can say something where its better/worse than McFae or Leyline? at Pippo: yeah, thats what caught my attention in extirpate too :)
I think Top could be nice actually. Fixing your draws, revealing less damage with Bob, keeping Jace from fatesealing you out of the game, and occasionally grabbing the 1 extra card you need off the top to stabilize. It's something I might take a look at but I'm not happy with having to cut anything after agonizing about getting 1 more Swamp. A couple copies are promising enough to test.
Clearly Extripate would be at it's best against Madness or Loam control. That is, any deck where the game may hinge on 1 specific card in the yard. I'll be giving it a play-test sometime as I'm not convinced it's better than Faerie in those spots.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote