Will Stompy Ever Get There?

[arebennian]

Reading the below by ivanpei got me thinking...

With the printing of Mental Misstep, Chalice Stompy decks will definitely be pretty effective at taking down Misstep Running decks (+ 4 dead cards). Dragon Stompy and Faerie Stompy are all pretty well established decks. I feel that these decks have some consistency issues like all Stompy decks do. If you deal with the lock pieces, the deck ends up being a bad Equipment Stompy deck. There are simply too few game ending/swinging threats in those colours.
....
...
..
.
, but I think that Elspeth + Baneslayer >> Gathan Raiders, Rakdos Pit Dragon, Sea Drake, Serendib Efreet. Power Creep has really weakened previously powerful creatures as modern monsters like KOTR, Stalker and Goyf are just plain bigger.

http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...-Brainstorming


Despite Drew Levin's attempts to promote Stompy decks of all colours about a month ago (and make some more cash for SCG) only one has placed in the top 8 of the SCG open series (and that was a breakout deck: Meandeck MUD).

Are the reasons listed above by ivanpei the real reason Stompy decks are not getting the job done and remain Tier 2-3? And will the unpredictable mana always keep them from hitting top 8s, or will it just require something printed (personally, I doubt that card is Mental Misstep)? Another lock piece or creature perhaps?

[Barook]

Are the reasons listed above by ivanpei the real reason Stompy decks are not getting the job done and remain Tier 2-3? And will the unpredictable mana always keep them from hitting top 8s, or will it just require something printed (personally, I doubt that card is Mental Misstep)? Another lock piece or creature perhaps?

Stompy's main problem is its consistency. You would need to print cards that fit into the theme and increase the consistency.

Otherwise, they'll always stay glass cannons.

[GGoober]

Stompy's main problem is its consistency. You would need to print cards that fit into the theme and increase the consistency.

Otherwise, they'll always stay glass cannons.

This is the reason why Stompy can never be truly successful in bigger tournaments. The whole basis on playing out bombs like Trinisphere/Chalice/Blood Moon before being able to safely beat for the win is the reason that Stompy is successful and failing.

There are 3 big reasons that I have experienced where Stompy fails:
1) Consistency: If lists are too focused on winning on the back of Chalice/Trinisphere/Blood Moon, they can only succeed if these lockpieces resolve. If they don't resolve, you are playing a terrible deck with terrible creatures. If they do resolve, you have to win before your opponents get out of the lock i.e. hit 3 lands under Trinisphere, hit a basic land under Blood Moon (this is one big reason I had when playing Dragon/Green stompy). Both situations are quite easy to get out of these days (Noble Hierarch, Aether Vial, higher basics/fetches, FoW). My honest opinion that Stompy can improve consistency is to be less focused on the bomb approach, and play spells that are actually 'good' (parenthesis because stompy spells aren't technically good without a Stompy manabase i.e. the cards are inherently very cost inefficient unless the Stompy manabase is factored in).

2) Losing to critical spells: What I mean by this is: Stompy is fundamentally a deck that relies on its opening hands. It rarely has filtering and draw, and the biggest part to maintaining good draws is deck design (if you're interested in deck design to reduces dead draws and increasing synergy and consistency, feel free to take a look at Steel stompy because the deck design of Steel stompy is from an entirely different philosophy than other Stompy deck). Irregardless, Stompy decks going second on the draw is terrible for most cases. Your opponents will have a turn advantage to answer the threats you intend to lock them out (Pierce/Snare for turn 1 Chalice). If you kept a hand that folds to one wasteland, you will get wrecked if they do waste you. Stompy loses a lot to a critical answer spell from an opponent, and I feel that most Stompy failures are due to 2 reasons:

- Deck design in being too reliant on one strategy that if answered, the deck completely folds
- Not mulliganing correctly. Not only do you need to consider the strong opening hand you start off, but you also need to consider whether this hand loses if my opponents duress/FoW/Wasteland/Pridemage me etc, which leads to point 3

3) Mulligans in Stompy: mulliganing in Stompy sucks. Firstly, I am now convinced that I cannot keep a hand without a mana acceleration (by Sol-lands and moxens) because if you kept a hand that goes land-go, you deserve to lose. Your entire deck is based on disruption on the first turn, followed by a lot of spells thrown out to capitalize on the tempo. However, mulliganing in Stompy also sucks, because the more you mulligan, the more inconsistent you risk another hand. This is the bane of Stompy: You have to have strong starts/hands, but you have to risk mulligans to getting them. However, I would say that with more aggressive/correct mulligans recently, I've been able to do much better than before (even with 5-6 card hands). I feel that the mulligan issue in Stompy is relieved to some extent if you designed your deck to be less bent on an all-in approach. Once again, if you would like to read more into my take on this issue, Steel Stompy is a good place to check out how the deck was built with its fundamental principles on relieving these issues.

And I'll tell you this: even if MM becomes dominant in Legacy for the next year or so while the meta adapts, it's not going to mean that Stompy is an ideal deck to play. It definitely becomes better since most decks are focused on fighting each other and tending to ignore Stompy, but Stompy's main problems are not really from what an opponent is playing (obviously more 1cmc spells, more duals is better for Stompy to stomp on), but rather, Stompy's main problems come from itself, the deck design, which is associated with opponents playing critical spells that destroy your entire hand/strategy, or the mulligans you suffer from.

And I've read Levine's articles on Stompy that he spanned out in 2 consecutive weeks. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with his articles, but there's always something wrong when someone goes "Stompy is the best deck to play right now, this deck stomps on so many things, it has broken starts with turn 1 blah blah". All these are cool stories that are logically correct, but never once did these articles address the heart of the subject, on why turn 1 plays in Stompy are good, yet is a weakness itself because the entire archetype is too reliant on these plays which it is most susceptible to when answered. I'm a Stompy addict and it was the first deck I started out with 3-4 years back when I got into the format. I took a LONG ass break from it, had to re-evaluate the entire archetype from scratch for over half a year when I got interested in the archetype again. Now, I still face the same old problems, but they're in some ways relieved with a less bomby approach, and an approach focused on constantly building up disruption and pressure.

[mchainmail]

The other thing is most people that play these decks are just terrible, creating an awkward feedback loop of the deck being "bad."

[overpowered]

However, mulliganing in Stompy also sucks, because the more you mulligan, the more inconsistent you risk another hand. This is the bane of Stompy: You have to have strong starts/hands, but you have to risk mulligans to getting them. However, I would say that with more aggressive/correct mulligans recently, I've been able to do much better than before (even with 5-6 card hands). .

I completely agree with the majority of your arguments for/against the stompy archetype. One problem that I find in most stompy/prison builds for decks is that I am constantly trying not to lose rather than proactively winning the game. Capitalizing on tempo gained is harder than it may seem. If your first turn is Ancient Tomb into CoTV, you need to follow that up with a threat, otherwise your gameplan may well be dissolved by a Quasali Pridemage off a GSZ.

The quoted text is one of the biggest issues I have with most people in Legacy. If your deck has a 15% or below chance to win with the 7 cards you've drawn, mulling to 6 or 5 actually can INCREASE your chance to win. (e.g. One land and 6 one drops vs a Chalice aggro deck should be mulled). I'm glad you addressed that issue.

[GGoober]

I completely agree with the majority of your arguments for/against the stompy archetype. One problem that I find in most stompy/prison builds for decks is that I am constantly trying not to lose rather than proactively winning the game. Capitalizing on tempo gained is harder than it may seem. If your first turn is Ancient Tomb into CoTV, you need to follow that up with a threat, otherwise your gameplan may well be dissolved by a Quasali Pridemage off a GSZ.

Exactly this. This is also a reason why I feel Stax is an even worse deck than Stompy. Nothing's wrong with the Stax archetype, but in Legacy, where bulk of your opponents are applying threats in the form of creatures, Stax/Prison strategies are not as simple as Sphere effects. In Vintage, 1-2 spheres can shut your opponents down, but in Legacy, if they sneaked a Goyf in and you have 10 spheres, you're still going to lose. This is why Stax is a weaker archetype in Legacy than it is in Vintage (putting Workshops and other cards aside). It's also a reason why I tend to build my Stompy decks towards more aggression than prison. Because you want to be able to always follow up with a threat rather than sit back and draw them while giving your opponents time to get out of the lock. Don't forget that your opponents are playing 'better' cards (i.e. cost-efficient cards that are universally good in the format), and will be able to break out of the temporal lock you created.

It's also this reason where I've come to love Lodestone Golem in Stompy decks, however, not many Stompy decks can afford golem because they are running Chrome Moxes. It's a BIG beater that has a little disruption effect on it. If you're going first and drop a turn 2 Golem, you will be creating tempo from the Sphere effect and the huge body. If they did remove it, then you've bought a removal spell and a turn (a little better than a 1-1), if they can't remove it (no removal or Chalice in play, then you're going to ride the Golem to a quick victory). Steel Stompy and Meandeck MUD are two decks that can play golem comfortably, while play Wastelands at the same time to try to maintain sustained locks. If you're looking to be on the aggression rather than always be on the defensive in a Stompy deck, you need to play aggressive cards. Stompy will fail as an archetype if you're focusing more on locks rather than beating down, for the same reason why stax loses in games where it seems to have sustained a lock but not long enough.

The quoted text is one of the biggest issues I have with most people in Legacy. If your deck has a 15% or below chance to win with the 7 cards you've drawn, mulling to 6 or 5 actually can INCREASE your chance to win. (e.g. One land and 6 one drops vs a Chalice aggro deck should be mulled). I'm glad you addressed that issue.

Mulliganing always sucks in Legacy, but what sucks more is looking at a weak 5,6,7-card hand that plays like Standard/Extended. Always ship a weak hand, and this is even more important in Stompy-ish deck. You cannot afford to give your opponents tempo and play out spells that wreck you.

[TheDarkshineKnight]

Really, Stompy just needs a good colorless source of card draw so as to make topdecking less of a bitch.

Also, I'm very tempted to try out Serum Powder. >_>

EDIT: You know, I'm thinking if we want to keep Stompy explosive but at the same time be consistent, then the only color that seems feasible to run is green since it has both mana accel and permanent card draw in the form of Sylvan library. Otherwise, yeah, the Steel Stompy route seems to be a bit more reasonable.

[Rico Suave]

The problem with Stompy is that its mana curve starts at 2 and not 1, yet its means of accelerating into 2 are unreliable at best.

[LostButSeeking]

Really, Stompy just needs a good colorless source of card draw so as to make topdecking less of a bitch.

Tezzeret's Gamble reads:
3::p:
Sorcery
Draw two cards, and then proliferate.

I was REALLY hoping for a draw two for :p:, but we can't get everything we want. As it is I don't think this is going to do it, but I thought it was worse pointing out. Nor is sorcerer's strongbox. *sigh*. My first legacy deck was dragon stompy and I loved it. Horrible deck, but I loved it anyway.

[Koby]

Is this a Legacy hand, or a Standard hand?

That applies to any deck in the format. Just like my 5 land hand in Elves was garbage, and needed to be mulligan'd.

[menace13]

Rico stated the major problem, Stompy would get somewhere IF it had Shops.

[Meekrab]

Also, I'm very tempted to try out Serum Powder. >_>

Don't do this. You never really want to keep a hand with it, so almost all of the time you open it you HAVE to use it, even if the other six cards are pretty good. What's the point?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

The things you lose by running a Chalice-centered deck are less than you gain. 1 is an important stop along the mana curve, but it's just one stop, and there's just a ton of cards that see constant play in Legacy (Pridemage, Vial, Cunning Wish amongst others) that just completely fuck up your day.

There may be a deck out there for Magus of the Moon, but I think Chalice has seen its heyday as a central card (although it's still a fine sideboard in certain decks; got absolutely wrecked by Merfolk boarding in Chalices last weekend.)

[(nameless one)]

What about MUD Stompy, that deck has a lot of potential. For an inconsistent list to make top 8 (let alone come 2nd). Its unfortunate that it did die on the finals by its bad mulligans.

Tezzeret's Gambit seems like the draw the deck needs, though theres already Thirst for Knowledge for that (though it does require the deck to splash blue). I have been tinkering with the deck. My version runs red (for Goblin Welder) and blue (for Fabricate).

So far, I have been happy with the list, though it does die to a lot of things. At least Dredge can still put up results even when faced with hate, this deck needs something (like a card advantage machine). Maybe Scrying Sheets and Snow Lands? (That was a joke)

[kusumoto]

I think what we need is another card a la Lodestone Golem. Something that is a lockpiece and a threat. That would be plenty for mono brown stompy to be fine. Consistency isn't an issue in colorless stompy/stax as much as the ability to lock them out and beat at the same time.

[socialite]

I've been having a lot of success with an updated build of Faerie Stompy (one of the better Stompy builds IMHO).

One of the biggest issues I had with the deck was the inability to actually keep a fast clock and offsetting the damage caused by Ancient Tomb and Serendib Efreet. We always needed something between Sword of Fire and Ice and Sword of Light and Shadow.

Sword of War and Peace solves this issue and turns every 1CC card trapped in the opponents hand into damage. In addition it, arguably, provides two of the best protection colors in Legacy.

Phyrexian Revoker solves a lot of one drops like Divining Top and Aether Vial that could be dropped on the play before you could drop Chalice as well as Pridemage which in my experience has been straight up obnoxious against Stompy builds. Revoker hits an obscene amount of cards in Legacy as well which is a huge plus while getting around Chalice of the Void unlike Pithing Needle. Body for equipment too!

For what it's worth my list for those looking to experiment with Stompy builds:

4 Mulldrifter
4 Pestermite
3 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Sea Drake
4 Serendib Efreet
4 Trinket Mage
4 Force of Will
3 Sword of War and Peace
3 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Engineered Explosives
4 Chalice of the Void
4 Chrome Mox
4 Ancient Tomb
4 City of Traitors
10 Island

Edit: Also don't actually spend time reading the Faerie Stompy thread (excluding the OP) as it's complete trash. One reason why this deck hasn't gotten there is because no one half decent actually takes it to events.

[(nameless one)]

I think what we need is another card a la Lodestone Golem. Something that is a lockpiece and a threat. That would be plenty for mono brown stompy to be fine. Consistency isn't an issue in colorless stompy/stax as much as the ability to lock them out and beat at the same time.

Wouldn't Sundering Titan fall under that category?

[Zork]

Sundering Titan is, but he also costs 8. MUD Stompy aside, few of these decks reliably get 8 mana.

Moreso than another piece of disruption or another broken threat, I feel stompy decks need more consistent manabases to really excel. Better Sol lands would be start, perhaps something like:

MUDy Sol
Land
T: Add 2. This mana can only be used to play colorless cards.

or

Sometimes Sol
T: Add 2. Play this ability only if this is the only land you control.
T: Add 1.

[Octopusman]

I have high hopes for Dragon Stompy. I'm waiting for it to function better without equipment or two drops. I think it will be better once the best version isn't a Hellbent version although some of the best beaters are the Hellbent ones (Gathan Raiders and Rakdos Pit-Dragon win games). It may take a while.

I would argue that Trinisphere has declined in effectiveness more than Chalice of the Void.

I'm desperate for a 2R card advantage+threat in one card or a better disruption creature. I may run Revoker for some of the reasons Ertai's Familiar mentioned but again, the only two drop I really want is Chalice for 1. I would love a sweeper+threat as I'm tired of relying on ratchet bomb(used to be powder keg) and, again, I don't like 2 drops in stompy.

Imo, the Moon Effects and Chalice are so strong with Dragon Stompy will be around for a while as a metagame deck. Aside from Goblins and Merfolk, I feel that the metagame is becoming more stompy friendly because people are starting to get more optimistic about their complex manabases again (I'm going to dust off my Stifles in other news).

Truth be told, it's only a matter of time before wizards accidentally prints some overpowered lock piece or creature card that is fantastic in Dragon Stompy. When this happens, people are going to be mad they didn't pick up their Ancient Tombs or City of Traitors when they were "cheap" (although City has been rising steadily for a while). All in all, it's still a pretty budget deck.

What's great about Dragon Stompy imo is its ability to just stumble into huge blowouts. I would argue that Magic is fun largely due to one's need to make a deck that can perform well against as many strategies as possible. Keeping things like moon and chalice effects in mind when designing decks is good for the format. It's still possible for a Dragon Stompy player to just get lucky and paired with decks who fold when their lands become mountains all day.

Stompy is a swingy, inconsistent, archetype (maybe MUD is changing this) and these kinds of decks appeal to certain kinds of people. Some would argue that this is why it will never be tier 1. They are probably right, but out of barely passable strategies, the archetype is likely one that can become a major contender if the right cards are printed. Stompy needs a card that just happens to fall into the theme like others have mentioned.

Who knows. It's fun to talk about though. I love stompy.

[ivanpei]

1) Consistency: If lists are too focused on winning on the back of Chalice/Trinisphere/Blood Moon, they can only succeed if these lockpieces resolve. If they don't resolve, you are playing a terrible deck with terrible creatures. If they do resolve, you have to win before your opponents get out of the lock i.e. hit 3 lands under Trinisphere, hit a basic land under Blood Moon (this is one big reason I had when playing Dragon/Green stompy). Both situations are quite easy to get out of these days (Noble Hierarch, Aether Vial, higher basics/fetches, FoW). My honest opinion that Stompy can improve consistency is to be less focused on the bomb approach, and play spells that are actually 'good' (parenthesis because stompy spells aren't technically good without a Stompy manabase i.e. the cards are inherently very cost inefficient unless the Stompy manabase is factored in).

I feel that this is the fundamental problem with Stompy decks. If your lock pieces are stopped/circumvented, you end up playing bad cards.deck. I mean who would play Gathan Raiders/Serendib/Sea Drake outside a stompy deck? That's why I'm putting alot of emphasis on a white based stompy deck. This is because White gives you alot of GOOD cards to play that you would still play without a stompy manabase:

Phyrexian Revoker (Obvious)
Porcelain Legionnaire (Would you play a 2 mana 3/1 First Striker? This card is deceptively good as it holds back kitties, folk and goblins + can be cast on T1 and insane with Equip)
Stoneforge Mystic
Oblivion Ring
Aven Mindcensor (WG decks still play this without stompy lands)
Elspeth
Baneslayer Angel (Rubin Zoo played this in extended)

All the above are perfectly playable outside of stompy decks and their power level matches their casting costs. Add Chalice and you have a pretty good stompy deck IMO. Here's what I posted on the Angel Stompy thread:

4 Revoker
4 Chalice
4 Legionnaire
4 Stoneforge
4 Mindcensor
4 Oring
1 Sofi
1 Jitte
2 Elspeth
3 Slayer
1 Batterskull

4 Mox Diamond
12 Plains
4 Waste
4 Tomb
4 City

Compare these cards to:
Gathan Raiders
Rakdos Pitdragon
Arc Slogger
Serendib Efreet
Cloud of Faeries
Pestermite
Sea Drake
Mulldrifter

Yeap, that's what I thought, I wouldn't play those either. Ideally white needs a "spirit guide" to be even more effective, but I can live with the recent goodies stompy has been given.