I don't know, but the meta seems to be full of FoW's. If you are on the play, in order to prevent losing to a counter, you must have at least: 2 lands (one for the first turn, and another to play around daze next turn), 2 discard outlets and a dredger. That seems a bit hard to me.
You can just DDD once or twice in order to get a dredger in your GY before start casting spells, and I am not sure if this is "too slow". If you chose to play, and in your opening hand you have only 1 discard outlet, or get Dazed on turn 2, you lost.
Just to be clear, my opinion is: If you don't know what deck your opponent is playing, you should probably choose to draw. Of course in several occasions you've already seen your opponent playing, and them, you can safely be on the play.
@Careful Study: Yes Izor, you are right, i'd rather cut the 4th Ichorid before it.
Dread Returning a Grave Troll won't win you as many games as Iona, Zealot or Elesh Norn.
Originally Posted by Koby
Follow me on Twitter @RaNDoMxGeSTuReS
Hey guys, this is Ryan Daly. I haven't had a chance to really comment on here yet, but was just going to jump in for a quick blurb here on the main deck dread return targets because this is something that I have really gone back and forth on. Usually, I would agree that they are not necessary, but I anticipated a faster metagame, with a lot of AnT, goblins, zoo ect. The Sphinx/Zealot combo won me a lot of games in the early rounds against the faster decks I played, like zoo and burn. In fact, I probably would have lost game one in the quarterfinals to burn had the zealot been a grave-troll. In a slower metagame, I would have definitely would have nixed the MD dread return targets.
As for the DDD vs. taking the play argument, my decision came down to the same principles as the main deck Zealot. I felt the metagame would simply be too fast to allow me to DDD, and firestorm seemed like the perfect answer to that problem. It allowed me to get aggressive with the turn one discard outlet in game one without fear of counter magic. This allowed me to get the edge on the faster, more aggressive decks while also allowing me to get ahead on the control players.
When it comes down to it, I feel the both of those decisions come down to the current state of the meta. If it looks like a fast meta with lots of combo and agro, take the play. If it's a slower meta with a lot of control and tempo decks, go with the phantasmagorian DDD plan.
I a blue infested metagame it's perfectly viable to draw most of the time. In that case, I would definitely try Phantasmagorian in Tireless Tribes/Firestorms slots, because that card really makes the difference when DDDing. Even outside of manaless.
y metagame seems similar to yours and my list currently has Phantas as well. It works extraordinarily well.
@ dredgekid:
Congratz on your finish !
I guess if you expected such a fast metagame, your decision to run the FKZ package makes sense.
Still one question. Why did you not choose to draw against Alex in the top 4 for game 3? I feel that if you had started your Dredging on turn 3, instead of turn 5 or so, you would have been able to take it home. In your first feature match you also DDDed against a blue opponent and easily won despite mulling to 6 on the play iirc. What were your thoughts?
Thats why you run Firestorm.
This man is a truthspeaker! You deserve a beer - if you see me in Ghent, you may present yourself to me as The Speaker of Truths and I will buy you a beer of choice
First off, thank you Izor!
In hindsight, taking the draw would have been the correct play. Honestly, at that point I was just so mentally drained my brain wasn't exactly thinking 100 percent straight, as evident from all the punts in game 3.
In the feature match, DDD was the choice because my mull to 5 forced it. It was something like thug, troll, stinkweed, land, coliseum, which is too good of a hand to mull to four against an unknown opponent. I also kind of had a gut feeling he was playing some sort of blue deck like UW or BUG, so I just kind of went with it.
Last edited by dredgekid; 11-01-2011 at 10:00 AM. Reason: Forgot to thank him!
I'm pretty sure being on the play game 3 in this scenario is always correct because Alex could go turn 1 Thoughtseize into Surgical Extraction.
Being on the play with turn 1 Cabal Therapy for X card seems much stronger.
Follow me on Twitter @RaNDoMxGeSTuReS
@HokusSchmokus: Yes, of course my choice to play Firestorm main deck has to do with that, I just don't really think I can trust a hundred percent on Firestorm to be on the play every game. In my point of view, Firestorm is better than Phantasmagorian because it provides you a decent discard outlet while you are on the play, and Phantasmagorian kind of forces you to choose to draw.
I believe we can race any kind of aggro, even being on the draw, on game 1. Maybe against Combo we can't afford that decision.
I agree that we can race most aggro decks, but burn can just get there on turn 3. AnT is another one that is just a faster combo deck than us.
Yes, indeed combo is a tough matchup, but I don't think it's worth taking the play if don't know your opponent's deck, since taking the draw seems better against all kind of Control and Aggro decks.
PS: I am considering Burn as a combo deck, if you are playing against Sligh, things should be a little easier.
I only DDD when I am really certain my discard outlet will get countered.
Why give decks that have a chance against us like maverick and burn and easier time with an extra turn?
Might as well go play manaless dredge if you want to DDD every game.
I think Mental Misstep still has you conditioned.
Yeah, maybe I am still shocked by Mental Misstep, but If you choose to play, and open a hand with only 1 discard outlet, and it gets countered, you lost.
With the meta full of blue, I am very concerned in taking the play every single G1. Therefore, Maverick can't rush us on game 1, actually, no aggro can do it, and if you take the draw, and see a Savannah (for example) you can simply play your dork.
But I got your point, having PImp, Study, Therapy and Firestorm (uncounterable) you got to be very unlucky to get stuck on first turn.
I was testing today against Merfolk, and still not get a conclusion about choosing to play or draw. If they come with no Vial, is nice to be on the draw, but if they do have a Vial, DDD is just too slow.
1 Discard outlet in hand? You're playing pImp, Tribe, Cabal Therapy, Careful Study, and in extreme cases breakthrough. The chances that you don't have a combination of these cards in your opening hand is unlikely. Unless of course you've mulled down to 4 or something in which case you have to take what you get.
I almost always choose to be on the play. I don't want to give my opponents any breathing room. Much like Ryan I currently play the Sphinx/Zealot package as my maindeck DR targets because the meta out here in Los Angeles is combo oriented and I need the speed. I want to win on turn 2, not waste my time making 13 zombies and one fat troll on turn 3 and then passing the turn... I don't want to give them the chance to rip off the top. I want them dead on the spot. Thats my opinion anyway.
What I will take from this is the opportunity to try out main deck Firestorm. I will probably settle on Ryan's list for SCG Open Vegas just switching up the sideboard for my own preferences.
The point is: you are going to face blue decks most of the times (right?), and to be consistent, you must have 2 discard outlets (one to get countered, and another to actually discard). That's why I wonder if being on the draw can be a viable option.
If your meta is Combo-directioned, of course you want to be on the play, and by the way, that's why you want speed, in the shape of FKZ package. That makes a lot of sense, but I'm afraid it can't be generalized. In a random meta, would you play FKZ package and take the play every single game? That's my point.
Being on the play against combo is a double edged knife. While it's obvious that the only chance we got of going off before they play their second turn, arguably enough for them to win against unprotected decks like ours, our chance of getting a good hand is smaller.
With a regular list (11 rainbow, 4 coliseum, 12 dredgers, 4 careful, 4 breakthrough, 8 discard + 4 CT), aiming for Land + Discard + Dredger + Draw spell, we have 40% of having it. This chance doesn't get much better with -1 tarnished, -1 careful, -1 dredger when featuring 2 maindeck DR targets with 3 DR, going down to 33,5%. If you mulligan looking for this hand (I wouldn't mulligan hands with GGT alone, but let's say we would mulligan any hand "without the combo") down to 4, this chance is 54,5% with the 2DR targets list. It gets better for the regular list, reaching 63%.
With discard EOT for the first dredger being an option, still being able to mull if you don't have it, the chance is WAY better, despite the fact that you won't ever be able to kill him before his turn 2, you still will combo before his turn 3 about 72% of the time with the regular list.
Now, you can choose to be anywhere from 54,5% of the time to 72% of the time, this is pretty much up to you. With the first, you will combo before their second turn half of the time. With the second, you will only combo after their second turn, but 3/4 of the time.
And for the record, this is why siding out Lands or Dredgers to add WoC against combo is wrong. You reduce your chance to increase your chance, getting nothing out of a lot of slots. oO
If you fail to explain the reason behind your choice, technically, it's the wrong choice.
Zerk Thread -- Really, fun deck! ^^
What about cabal? it's a lifesaver against combo matchups... Just try to cabal their brains out before they can do anything. Otherwise you dont stand any chance imo.
3 ways to win imo:
1. Go fast with led
2. Cabal till they cry
3. Their stupid and/or unlucky
Yes, Cabal Therapy is awesome against them. If we manage to resolva two, we can usually slow them down a lot. If we manage three, we usually win.
I don't like DR targets main that much, but I definitely bring one or two in after boarding in order to maximize my chancess (mostly Iona + Hypnotist).
As of the whole 'always choose to draw and DDD' vs 'always choose to play and try to resolve my enablers', this is really matter of preference. However, one should definitely adapt to the strategy one likes by adjusting the list.
If you always want to play, you need 14-15 lands, 11 Dredgers and 8 discard outlets (4 PImp + 4 Tribe/Firestorm).
If you want to draw first, cut Tribe/Firestorm and add Phantasmagorian (a split of like 2-3 Phanta + 1-2 other is also viable). Also, definitely add Dredgers 12-13 and you can cut lands down to 13-14.
Which list is better depends on the metagame and preference. But there's still one misconception about the DDD list, or Hybrid list, or usual list with Phantasmagorian or whatever you call it. It's not straight up slower than the usual list. It just often doesn't go first against opponents you want to go first against (and that only if you don't know your opponent's deck, cause you can also just choose to play with hybrid). The key differences are:
1. Hybrid has a lower chance to assemble all it needs to go off if it's on the play (due to the lack of 4 discard outlets). The chance to have Gold Land, Dredger, discard outlet and draw effect is 33% for Usual vs 25% for hybrid.
2. Hybrid has a stronger DDD play because of Phantasmagorian.
However, DDDing on turn 1 with hybrid, activating a Phantasmagorian after the first Dredge and casting a draw spell off a land is just as fast as the usual list on the draw.
That being said, the two lists have some differences in their matchups:
Combo: Usual is better, because it always chooses to play. And that turn can make the difference
Slow Control: Hybrid is better because it's faster while DDDing.
Tempo: Hybrid is better because it doesn't fear Wasteland and tempo counters while Usual can be wrecked. Hybrid is still fast enough against the few creatures they have.
Aggro w/o FoW and Wasteland: Usual is better for the same reasons it's better against Combo.
Aggro with FoW/Wasteland: That's pretty even actually. While Hybrid can avoid Waste and counters it could be too slow against the aggro clock. On the other hand, while Usual is fast enough against their clock, it can be wrecked by Waste + counters.
So just choose whatever you like best I guess.
Just to set this straight, what do you call Hybrid? I call Hybrid the version with 'Gorian and SW, so I got confused there. It actually has a better chance of a hand with land + dredger + draw than any of the general lists trying land+discard+draw+dredger
And I wouldn't ever cut lands. Lands are the weak link. There's a reason why we take the shot of bolting ourselves with tarnished, and this reason is the fact that cutting lands is the second thing that reduces our chances the most, Careful Study being the first, since it's a swiss army knife.
Really, even in 'Gorian list, I go 11 gold lands now.
If you fail to explain the reason behind your choice, technically, it's the wrong choice.
Zerk Thread -- Really, fun deck! ^^
Yeah, it's pretty hard to find names for all those different variations. I used Hybrid for the deck Morrissey won the SCG Open with, just -4 Wraith +4 Putrid Imp. PImp is better than Wraith with Misstep gone, I think even Morrissey himself said he'd make that change nowadays.
And I'd love to play 11 gold lands in Hybrid if I had the slots.
Ah, ok. I call the list with SW as hybrid, and never got a name for the list with -4 sw and +4 pimp
I prefer SW over PImp. I think it's very good, great to dodge extraction or some artifact hates, and it helps a lot with Ichorids, being fast and then pitching for them.
I found the room I needed by removing Phantasmagorians. Bottom line, 'gorians work as dredgers for when you are dredging already, and I don't think more than 2 is needed. Also, I'm thinking about cutting a DR. DR is great, but in these DDD lists, where Ichorid puts harder work, it's less needed. But this change is still in test.
If you fail to explain the reason behind your choice, technically, it's the wrong choice.
Zerk Thread -- Really, fun deck! ^^
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
