That deck looks pretty cool blacksmithy.
Have to admit, I'm not a fan of the triad either, it feels so clunky.
Have to admit, I'm not a fan of the triad either, it feels so clunky.
The Penny Pincher Cube (360)
- Thread starter Grillo_Parlante
- Start date
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Yeah that looks sweet.
Haven't really gotten to do much with triad in a game yet. But it should be a good grind card with the splicers, and thus far the format seems paced right where it can do some work
Haven't really gotten to do much with triad in a game yet. But it should be a good grind card with the splicers, and thus far the format seems paced right where it can do some work
I've always wanted to build a Triad EDH deck, but all my good blink targets are in an Athreos stax deck instead...
On topic, I think Triad will do work in splicers, but it is definitely slow. Feels like something that would be great against midrange, maybe? But it's really hard to evaluate anything in this cube since I haven't played it. It really comes down to whether you can spare mana and time for the fate counters.
On topic, I think Triad will do work in splicers, but it is definitely slow. Feels like something that would be great against midrange, maybe? But it's really hard to evaluate anything in this cube since I haven't played it. It really comes down to whether you can spare mana and time for the fate counters.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
So, got to draft with the new cards, pretty pleased with the results. I decided at the last moment to keep the second resounding wave in rather than run rescind, because resounding wave has been so much fun. I also am keeping the second sunscape familiar in rather than parallax wave, due to how healthy the familiar effects are for the enviornment. Temur Sabertooth didn't show up, but I still suspect it will eventually get banned when it does.
However, I think I've found the disruption package that I need, in the form of high impact discard: hypnotic specter, persecute, and nightmare void. Persecute in particular I found surprisingly pleasing as it is a legitimately skill testing card, given how many potential colors an opponent could be playing. In addition, there is the decision of whether you should just shoot it off, or wait until a return to hand effect has been used.
The power creatures from the original RGD were as wonderful as I had hoped, finally finding themselves in an environment tuned at a speed and power level where they could be legitimate powerhouses rather than modest spectators. Skeletal Vampire, in particular, got to be a reanimation target, whose bat tokens helped dread return out other reanimation targets, in a reanimator deck that felt just right in terms of speed, interactivity, and impact.
Primative Justice was also excellent, and I think it may even be first pick worthy. Its given me a lot to think about in terms of increasing the anti-artifact/enchantment count, as well as increasing the robustness of some of the removal. I'm still not sure where the line should be in terms of artifact/enchantment removal, but I could see running more 1 more terror effect (the non-artifact condition is super intersting), rift bolt, 1-2 more 3 damage pyroclasm effects, and the new -4 -4 black sorcery. Honestly, I could run bolt, but I feel its more interesting to have something else. I just feel like burn is better positioned at 2cc rather than 3cc, regardless of what the bonus off of the 3cc spell is.
Debating if artifact mass removal would be a good inclusion.
However, I think I've found the disruption package that I need, in the form of high impact discard: hypnotic specter, persecute, and nightmare void. Persecute in particular I found surprisingly pleasing as it is a legitimately skill testing card, given how many potential colors an opponent could be playing. In addition, there is the decision of whether you should just shoot it off, or wait until a return to hand effect has been used.
The power creatures from the original RGD were as wonderful as I had hoped, finally finding themselves in an environment tuned at a speed and power level where they could be legitimate powerhouses rather than modest spectators. Skeletal Vampire, in particular, got to be a reanimation target, whose bat tokens helped dread return out other reanimation targets, in a reanimator deck that felt just right in terms of speed, interactivity, and impact.
Primative Justice was also excellent, and I think it may even be first pick worthy. Its given me a lot to think about in terms of increasing the anti-artifact/enchantment count, as well as increasing the robustness of some of the removal. I'm still not sure where the line should be in terms of artifact/enchantment removal, but I could see running more 1 more terror effect (the non-artifact condition is super intersting), rift bolt, 1-2 more 3 damage pyroclasm effects, and the new -4 -4 black sorcery. Honestly, I could run bolt, but I feel its more interesting to have something else. I just feel like burn is better positioned at 2cc rather than 3cc, regardless of what the bonus off of the 3cc spell is.
Debating if artifact mass removal would be a good inclusion.
The discard cards sound fantastic, but I would keep an eye on hypnotic spectre though as might be very powerful in your cube. Possible feel ads with bouncelands and low land counts too.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Right now, I've been getting requests to expand on a few contours of the cube, now thats its really hitting its paces.
1. Removal upgrade. You can kind of see the start of this with the sulfurous blast, but basically pauper runs excellent removal that can be played around, and I can recreate that feel a little better I feel. In Pauper, for example, Electrickery is often a 2 mana instant speed wrath of god, but dosen't completely grief certain decks since it can be played around via vertical growth (or tempo proc. effects), which creates an interesting meta game relationship between aggro and control decks. Despite languish from magic orgins lookings very good, I think I don't want to run it quite yet, and keep red the mass removal color.
The reason is that I like the defintion this creates in control decks, with U/B decks focusing on reusing value spot removal to establish board dominace and card advantage, in a play pattern not disimilar from the 2006 U/B dralnu decks. Meanwhile, the U/R decks play more like traditional control, with board wipes (here pyroclasm effects), card draw, and the ability to break symmetry on those board wipes by running larger creatures (rather than running no creatures). U/W is more tempo focused, as it has access to white temp. proc. effects and blue counterspells, to disrupt an opponent and ride a few threats to victory.
2. Land Destruction. This is probably going to raise some eyebrows, and I would need to write a lot more as to why this is happening; however, the sum of it is that the format is being meta gamed more by my players. Since there are interested in attacking the format rather than playing out powerful spells that demand a response. Another way to phrase this is to draw distiction between metagame decks and assertive decks: my players are trying to design decks that are an answer to the format, rather than decks that simply wish to assert their will.
The assertive decks are decks largely focusing on a single strategic axis, that get wreaked off of disruption as a result, creating a feel bad. E.g. the all in graveyard deck that has its graveyard wiped out, the fragile storm combo deck that missed critical resources, the ramp deck that has a land blown up etc. This can even apply to more mainstream examples--like the control deck that has to hit four mana to wrath.
On the other hand, if we have more complex decks, functoning on multiple strategic axes (and if there is one thing that is clear at this point, its that this format is very good at producing adaptable decks), than land destruction is less ruining and just a reason for a deck to shift its strategic axis, creating an interesting textual shift in the flavor of the game.
Since there is archetype diversity (but not too much diversity: when you get to the point where the format is so diverse that there are no commonalities across decks, it becomes impossible to metagame) there is a lot of space to build meta decks. This is supported by a lot of things: interesting conditions on removal, prevelance of artifacts and bouncelands etc. Decks already have to be flexible, willing to attack the format rather than merely being assertive (with the exception of the combo decks I am experimenting with), and in that equation land destruction is hugely desirable. It does the following:
1. Adds complexity to the decision of how many colors to run.
2. How dependent you can be on bouncelands in terms of how you draft and design your deck.
3. How high you can afford to run your curve.
4. Encourages multiple strategic axes rather than a singular one.
It helps solidify a metagame relationship between decks that want to take advantage of these super powered mana sources, and decks that want to take advantage of that appeal. On the other hand, if my format's decks were more narrow and assertive, this would than be a diaster.
3. Enchantment/Artifact Removal. I'll admit I'm a little flummoxed here, since so many cube formats just run the barest artifact/enchantment kill pieces, as they are inheriently poisonous. In this format, they are excellent. I think I would ideally much rather than the cards be dual artifact/enchantment killers, for space efficency, but I could expand this section out tremendously. I probably want to have at least 1-2 more effects. Probably in white or red, and in red I could have them target artifacts or land. I was thinking of some mix of:
-------
Also, we had a few interesting decks last night:
Really sweet and well built deck. Marsh Flitter, skeletal vampire, and kessig cagebreakers all represent sources of tokens that can be used to flash back dread return. You can use dread return on vampire to both present a threat and setup for a follow up reanimation. The cagebreakers is a powerful source of pressure that can leveraged in this shell, as well as another potential reanimation target. It has evasive elements with wandering wolf, can play a fair midrange game, a value reanimation game, or can explosively cheat out a big ulamog's crusher.. If the crush play is disrupted, because of the bouncelands, it can just ramp the crusher out if it needs to. Thug and noxious revival give it a lot of control over the graveyard as an extension of the hand.
This is what I mean by decks that shift based on the texture of the game: this deck has a focused strategy on dredge-reanimation, but can shift with the texture of the game to the point where it neither needs to dredge or reanimate.
And in the same draft, approaching the graveyard from a different angle, is this goblins based aristocrate deck. Running smoothly on 14 lands (and probably could have gone down to 13, though I think that would be the limit), this deck was capable of making plays revolving around explosive bursts of damage, or could slowly grind out an advantage. Two Goblin bushwhacker, bloodthrone vampire, atog, okibi-gang shinobi, and persecute all provide perceived pressure to warp the game around. Angler, goblin bombardment, bloodthrone vampire, and scavanger provide a way to use expended resources. Meanwhile, a burn suite combined with spikeshot elder, executioner's capsule, young pyromancer, and nightscape familiar provide board control tools. Familiar also made the lower land count easier, and enabled super efficent plays (in conjunction with the delve cards) to get ahead on tempo out of nowhere.
Just a very explosive, adaptable aggro deck, with lots of strategic lines to go down, which made playing against it very challenging.
1. Removal upgrade. You can kind of see the start of this with the sulfurous blast, but basically pauper runs excellent removal that can be played around, and I can recreate that feel a little better I feel. In Pauper, for example, Electrickery is often a 2 mana instant speed wrath of god, but dosen't completely grief certain decks since it can be played around via vertical growth (or tempo proc. effects), which creates an interesting meta game relationship between aggro and control decks. Despite languish from magic orgins lookings very good, I think I don't want to run it quite yet, and keep red the mass removal color.
The reason is that I like the defintion this creates in control decks, with U/B decks focusing on reusing value spot removal to establish board dominace and card advantage, in a play pattern not disimilar from the 2006 U/B dralnu decks. Meanwhile, the U/R decks play more like traditional control, with board wipes (here pyroclasm effects), card draw, and the ability to break symmetry on those board wipes by running larger creatures (rather than running no creatures). U/W is more tempo focused, as it has access to white temp. proc. effects and blue counterspells, to disrupt an opponent and ride a few threats to victory.
2. Land Destruction. This is probably going to raise some eyebrows, and I would need to write a lot more as to why this is happening; however, the sum of it is that the format is being meta gamed more by my players. Since there are interested in attacking the format rather than playing out powerful spells that demand a response. Another way to phrase this is to draw distiction between metagame decks and assertive decks: my players are trying to design decks that are an answer to the format, rather than decks that simply wish to assert their will.
The assertive decks are decks largely focusing on a single strategic axis, that get wreaked off of disruption as a result, creating a feel bad. E.g. the all in graveyard deck that has its graveyard wiped out, the fragile storm combo deck that missed critical resources, the ramp deck that has a land blown up etc. This can even apply to more mainstream examples--like the control deck that has to hit four mana to wrath.
On the other hand, if we have more complex decks, functoning on multiple strategic axes (and if there is one thing that is clear at this point, its that this format is very good at producing adaptable decks), than land destruction is less ruining and just a reason for a deck to shift its strategic axis, creating an interesting textual shift in the flavor of the game.
Since there is archetype diversity (but not too much diversity: when you get to the point where the format is so diverse that there are no commonalities across decks, it becomes impossible to metagame) there is a lot of space to build meta decks. This is supported by a lot of things: interesting conditions on removal, prevelance of artifacts and bouncelands etc. Decks already have to be flexible, willing to attack the format rather than merely being assertive (with the exception of the combo decks I am experimenting with), and in that equation land destruction is hugely desirable. It does the following:
1. Adds complexity to the decision of how many colors to run.
2. How dependent you can be on bouncelands in terms of how you draft and design your deck.
3. How high you can afford to run your curve.
4. Encourages multiple strategic axes rather than a singular one.
It helps solidify a metagame relationship between decks that want to take advantage of these super powered mana sources, and decks that want to take advantage of that appeal. On the other hand, if my format's decks were more narrow and assertive, this would than be a diaster.
3. Enchantment/Artifact Removal. I'll admit I'm a little flummoxed here, since so many cube formats just run the barest artifact/enchantment kill pieces, as they are inheriently poisonous. In this format, they are excellent. I think I would ideally much rather than the cards be dual artifact/enchantment killers, for space efficency, but I could expand this section out tremendously. I probably want to have at least 1-2 more effects. Probably in white or red, and in red I could have them target artifacts or land. I was thinking of some mix of:
-------
Also, we had a few interesting decks last night:
Dredge-reanimator
| | | | | |
| |||||
| |||||
Really sweet and well built deck. Marsh Flitter, skeletal vampire, and kessig cagebreakers all represent sources of tokens that can be used to flash back dread return. You can use dread return on vampire to both present a threat and setup for a follow up reanimation. The cagebreakers is a powerful source of pressure that can leveraged in this shell, as well as another potential reanimation target. It has evasive elements with wandering wolf, can play a fair midrange game, a value reanimation game, or can explosively cheat out a big ulamog's crusher.. If the crush play is disrupted, because of the bouncelands, it can just ramp the crusher out if it needs to. Thug and noxious revival give it a lot of control over the graveyard as an extension of the hand.
This is what I mean by decks that shift based on the texture of the game: this deck has a focused strategy on dredge-reanimation, but can shift with the texture of the game to the point where it neither needs to dredge or reanimate.
Goblin Aristocrates
| | | |
| |||
| |||
And in the same draft, approaching the graveyard from a different angle, is this goblins based aristocrate deck. Running smoothly on 14 lands (and probably could have gone down to 13, though I think that would be the limit), this deck was capable of making plays revolving around explosive bursts of damage, or could slowly grind out an advantage. Two Goblin bushwhacker, bloodthrone vampire, atog, okibi-gang shinobi, and persecute all provide perceived pressure to warp the game around. Angler, goblin bombardment, bloodthrone vampire, and scavanger provide a way to use expended resources. Meanwhile, a burn suite combined with spikeshot elder, executioner's capsule, young pyromancer, and nightscape familiar provide board control tools. Familiar also made the lower land count easier, and enabled super efficent plays (in conjunction with the delve cards) to get ahead on tempo out of nowhere.
Just a very explosive, adaptable aggro deck, with lots of strategic lines to go down, which made playing against it very challenging.
In terms of artifact and enchantment removal, there's always Wear // Tear.
Reading your discussions about this cube makes me want to do an 8-man draft with it... any chance we could do that here on Riptide Lab?
Reading your discussions about this cube makes me want to do an 8-man draft with it... any chance we could do that here on Riptide Lab?
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
And also the old classic ancient grudge. Have to keep those cards in mind.
I'm game, would love to get some reactions now that I added some more juice.
I'm game, would love to get some reactions now that I added some more juice.
I could probably also be down for a draft
I would love to actually play a game with this cube considering how many times I have drafted it. Shame being in an awkward timezone might prevent me from doing so.
Also, speaking of adding spicy enchantment/artifact removal why not add the spiciest (and most awkward)?
in green.
I have fond memories of these cards:
Also, speaking of adding spicy enchantment/artifact removal why not add the spiciest (and most awkward)?
in green.
I have fond memories of these cards:
After the first few drafts, I feel the need to bring you some successful decklists:
The deck almost felt like a combo deck with the ability to do a ton of damage with Saproling Burst+Bushwhaker(or rather anything + Bushwhacker) or Saproling Burst + Sharpshooter. It went 4-0 dropping only one game in the process, which was eased by the fact that all the other decks were rather slow, I feel like players (including myself) are still adjusting to the new cube.
This other deck I wanted to share is one I drafted today in a 1 on 1 draft. It was heavily inspired by the UG post on the forums, it tempoed my opponent out pretty heavily returning a bounceland twice in a row and practically locking my opponent out of that game. (The other games very extremely close though.)
Moldervine Cloak was the lone, mvp representing tons of dmg in combination with the cheap flyers, I totally underestimated that card. The games usually went like this: I'm dropping 1-2 low drop creatures and start the beats while he is slowly developing his mana. In turn 3 or 4 he would usually have a dude that was bigger than my ground guys which ment that only the weakly flyers could attack(until I drew bigger dudes/bounce spells/Moldervine Cloak). Sadly enough I couldn't test the deck's potential against other faster/slower decks but it looks like it has some nice finishing moves with Somnophore/Saproling Burst and the mvp Moldervine Cloak (on a flyer). All in all it felt super weird and was a blast to play
4-0 Almost MonoR Goblins
| | | | |
| ||||
| ||||
The deck almost felt like a combo deck with the ability to do a ton of damage with Saproling Burst+Bushwhaker(or rather anything + Bushwhacker) or Saproling Burst + Sharpshooter. It went 4-0 dropping only one game in the process, which was eased by the fact that all the other decks were rather slow, I feel like players (including myself) are still adjusting to the new cube.
This other deck I wanted to share is one I drafted today in a 1 on 1 draft. It was heavily inspired by the UG post on the forums, it tempoed my opponent out pretty heavily returning a bounceland twice in a row and practically locking my opponent out of that game. (The other games very extremely close though.)
UG Tempo
| | | | |
| ||||
| ||||
Moldervine Cloak was the lone, mvp representing tons of dmg in combination with the cheap flyers, I totally underestimated that card. The games usually went like this: I'm dropping 1-2 low drop creatures and start the beats while he is slowly developing his mana. In turn 3 or 4 he would usually have a dude that was bigger than my ground guys which ment that only the weakly flyers could attack(until I drew bigger dudes/bounce spells/Moldervine Cloak). Sadly enough I couldn't test the deck's potential against other faster/slower decks but it looks like it has some nice finishing moves with Somnophore/Saproling Burst and the mvp Moldervine Cloak (on a flyer). All in all it felt super weird and was a blast to play
Did you like Stitched Drake?
I never got to cast it in the games we played but it looks quite solid in this deck as you can even cycle Cloud of Faeries to turn it on if need be. The biggest problem the deck had were the UU mana costs so that's basically the only thing that'd speak against it.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Both those decks look fantastic. That goblins deck is basically perfect, and that interaction between burst and bushwhacker is a new one for me (usually its comboed with fallen angel or death triggers). No one else was in red i see because wow! If you feel the waifs are too strong, dont forget you can go back to running the two goblins that were originally there. I feel the stronger waifs helps balance out some of the stronger midrange additions.
That deck is a perfect example though of multi dimensional aggro: combo, control, tempo (leverage that burst damage), and low CC aggression. Basically a model of what aggro decks could be.
Love the ug tempo deck. Moldervine cloak was a great card in rgd, but formats have really outpaced the card since its original run to the point it cant shine in most formats.
Putting it in a tempo list like this is brilliant, allowing you to generate the time needed for cloak to really take over the game. I also really like the way your blastoderm and cloud if faeries interect with ninja of the deep hours to generate tempo and mana advantage. There are also some slick plays here with mindshreiker, reclaim, and memory lapse. The double faeries to cycle to fuel stitched drake is great deck building.
That deck is a perfect example though of multi dimensional aggro: combo, control, tempo (leverage that burst damage), and low CC aggression. Basically a model of what aggro decks could be.
Love the ug tempo deck. Moldervine cloak was a great card in rgd, but formats have really outpaced the card since its original run to the point it cant shine in most formats.
Putting it in a tempo list like this is brilliant, allowing you to generate the time needed for cloak to really take over the game. I also really like the way your blastoderm and cloud if faeries interect with ninja of the deep hours to generate tempo and mana advantage. There are also some slick plays here with mindshreiker, reclaim, and memory lapse. The double faeries to cycle to fuel stitched drake is great deck building.
That's true, I was the only one drafting red and only moved in like 4 picks into the draft as it was wide open, I got pretty lucky with that deck though. Reckless Waif wasn't too problematic from my point of view although it did attack for 5 once. I think I'll give it a closer look in the next drafts, people are still adopting and trying out which strategies work and which don't. With all these midrangy value decks I also think it's pretty hard to evaluate those decks. That said they seem to have a much harder time adopting to the environment, do you have any tipps on how to change that? (Things that helped your group or something)
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
I think it helps to point out the ways bouncelands can change mana count in your decks, and that a good bounceland setup can go a long way towards addressing both mana and color screw. You can provide a similar explanation with the scry lands in regards to filtering. That made people feel good over here.
You could emphasis the importance of drafting a focused, constructed worthy deck. The format is essentially an uncondensed, interactive version of pauper, and the final decks should reflect that. Sometimes people will get too caught up in the different interactions, and produce something thats pulled in a few different contrasting directions, resulting in decks that collapses under the weight of their own contridictions.
This is from the first draft, and you can see that the interactions that this guy was going for aren't bad, but what is this deck's focus? There is a low cc aggressive goblins aggro plan awkwardly stitched with nightscape familiars to a higher cc midrange value reanimation plan. The ultimate problem is that you can draw the wrong portions of the deck at the wrong time, and each portion of the deck wants a different mana count. He would have games where he draw the low cc goblins portion, and than flooded out. If he draw the high cc portion of the deck, he basically could do nothing for forever, accept playing out goblin cards piecemeal, which are only impactful in a critical aggro mass. Or he would get color screwed because he is trying to greedly splash two colors, and one of the green cards is a card.
In those instances I usually just point out that the deck seems unfocused, maybe with a very brief explanation of why.
Honestly, having the bouncelands and scry lands helps a ton in teaching, because you always have the option of saying "you should have ran x lands with that many bouncelands, than you wouldn't have been color screwed/mana screwed etc." or "you should have ran more scry lands for filtering, because this deck is a bit too inconsistent." That way you can avoid theory discussions that they aren't interested in hearing anyways, and everything is just very concrete. If you can reduce negative variance without ever using the term negative variance that is a good thing.
You could try point out that you can't really power draft the format (usually too theoretical). Even the cards that push the power ceiling will struggle to take over the game on their own, and are extremely metaconscious. Temur sabertooth and jor kadeen, the prevailer are both perfect examples of that principle in action. The only card that can really play itself is skeletal vampire (that I can think of).
You could emphasis the importance of drafting a focused, constructed worthy deck. The format is essentially an uncondensed, interactive version of pauper, and the final decks should reflect that. Sometimes people will get too caught up in the different interactions, and produce something thats pulled in a few different contrasting directions, resulting in decks that collapses under the weight of their own contridictions.
Problem Deck
| | | | | |
| |||||
This is from the first draft, and you can see that the interactions that this guy was going for aren't bad, but what is this deck's focus? There is a low cc aggressive goblins aggro plan awkwardly stitched with nightscape familiars to a higher cc midrange value reanimation plan. The ultimate problem is that you can draw the wrong portions of the deck at the wrong time, and each portion of the deck wants a different mana count. He would have games where he draw the low cc goblins portion, and than flooded out. If he draw the high cc portion of the deck, he basically could do nothing for forever, accept playing out goblin cards piecemeal, which are only impactful in a critical aggro mass. Or he would get color screwed because he is trying to greedly splash two colors, and one of the green cards is a
card.In those instances I usually just point out that the deck seems unfocused, maybe with a very brief explanation of why.
Honestly, having the bouncelands and scry lands helps a ton in teaching, because you always have the option of saying "you should have ran x lands with that many bouncelands, than you wouldn't have been color screwed/mana screwed etc." or "you should have ran more scry lands for filtering, because this deck is a bit too inconsistent." That way you can avoid theory discussions that they aren't interested in hearing anyways, and everything is just very concrete. If you can reduce negative variance without ever using the term negative variance that is a good thing.
You could try point out that you can't really power draft the format (usually too theoretical). Even the cards that push the power ceiling will struggle to take over the game on their own, and are extremely metaconscious. Temur sabertooth and jor kadeen, the prevailer are both perfect examples of that principle in action. The only card that can really play itself is skeletal vampire (that I can think of).
So I guess it just took him some time, as he totally destroyed me with this aggro-control(!) deck yesterday:
At least against my Splicer Midrange deck it felt like this deck could switch from control to aggro in just one or two turns and just crushed me with an army of 3 power flyers that came out of nowhere. Voyager Staff was one of the MVP's removing blockers and killing golems all day long. Evincar's Justice also did a lot of work, killing most of my board and making him able to switch into aggro mode(as my threats weren't that threatening anymore). The deck might look like a bit of a pile but it played extremely well.
On this occasion I wanted to ask you about your opinion on the 4 mana black removal spells as they are very powerful and helped a deck of mine to go 3-0 in another draft. Maybe it was because people weren't prioritizing them highly enough but ending up with 3 of them felt pretty broken. (For the record I'm talking about Silence the Believers Consuming Vapors Sever the Bloodline and to a lesser extent Slaughter, the least problematic of them. The fact that they efficiently remove almost everything and given time or timing provide you with a very strong 2 for 1 make them one of the top picks in this cube in my opinion. Maybe replacing one of them with a weaker version of black exile removal (Gild?) could help in making black a bit less dominant. What's your experiecne with those removal spells?
UB Aggro-Control
| | | | | |
| |||||
| |||||
At least against my Splicer Midrange deck it felt like this deck could switch from control to aggro in just one or two turns and just crushed me with an army of 3 power flyers that came out of nowhere. Voyager Staff was one of the MVP's removing blockers and killing golems all day long. Evincar's Justice also did a lot of work, killing most of my board and making him able to switch into aggro mode(as my threats weren't that threatening anymore). The deck might look like a bit of a pile but it played extremely well.
On this occasion I wanted to ask you about your opinion on the 4 mana black removal spells as they are very powerful and helped a deck of mine to go 3-0 in another draft. Maybe it was because people weren't prioritizing them highly enough but ending up with 3 of them felt pretty broken. (For the record I'm talking about Silence the Believers Consuming Vapors Sever the Bloodline and to a lesser extent Slaughter, the least problematic of them. The fact that they efficiently remove almost everything and given time or timing provide you with a very strong 2 for 1 make them one of the top picks in this cube in my opinion. Maybe replacing one of them with a weaker version of black exile removal (Gild?) could help in making black a bit less dominant. What's your experiecne with those removal spells?
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I have never before hear someone describe 4-mana removal spells as broken...
It's possible that it was just the nature of the last draft but people weren't playing the fastest decks and if you have the time to cast these they certainly do work, especially against the slower midrange and control decks. If you can get to 7 mana in most of your games these spells can ruin a threat light midrange/control decks day
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Sure, if you can reach 7 mana these spells certainly pack a 2-for-1 punch, but that sounds more like a problem in your environment than a problem with your removal suite. It should be pretty easy to overload your deck with expensive removal spells with a sufficiently aggressive deck or a deck going wide with tokens I think? Though Evincar's Justice is gold in both scenario's.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
I would give the black removal spells more time. I expect this is just a matter of meta adjustment.
A low threat midrange deck seems poorly positioned against these sorts of control tools regardless, and should be struggling, as its effectively playing an inferior version of the answer decks own gameplan. To a slow threat light midrange deck (I'm guessing without much disruption?) that answer suite is effectively like playing against a 40 card four wrath deck, and is going to make the answers feel much more impactful than in other matchups.
Those control strategies need a lot of mana for them to start producing 2 for 1s and having their cards feel like actual wraths. Also, almost all of their answers have some sort of meta weakness built in:
1. Evincar's justice: overpriced pyroclasim at 4. Dosen't kill golems or other mid range threats. Terrible against vertical growth or sacrifice strategies.
2. Consuming vapors: completly blanked by any wide or sacrifice strategy, which also neuters its life gain.
3. Sever the bloodline: unconditional, but sorcery speed and requires you to take your turn off to cast each end of it.
4. Silence the believers: Very powerful, but requires 7 mana to 2 for 1 anything, and is slow as 4 mana as spot removal.
5. Slaughter: Can't hit black creatures, and requires a payment of life.
Threat light decks have their own ample set of meta tools to disrupt slow removal strategies, with cheap counters, temp hexproof, temp protection, blink, and increasingly impactful discard to punish players for sitting on spells. Their are also grindy recursive strategies that can make life difficult for answer decks.
If I were to cut one though, it would probably be silence, as it is the least interesting of the 5, but I don't think thats advisable. When you start seeing a pattern of answer based black decks dominating, thats when I would make a cut, but I would expect to see an uptick in aggro, and cheap disruption before that happens. Those control decks have some glaring weaknesses to exploit.
A low threat midrange deck seems poorly positioned against these sorts of control tools regardless, and should be struggling, as its effectively playing an inferior version of the answer decks own gameplan. To a slow threat light midrange deck (I'm guessing without much disruption?) that answer suite is effectively like playing against a 40 card four wrath deck, and is going to make the answers feel much more impactful than in other matchups.
Those control strategies need a lot of mana for them to start producing 2 for 1s and having their cards feel like actual wraths. Also, almost all of their answers have some sort of meta weakness built in:
1. Evincar's justice: overpriced pyroclasim at 4. Dosen't kill golems or other mid range threats. Terrible against vertical growth or sacrifice strategies.
2. Consuming vapors: completly blanked by any wide or sacrifice strategy, which also neuters its life gain.
3. Sever the bloodline: unconditional, but sorcery speed and requires you to take your turn off to cast each end of it.
4. Silence the believers: Very powerful, but requires 7 mana to 2 for 1 anything, and is slow as 4 mana as spot removal.
5. Slaughter: Can't hit black creatures, and requires a payment of life.
Threat light decks have their own ample set of meta tools to disrupt slow removal strategies, with cheap counters, temp hexproof, temp protection, blink, and increasingly impactful discard to punish players for sitting on spells. Their are also grindy recursive strategies that can make life difficult for answer decks.
If I were to cut one though, it would probably be silence, as it is the least interesting of the 5, but I don't think thats advisable. When you start seeing a pattern of answer based black decks dominating, thats when I would make a cut, but I would expect to see an uptick in aggro, and cheap disruption before that happens. Those control decks have some glaring weaknesses to exploit.
I agree, it's pobably just a question of people adjusting to the environment. That last draft had only one aggro player and he was stumbling on his 3 color mana base because he went back and forth between aggro and ramp in the draft process. I guess I'll have an eye on them and see how the meta evolves.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
I think easily the hardest thing for people to adjust to is the idea of having a competitive meta game. In the innistrad theme cube you could sort of free range that thing, while here you have to be meta conscious. I like the end product better ultimately, because the format has a great feel of balanced strategic depth, but figuring out those meta checks and balances naturally is going to conflict with johnny players looking For uninhibited expression, or timmy players that just want to power draft. Spike players should adjust very quickly.
Our timmies actually adjusted rather fast (which surprised me), but its taken over a month for our resident johnny extrodinare to figure out how far he can push the line. That problem deck i posted was one of his, and you can see the single minded focus on creative complexity and vision that gets him in trouble (though tends to Inspire other drafters). Hes doing fine now, but i think the idea of having to respect and anticipate other peoples strategies, rather than just asserting his own, took a while to get used to. there was a period there where i think he was stubbornly fighting against that, and he lost a lot.
Its an interesting discussion though on game complexity and learning curve vs having an ultimately deeper strategic environment.
But yeah, answes tend to be the weakest part of most cubes, since you just have to ask the right question to beat them. All of these have limitations, which leads me to believe that people just arent asking good questions. If your players are wrapping themselves in a midrange security blanket, it might even be a big mistake to cut them, as they let people feed on that strategy, eventually inspiring a meta change. If they all gravitate towards control ramp, that creates a window for aggro decks. Alt. actual dedicated midrange pilots might adapt by experimenting with disruptive tools. That sort of meta dynamic is what i love.
Our timmies actually adjusted rather fast (which surprised me), but its taken over a month for our resident johnny extrodinare to figure out how far he can push the line. That problem deck i posted was one of his, and you can see the single minded focus on creative complexity and vision that gets him in trouble (though tends to Inspire other drafters). Hes doing fine now, but i think the idea of having to respect and anticipate other peoples strategies, rather than just asserting his own, took a while to get used to. there was a period there where i think he was stubbornly fighting against that, and he lost a lot.
Its an interesting discussion though on game complexity and learning curve vs having an ultimately deeper strategic environment.
But yeah, answes tend to be the weakest part of most cubes, since you just have to ask the right question to beat them. All of these have limitations, which leads me to believe that people just arent asking good questions. If your players are wrapping themselves in a midrange security blanket, it might even be a big mistake to cut them, as they let people feed on that strategy, eventually inspiring a meta change. If they all gravitate towards control ramp, that creates a window for aggro decks. Alt. actual dedicated midrange pilots might adapt by experimenting with disruptive tools. That sort of meta dynamic is what i love.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Hey, got a PM asking me a few questions, and wanted to make a general response as it touched upon some data that might be relevant for people picking cards for their own cube.
1. Namely, about heroic and, specifically, U/W heroic. The sum, as alluded to in another thread, is that I've not been particularly impressed by heroic. Much of the disruption that aggro decks depend upon comes from temp. protection or hexproof effects, namely these guys:
These cards have all been great, and given aggro a lot of flexibility, and tools to play a longer more grindy game. There are other spells that play a role in this as well: general pump spells and blink effects: but these are the cards that feel most directly like conditional counterspells.
I really don't have the space, or the motivation, to add a lot of creature enchantments or much more in the way of combat tricks. There already is a reasonable desnity of these effects, and I am trying to steer as much as possible to instant speed in order to create a metagame relationship with the penny cube's damage based removal and tap effects.
The end result, is that the cube dosen't support particularly well the sort of voltron style heroic decks that we see in standard right now. There just isn't enough of a density of effects in most drafts to make it feasible, and not enough to make it where you are suiting up more than one creature. Heroic creatures can still play an important role in the draft if the cards are powerful enough to act as a reward for low CC decks running conditional non-blue counterspells, and I rather like them in that role.
I think its important though to think of heroic not so much as a deck type to be supported, but more of a mechanical reward and incentive for disruptive fish-type aggro decks. This is something I've learned only through repeated drafts of the cube, and its worth putting some of the heroic cards under a microscope:
Because of the limited number of combat tricks on average in one of these decks, the most impactful heroic cards should have a slot in. That is anax and cymede and fabled hero, both of which are potential game ending threats in their respective decks (or the same deck, depending on how you build it).
Favored Hoplite I've found to be the least impactful, and thus the most cutable. I've gone from three to two, and probably could go to 0. Akroan skyguard is ok, not exciting, but the additional evasion makes it a much better source of pressure.
I've been fine with all of the green instant speed enchantments, as they have a meta game relationship with damage based removal and can serve as board control. They also work with cards like wandering wolf.
Defiant strike should go--guided strike is much better. Defiant strike is really only value with heroic creatures. Glint has been pretty bad because it can't kill anything or grant evasive: its just a purely defensive buff. Ophidian eye has been ok, but not really attracted a lot of attention. When it shows up though I think the effect is strong.
Triclopean sight has a metagame relationship with tap removal which I like, and moment of heroism has been good as a source of lifelink.
One of the appealing cards of the original U/W heroic deck was battlewise hoplite, which could let you advance your gameplan while also giving you control over your card quality. I really like the card, but U just dosen't really have the tools to effectively support a heroic gameplan, and white dosen't have the density of effects to support a base white heroic deck, splashing blue. Whenever these decks come together here, they feel poorly positioned for the meta, without any real explosive or powerful plays.
I would support cutting
Though I think both akroan skyguard and ophidian eye could potentially justify their slots. Akroan skyguard might be nice to have just as a way to messege the relationship between pump and small creatures.
2. I support open experimentation in the multi-color section. That section is designed to be small, and consist mostly of nudge cards, that will make a drafter think critically about different directions they could go in a draft. Sort of a way to recreate the feeling of opening certain rares, that provide a sense of exploration and discovery. In that regard, I support experimenting with fires of yavimaya, but am less excited about possessed skaab, as that type of effect already exists in the blue section. In addition, I don't want the familiar deck to feel like an autodraft for anyone that first picks a ghostly flicker.
3. R/G is a noted under drafted color combination, though we've been having more of those decks lately. Buffed spikeshot elders have been the real draw. I've never really been able to come up with a good solution for this.
Magic origins probably has a ton of cards that could slot in here, and I'm open to suggestions. Foundry of the consuls, at least, is a card that deserves a slot, and i'm still high on pia and kiran.
The #1 and #2 thing I feel the cube is missing right now is more good artifact sac. outlets, and artifact/enchantment destruction.
1. Namely, about heroic and, specifically, U/W heroic. The sum, as alluded to in another thread, is that I've not been particularly impressed by heroic. Much of the disruption that aggro decks depend upon comes from temp. protection or hexproof effects, namely these guys:
These cards have all been great, and given aggro a lot of flexibility, and tools to play a longer more grindy game. There are other spells that play a role in this as well: general pump spells and blink effects: but these are the cards that feel most directly like conditional counterspells.
I really don't have the space, or the motivation, to add a lot of creature enchantments or much more in the way of combat tricks. There already is a reasonable desnity of these effects, and I am trying to steer as much as possible to instant speed in order to create a metagame relationship with the penny cube's damage based removal and tap effects.
The end result, is that the cube dosen't support particularly well the sort of voltron style heroic decks that we see in standard right now. There just isn't enough of a density of effects in most drafts to make it feasible, and not enough to make it where you are suiting up more than one creature. Heroic creatures can still play an important role in the draft if the cards are powerful enough to act as a reward for low CC decks running conditional non-blue counterspells, and I rather like them in that role.
I think its important though to think of heroic not so much as a deck type to be supported, but more of a mechanical reward and incentive for disruptive fish-type aggro decks. This is something I've learned only through repeated drafts of the cube, and its worth putting some of the heroic cards under a microscope:
Because of the limited number of combat tricks on average in one of these decks, the most impactful heroic cards should have a slot in. That is anax and cymede and fabled hero, both of which are potential game ending threats in their respective decks (or the same deck, depending on how you build it).
Favored Hoplite I've found to be the least impactful, and thus the most cutable. I've gone from three to two, and probably could go to 0. Akroan skyguard is ok, not exciting, but the additional evasion makes it a much better source of pressure.
I've been fine with all of the green instant speed enchantments, as they have a meta game relationship with damage based removal and can serve as board control. They also work with cards like wandering wolf.
Defiant strike should go--guided strike is much better. Defiant strike is really only value with heroic creatures. Glint has been pretty bad because it can't kill anything or grant evasive: its just a purely defensive buff. Ophidian eye has been ok, but not really attracted a lot of attention. When it shows up though I think the effect is strong.
Triclopean sight has a metagame relationship with tap removal which I like, and moment of heroism has been good as a source of lifelink.
One of the appealing cards of the original U/W heroic deck was battlewise hoplite, which could let you advance your gameplan while also giving you control over your card quality. I really like the card, but U just dosen't really have the tools to effectively support a heroic gameplan, and white dosen't have the density of effects to support a base white heroic deck, splashing blue. Whenever these decks come together here, they feel poorly positioned for the meta, without any real explosive or powerful plays.
I would support cutting
Though I think both akroan skyguard and ophidian eye could potentially justify their slots. Akroan skyguard might be nice to have just as a way to messege the relationship between pump and small creatures.
2. I support open experimentation in the multi-color section. That section is designed to be small, and consist mostly of nudge cards, that will make a drafter think critically about different directions they could go in a draft. Sort of a way to recreate the feeling of opening certain rares, that provide a sense of exploration and discovery. In that regard, I support experimenting with fires of yavimaya, but am less excited about possessed skaab, as that type of effect already exists in the blue section. In addition, I don't want the familiar deck to feel like an autodraft for anyone that first picks a ghostly flicker.
3. R/G is a noted under drafted color combination, though we've been having more of those decks lately. Buffed spikeshot elders have been the real draw. I've never really been able to come up with a good solution for this.
Magic origins probably has a ton of cards that could slot in here, and I'm open to suggestions. Foundry of the consuls, at least, is a card that deserves a slot, and i'm still high on pia and kiran.
The #1 and #2 thing I feel the cube is missing right now is more good artifact sac. outlets, and artifact/enchantment destruction.