Card/Deck Swords to Plowshares too good for my cube?

Rasmus Källqvist

Rasmus Källqvist

I think a good analytic model would be to start at the other end; what do you want your aggro decks to look like? What answers do you want to give other decks to combat those threats the aggro decks have?
 
FlowerSunRain

FlowerSunRain

Contributor
I don't run those and certain similar cards, but the reason wasn't to help aggro. One mana removal is really important in aggro too, because it gets rid of blockers. Lightning Bolt is of course exceptionally good in aggro because it can also just kill an opponent in spite of blockers. If I'm drafting aggro, efficient removal is my #1 priority, unless the cube has hamfist aggro support cards like Sulfuric Vortex and Winter Orb in it. I've 3-0'd with aggro decks that don't have a 4 drop, but I've never done it without some removal cards, so I will pass Hero of Oxid Ridge for Firebolt 95% of the time.

I think tinkering your removal is fine, but the specific changes you are suggesting won't help aggro as much as you think.

Just glancing at your list, your a little thin on dudes, so if no one is playing it, the one guy who goes in on it should be fine, but if two people are trying to split it up it might get hairy.

Interacting via 1 to 1 removal is absolutely fine for getting good gameplay, I'm pretty sure you issue is somewhere else. It's probably more subtle then that. How are the aggro decks losing? Are the decks intrinsically flawed or do they match up poorly with the other decks?
 
B

blacksmithy

Another thing to think about is that, if your curve is low enough, the "good" removal like StP and Bolt isn't quite as good, because your average-case tempo-gain scenario gets worse. Removing a Blood Artist or Rabblemaster with StP feels a lot more fair than hitting their Titan or Baneslayer.
 
Grillo_Parlante

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
Efficent removal is fine, but sometimes efficent removal without reasonable conditions can be stifling. If thats the case that usually impacts all decks though. I dont run path or swords because those answers are disproportionate to the threats I am running. Even condemn is annoying.

However, if your aggro decks are struggling its usually a multi faceted problem, though its possible removal could be a factor. What is your removal as-fan like?
 
Tyrole

Tyrole

I have been debating this question as well. StP seems like the obvious 1st pick in one of my packs no matter what, because it's such premium removal. That said, I have been feeling very good about my removal suite lately, so I hesitate to make big changes - currently debating if I should swap StP for Condemn or potentially put in 2 removal spells that are less good as a replacement. Then again, maybe having snap pick quality removal occasionally is ok? I only find it really annoying when someone has both STP and snapcaster.
 
shamizy

shamizy

Swords is fine if your threats are high powered enough that it feels fair. I've never felt it to be oppressive in my list and it's not often that there's a single person at the table who's just picked up all the premium removal and will wreck the field.
 
Grillo_Parlante

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
I think with the 1cc insta kill removal pieces, its more a question of if you want people to be able to play around those removal spells or not. That was the real issue I had with those three spells specifically. You can play around most other removal, but 1cc instant speed kill anything on 3 cards in the format always felt like they lead to shallow interactions.
 
Tzenmoroth

Tzenmoroth

I removed Swords to Plowshares and Path to Exile awhile back, I've even removed 1 mana removal at this point and cut down hard on 2 mana removal. I don't even run one mana burn spells. If your removal is 1-2 mana, your aggro threats need to be 0-1 mana to keep up and not just be favorably removed. 3 mana removal is pretty good for letting aggro's 1 drops and 2 drops actually be serious threats and giving the aggro player same time to actually dominate the early game like they should.
 
Lucre

Lucre

Aggro doesn't care as much about being hit with swords. Its creatures cost 1-2 mana anyway. Its not a huge hit and honestly the life can be a huge help to race other aggro decks or for an extra turn against an angel etc. Having removal that can merely keep up with aggressive decks isn't that bad because honestly removal that costs 1-2 doesn't attack, it can never win you the game and sometimes its straight up dead. Aggro may resent you for being able to keep up with them, but really they are resenting the fact that if you aren't "dead-enough" within the first 4 turns or so you're likely able to go a little bigger than them unless they are disruptive or you stumble. Aggro should be resenting the fact you are going to be flashing back your lingering souls in that time or playing a grave titan or playing two spells a turn with the help of your thirst for knowledge.

Now midrange and control have reasons to resent swords to plowshares because of the exile and the amazing tempo swings but honestly they're the ideal candidates to playing it and they can easily work defenses to it into their gameplan. Aggro has a readymade defense against swords in that its spells are just not very attractive targets for a 1 mana removal spell, you're never really "getting" them unless you're saving your swords for like their hellrider in which case you appear to be playing for value and probably not actually trying to win the game because messing with with nacatl was probably what you wanted to do and thats trading even.

Umm walls are something aggro will resent more! Wall of omens will piss an aggro player off like nothing else, and have you ever played a blade splicer, or a turn 3 young pyromancer or seeker against an aggro deck?

I'd recommend giving your aggro decks access to more depth of gameplay or card selection will also help make them feel more inevitable and less like they need to be facing unfairly poor removal to win. But like its also fair if you want to make a format where you just don't let 1 mana plays be very relevant but then you have to figure out how certain turns are gonna play out for the players that intend to cast more than one spell per turn. Like prowess spells and delve and any number of standbys like card draw are gonna get a lot crappier.
 
T

Tanner K.

A lot of us have moved our aggro sections in the direction of "aggro-combo", where you're looking to knock the opponent's life total down some in the first few turns, and then find a different axis of attack to deliver the final blow.

Mono-red is the best known version of this, where you're looking to beat down early with cheap and hastey threats, and close the game out with burn spells or by going wider than your opponent.

The red-black sacrifice deck that's popular around here is another good example. You use recursive creatures like Bloodghast, Gravecrawlers, and Bloodsoaked Champions and token makers to beat down early, and then finish off with a big, evasive, durable threat like Falkenrath Aristocrat[/ci] or by using sacrifice effects and on death triggers (
 
MCMcEmcee

MCMcEmcee

1-mana removal is great imo.

I think aggro is better served by raising its overall card quality rather than cutting cheap interaction from a cube list. More Abbot of Keral Keep, Tarmogoyf, Wild Nacatl, Champion of the Parish, etc. Less Borderland Marauder, Savannah Lions, Mons Goblin Raiders with a keyword, etc.
Aggro's success also depends a lot on your draft group, some groups just don't have anybody who wants to curve out small creatures and beat down.
 
Chris Taylor

Chris Taylor

Contributor
Honestly marauder is fine. It's an unconditional 3/2 that blocks as a 1/2 instead of Not at all
The only reason I'm not running a bunch of it is because of +1/+1 counter shit
 
Lucre

Lucre

Yeah good lord guys, what if your abbot found a land or something and you're talking about forcing players to kill it with cards the speed of oblivion ring or downfall?

I mean I know blocking is a thing but even look at how many of your 1 and 2 cc guys don't block well and we all know attacking is waaaay better than blocking and very rarely do people cube cards based on their great blocking potential lol. Half of you won't even run army in cans anymore.
 
Chris Taylor

Chris Taylor

Contributor
Eh, The reason I talk about blocking is because so many cards attack as a 3/2 anyways:



Okay those last two less so but still
The 3 power attacker is relatively common. What else do you go by? Either synergy or blocking
 
Lucre

Lucre

Chris you are probably doing this better than most cuber's but we still need to have a solem conversation about 1 and 2 drops.
 
Chris Taylor

Chris Taylor

Contributor
To elaborate: all I'm saying is the exact different between Geopede, Chainwalker and Marauder is small at best.
So you choose between them by going
1) Are there synergy reasons I want to run one of these over the other
2) What about other reasons

and blocking is a decent answer to #2. Plus typically limited benifits from some number of just solid cards that aren't so niche, and Marauder does a great job of that

Lucre said:
Chris you are probably doing this better than most cuber's but we still need to have a solem conversation about 1 and 2 drops.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean
 
Grillo_Parlante

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
Chris Taylor said:
I'm not sure what you mean
Click to expand...

Speaking for myself, it kind of sucks that so much of the black 1-2 drops in higher power formats can't block. It creates this weird void in the section where 2/3 of the major deck types can't venture, places a heavy burden on the rest of the creature section (I hate vampire nighthawk but you are kind of priced into running it), and generally feels weird with blacks generally more flexible spell selection.

Red has a lot of dudes that just swing, and it would be nice to see more flexible cards like mogg war marshal or abbot, that can be used to make value as well as swinging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top