TheManaDrain.com
April 23, 2014, 10:29:15 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: GWb Beat down/fish  (Read 5280 times)
TopSecret
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 889


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: October 10, 2010, 10:49:03 AM »


Turn 1: Welder
Their Turn 1: Shop, Mox, Golem
Your Turn 2: Nothing important
Their Turn 2: Start bringing in the hurt

K, another one:

Turn 1: Welder
Their Turn 1: Mox, Mox, Sphere, Waste your land
Turn 2: Nothing
Their Turn 2: Shop, Golem
Turn 3: Nothing because you now have just 2 land
Their Turn 4: Waste and that's probably GGs

The only openings where Welder is good is where you also have Shaman to nuke a mox and then start welder their stuff. So that requires Welder + Shaman, and I don't like relying on 2-card combos that don't auto-win for me and can take a turn to get going. Oh yeah, and if they get 2 Golem out you can't weld both so they'll still get a swing for 5 in every turn.

I agree that Welder and Shaman are not good against MUD. They both need help from other cards to be decent in game, which is difficult especially because of all the sphere effects in addition to needing a certain kind of draw. But unless I'm totally out of the loop with Vintage, both the games you listed were total nut draws by the MUD player and you should probably not worry about them too much.

Why not play maindeck Nature's Claim?

There are a couple things you can do for Shops, and one of them is playing cheap artifact kill that hits Golem and large artifacts. Another is supplementing cheap artifact kill with Duress/Thoughtseize. And another is loading up on lots of Kataki (or Serenity or whatever). There are other ways to beat MUD, but not without changing the deck into something that would need a separate thread. (Which I personally don't think is a bad idea. Limiting colors seems like a weird constraint if you are interested in building a deck that is functional.) But at the end of the day, you need to reach a certain threshold of plays you can consistently make against the MUD player that don't just scoop to Wasteland/Sphere + Sphere, because I'm pretty sure that Wasteland/Sphere + Sphere is going to happen a fair amount of the time.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2010, 10:57:30 AM by TopSecret » Logged

Ball and Chain: Punctuation is sufficient, without pressing enter as if you're writing an emo blog

http://topsecrettechnology.blogspot.com/
Stormanimagus
Basic User
**
Posts: 1123


maestrosmith55
View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: October 10, 2010, 11:11:29 AM »

Why not play maindeck Nature's Claim?

But at the end of the day, you need to reach a certain threshold of plays you can consistently make against the MUD player that don't just scoop to Wasteland/Sphere + Sphere, because I'm pretty sure that Wasteland/Sphere + Sphere is going to happen a fair amount of the time.

You answered your own question. Claim does not do what you want it to do most of the time. Claim only does what you want it to do if the Shop player draws 0 more threats for at least 4-5 turns.

Here's the fundamental issue Nature's Claim. You are trading a card in your hand AND 4 life for a Golem on the board. Seems good right? Wrong. You have just given them at least 1-2 Time Walks of life (you run bears remember? And don't tell me Tarmogoyf is not a bear because against MUD it often is for 1-2 turns after you play it) and you do nothing to stop them from drawing another threat at the SAME rate that you draw Claims.

Fish decks have 0 draw engine to rely on vs. MUD. Dark Confidant is one I suppose, but it is slow and dangerous vs. MUD as they will need less swings to finish the deal once confidant is out and you can't draw into anything particularly broken with Confidant so all you are drawing is more answers at best.

The parity of a card like Claim is not offset by your deck at all BECAUSE you can't follow it up with an "oops I win" play. MUD has this way of drawing relevant cards a lot .Powder helps this, but threat density also helps this a lot. Claim just rarely gets the job done for me. You could argue that Claim has its best chance to shine for Noble Fish because they can follow it up with Force Of Will + Goyf + things like Meddling Mage to lock the MUD player out of Wires but even there Nature's Claim rarely gets the job done (trust me, I've tried). 1-for-1 exchanges simply will not get there against MUD most of the time so then your left with board sweepers like Serenity that may never hit the board because of the prohibitive Mana Cost and because of stupid stuff like Chalice @2. I think Fish needs to face the music. The best way to beat MUD is to play a deck that can capitalize on the "post-sweep" turn with a broken play like Vault/Key or Tendrils FTW.

In conclusion, DON'T PLAY FISH IF YOU WANT TO BEAT MUD.

Here endeth the lesson,

-Storm
Logged

"To light a candle is to cast a shadow. . ."

—Ursula K. Leguin
beder
Basic User
**
Posts: 277


View Profile Email
« Reply #32 on: October 10, 2010, 12:28:52 PM »

Why not play maindeck Nature's Claim?

But at the end of the day, you need to reach a certain threshold of plays you can consistently make against the MUD player that don't just scoop to Wasteland/Sphere + Sphere, because I'm pretty sure that Wasteland/Sphere + Sphere is going to happen a fair amount of the time.

You answered your own question. Claim does not do what you want it to do most of the time. Claim only does what you want it to do if the Shop player draws 0 more threats for at least 4-5 turns.

Here's the fundamental issue Nature's Claim. You are trading a card in your hand AND 4 life for a Golem on the board. Seems good right? Wrong. You have just given them at least 1-2 Time Walks of life (you run bears remember? And don't tell me Tarmogoyf is not a bear because against MUD it often is for 1-2 turns after you play it) and you do nothing to stop them from drawing another threat at the SAME rate that you draw Claims.

Fish decks have 0 draw engine to rely on vs. MUD. Dark Confidant is one I suppose, but it is slow and dangerous vs. MUD as they will need less swings to finish the deal once confidant is out and you can't draw into anything particularly broken with Confidant so all you are drawing is more answers at best.

The parity of a card like Claim is not offset by your deck at all BECAUSE you can't follow it up with an "oops I win" play. MUD has this way of drawing relevant cards a lot .Powder helps this, but threat density also helps this a lot. Claim just rarely gets the job done for me. You could argue that Claim has its best chance to shine for Noble Fish because they can follow it up with Force Of Will + Goyf + things like Meddling Mage to lock the MUD player out of Wires but even there Nature's Claim rarely gets the job done (trust me, I've tried). 1-for-1 exchanges simply will not get there against MUD most of the time so then your left with board sweepers like Serenity that may never hit the board because of the prohibitive Mana Cost and because of stupid stuff like Chalice @2. I think Fish needs to face the music. The best way to beat MUD is to play a deck that can capitalize on the "post-sweep" turn with a broken play like Vault/Key or Tendrils FTW.

In conclusion, DON'T PLAY FISH IF YOU WANT TO BEAT MUD.

Here endeth the lesson,

-Storm

I totally agree with you regarding your natural's claim analysis, for fish decks. This clearly not sufficent to beat MUD, even with 4 of them. The one for one is clearly not a sufficently strong effect to be able to handle the succession of threats they are going to throw at you.  

But I disagree with your conclusion, mainly cause I feel like Serenity is definitely an extremely efficent tool against MUD, especially for a fish deck. I tested it a lot in fish deck and it was golden. Sure, it needs to be backuped with other tool (natural's claim for instance), but it is IMO the best side weapon for a fish deck with white.

If we start saying that 2CC is a prohibitive cost, what's left?

Sure, if the opponent sets up a chalice at 1 + plays spheres +  chalice at 2 + ...., you lose. But which deck does not lose in that situation.  
« Last Edit: October 10, 2010, 12:34:39 PM by beder » Logged
TopSecret
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 889


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: October 10, 2010, 02:39:47 PM »

You answered your own question. Claim does not do what you want it to do most of the time. Claim only does what you want it to do if the Shop player draws 0 more threats for at least 4-5 turns.

...

In conclusion, DON'T PLAY FISH IF YOU WANT TO BEAT MUD.

Here endeth the lesson,

-Storm

I agree with most of what you said. If you wanted to play a deck that beats MUD, it would be easier to just change to a different deck. Beating MUD with this kind of deck is not an easy problem to solve and conceding that MUD will be a poor matchup and focusing on other matchups instead is one possible solution.

However, I think the strength of Nature's Claim and other cheap artifact kill is that it opens the window for stronger cards like Serenity and Kataki. If you play lots of good cards that cost two mana and no cheaper cards, then the MUD deck will just lock up the board before the two casting cost cards can be played. But if you can Nature's Claim their first card it gives you time to access something stronger. Eventually, you do want to end up two for one-ing them with other cards, but you have to play cheaper cards during the early stage of the game to prevent getting locked out early.

I don't know if its possible for a deck using the fish strategy to do well against MUD right now, given all of MUD's strengths, but I think if there is it would probably involve early disruption followed by 2(or more) for 1's.

Most Vintage decks try to leverage their advantages into a quick win with Vault/Key or something, which is a pretty good strategy. Sometimes it's the best strategy. But unless something has fundamentally changed with the format recently, it's also possible to make a deck that consistently churns out more answers than the opponent can deal with and then kill with some embarrassingly inept win condition. The problem is that these decks are by nature more reactive to the metagame and need to be changed on a more regular basis in order to succeed. It's just much more 'difficult' or 'more work' to do, so such decks rarely get made or played effectively, and then the linear decks tend to do well. However, there is a benefit for playing a more reactive deck and that is the surprise factor. If you make a rogue deck from scratch that has a 50% matchup against an estrablished, linear deck assuming each player plays correctly to the same degree, then the rogue deck will tend to win in a tournament because the opponent will not know how to play against the rogue deck.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2010, 02:48:29 PM by TopSecret » Logged

Ball and Chain: Punctuation is sufficient, without pressing enter as if you're writing an emo blog

http://topsecrettechnology.blogspot.com/
Guli
Basic User
**
Posts: 1590



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: October 10, 2010, 05:29:37 PM »

Interesting, so goblin welder is not good against shop according to some people. How did this conclusion arise?
Logged



Click here for Legacy Humans 2014
and here for 5c Humans (vintage)
RecklessEmbermage
Basic User
**
Posts: 269


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: October 10, 2010, 06:18:18 PM »

Interesting, so goblin welder is not good against shop according to some people. How did this conclusion arise?

How often will it be turned on? You got shamans for their jewellery, 4 discard spells and 2 disenchants main. Additionally, they may break a lotus. That might be enough to make welder reliable. But then again, you have the non-workshop matches to care about too. Unless you play in a meta very heavily skewed towards shops, monkey should be good in more match-ups. And it supports your main strategy, whereas welder looks like pure hate.
How about a 4-2 split in the main? Welder would be better if you ran scullers yourself, though I agree they put a strain on your manabase. The manabase is better, by the way, but still light on black. The best call might be to cut two plateaus for a fetch and a badland. With such a set-up, you have four shots at a turn one badlands plus the cities that let you play any 1cc card except stp. You still have just about enough white sources. If you do this, sculler becomes a bit more reliable too, since all coloured sources now pay half its cost (no double plateau scenario).

And canonist seems awful, atleast in the main. If the opponent can play multiple non-artifact spells, you're doing something wrong. Is gush your concern? You have quite a few ways of disrupting their gameplan between arbiter, strips and duress effects. I would give sculler a shot in those spots.

Unlike you guys, I have very little experience with playing with or against power. Meaning I probably misevalue shaman, welders and possibly most other cards (but to a lesser extent). You'll see no bold claims from me when it comes to fighting particular tier one archetypes or evaluating the usefulness of chalice of the void for example. I know curves, manabases and beating face though. So that's that.
Logged
TopSecret
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 889


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: October 10, 2010, 06:31:00 PM »

Interesting, so goblin welder is not good against shop according to some people. How did this conclusion arise?

As far as I understand it, Welder needs Gorilla Shaman in play for it to be good. This means that you have to resolve Welder and Shaman before Welder does anything.
Logged

Ball and Chain: Punctuation is sufficient, without pressing enter as if you're writing an emo blog

http://topsecrettechnology.blogspot.com/
Guli
Basic User
**
Posts: 1590



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: October 12, 2010, 05:42:34 AM »

Interesting, so goblin welder is not good against shop according to some people. How did this conclusion arise?
How often will it be turned on? You got shamans for their jewellery, 4 discard spells and 2 disenchants main. Additionally, they may break a lotus. That might be enough to make welder reliable. But then again, you have the non-workshop matches to care about too.

Very well observed. But your follow up question is strange even though the answer is in the first part of your observation. Thoughtseize is extremely strong in this deck against everything with the exception of dredge while having the bonus to activate welder. It works so well to generate pressure early game alongside the strip effects and with vial you can actually put your bears in play too. This line means Thoughtseize is synergy with vial by the way. In this deck thoughtseize acts as Gaddock teeg when you want to get rid of their force. The mana denial makes sure that force is the only reliable counter magic spell.

The inclusion of 2 disenchant is rather experimental. It can not be safely D consulted when you really need it. Maybe I should go 3x STP and 3x Disench. Disencht is there as the 5-6 answer to Sphinx (also nicely observed) but also to take care of the problematic chalice@1 when it ever happens and of course Oath of Druids. It has the bonus to activate welder and to take care of null rod (vs my vials).

Quote
And canonist seems awful, atleast in the main. If the opponent can play multiple non-artifact spells, you're doing something wrong. Is gush your concern? You have quite a few ways of disrupting their gameplan between arbiter, strips and duress effects. I would give sculler a shot in those spots.
Are you saying Canonist is overkill? Or are you saying Leonin is kind of the replacement of the   {1} {W} slot? This is interesting and maybe not bad a bad way to free slots and refill them with cards that do other stuff you need. Kataki might be interesting in this regard. I said it before, Kataki and Vial is possible in the same deck. It is absolutely no big deal that you have to tap a land to keep Vial on line. Welder and Canonist are interesting to keep bring back canonist if you have artifacts in play. But this is a small synergy. Also Vial@2> Canonist is strong and we always bring it up, however the truth is I haven't really done this all that much. It happens sure, but it is also not that much of a big deal. Since this vial versions DOES opt for mana denial I have to agree that it is less important to use things like teeg and canonist. My old Vial versions were based on spell denial.

Kataki might not be a direct answer to Chalice@1 but with strip effects it sure makes it hard for them to maintain. And Kataki helps welder to make connection.

Quote
2x Plateau
2x Scrubland
1x Badlands
2x Fetchland
4x City of Brass
4x Black Lotus, Pearl, Jet, Ruby
4x Vial
4x Wasteland
4x Ghost Quarter
1x Strip Mine

4x Dark Confidant
4x Thoughtseize
1x Demonic Consultation

3x Goblin Welder (need less since kataki also takes slots against shop)
4x Gorilla Shaman

4x Leonin Arboter
3x Kataki
3x Jotun Grunt
3x Swords to Plowshares
3x Disenchant

This would be a list without canonist and with Kataki. It looks strong.





« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 06:03:02 AM by Guli » Logged



Click here for Legacy Humans 2014
and here for 5c Humans (vintage)
RecklessEmbermage
Basic User
**
Posts: 269


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: October 12, 2010, 09:22:49 AM »

Yeah. Atleast in my mind, kataki makes a lot more sense than canonist.

Consultation: I've run consultation mainly in goblins and would often use it for 2-ofs (artifact- and creature removal and warchiefs). I can remember it backfiring completely once. Sometimes it is also a good idea to consult for game-breaking 1-ofs, such as yawgwin, simply because it is the only out. In goblins, loosing a significant portion of your library actually is a big deal, because the deck runs about 6 tutors, much more draw than you and a heap of fetchlands. This deck shouldn't be negatively affected by consultation at all. You can definitely go down to two each of your consult targets if you think the third copy is marginal.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.136 seconds with 20 queries.