Congrats to @ChubbyRain. I really wish I could have perfomed better: After starting 4-0, the wheels fell off. The combination of opponents drawing insane openers and then my mulligans to 5 against Jazza ended my hopes for a Top 8. I ended up sliding all the way to 16th. Frustrating, but it's magic.
@vaughnbros to which barrier are you referring?
I'm not sure I understand the cut tbh. Wire seems like a good card to have access to. Maybe no longer a 4-of, but 2-3 can be the final lock piece in a lot of games. I understand that Workshops have become more aggressive since Bastilla was printed, but when Bactgudz was playing perhaps the most aggressive Workshop deck in history (Affinity Shops, likely the precursor to today's Workshop decks), Wire was probably the best card in that deck. It was the finisher the deck needed to close out the game. Perhaps Wire is less effective against Outcome which has become a troubling dominant trend in the meta?
@Griselbrother I so agree...the vast majority of Shops hate you see these days is sorcery speed (by force, fragmetize) and unless you are staring down an army of Inspectors and a trinisphere no one is setting explosives at 3. No tangle wire seems like it can leave shops pretty naked to a By Force blowout
For what it's worth I came in 3rd with Tangle Wires still in my deck. I've seen a lot of Wire-less (heh) lists running around, but I feel like PO and Mentor decks can do so much so quickly if you don't have enough lock components. In playing the deck I'm often most concerned about the oppt casting Mentor, Oath, Tinker, and other sorcery speed bombs that practically end the game. It helps that Fragmentize, By Force, and Dack are also sorcery speed. I get the argument for having a faster clock, but a clock without disruption is rarely good enough these days so for now I'm erring on the side of more lock pieces.
The best card against Precursor Golem is Yawgmoth's Will
No but I actually lost in the top 8 because By Force wasn't efficient enough against a Precursor, Revoker, Foundry Inspector, and Thorn. I only had 4 mana because of the Revoker on Sol Ring, so in retrospect I should have Mysticaled for Toxic Deluge instead of By Force.
@diophan You guys should add a tag called blue-based permission. It will give a more accurate view of the metagame imo. Right now as it stands, there are taxing decks, blue-based permission(win-con doesn't matter, the decks operate under the same principle/concept), dedicated combo and dredge. Blue-based permission builds focus on the principle of either controlling the stack and/or board while dropping a win-con. Some variants focus more on controlling the stack than others(G-Thieves & Matt Murray's Drain/Tendrils build come to mind here). I personally include decks that contain 9+ permission spells that are blue-based into the blue-based permission category. This include any combo variant than runs 9+ permission spells. An example of this would be Murray's drain tendrils deck. It packs a dozen permission spells main deck. Decks that I put into the dedicated combo category contain less than 9. An example of these decks would be outcome decks with a small permission package or ritual-based storm decks. I think when we classify things like this on a broad scale, we get to see the true percentages of pillars in the metagame as well as what is the most dominant. Otherwise we are skewing the perception of data without seeing the big picture.
The tag for that is 'FoW'. Any deck that runs enough blue cards to support Force of Will is also playing other blue permission spells. If you look at the spreadsheet, all the decks that you would label as "blue permission" are already tagged as 'FoW'
It's 58% of the metagame and has a win percentage of 50.3%. Obviously any deck that is over half the metagame is going to have an even win rate because of mirror matches.