@rolko said in Another 2nd place finish on Lands and encouraging others to give it a try!:

I think Song can be good if your relying on some amount of opponent misplays. I also believe most people dont understand how this deck works, and thats the advantage of it. So far the 2 Sorcerous Spyglass are good out of the SB. Have a paper event this Sun. Looking forward to testing the new configuration!

Cards should never be run because we assume imperfect play from the opponent, but should be run on their own merit. Song of the Dryads is being run in order to diversify the sideboard answers. Enchantments are one of the harder spell types to answer in Vintage, especially non-blue ones that cost 3 mana. A Beast Within-style catch all was something that I want access too, and I chose Song over Beast Within because it has less of a liability. This deck, unsurprisingly, is better at dealing with a leftover non-basic land than a 3/3 creature.

last edited by Guest

@hierarchnoble While I agree with your conclusions on Song (being that enchantments are one of the hardest permanent types to remove if they resolve, or harder to counter), I disagree that all cards must be run for their own face value. I believe this entire deck (and others exist), based on the premise that our opponents will in fact misplay, this deck is a psychological experiment in play style and lines of play. The less our opponent understands whats happening the more likely we will be able to exploit a minor misplay (this deck operates on a maxim of taking stock of many small accumulated advantages over time and converting them into a win).

@rolko said in Another 2nd place finish on Lands and encouraging others to give it a try!:

@hierarchnoble While I agree with your conclusions on Song (being that enchantments are one of the hardest permanent types to remove if they resolve, or harder to counter), I disagree that all cards must be run for their own face value. I believe this entire deck (and others exist), based on the premise that our opponents will in fact misplay, this deck is a psychological experiment in play style and lines of play. The less our opponent understands whats happening the more likely we will be able to exploit a minor misplay (this deck operates on a maxim of taking stock of many small accumulated advantages over time and converting them into a win).

Just because leading with Bazaar of Baghdad and passing the turn causes the opponent to incorrectly assume my deck choice doesn't mean that the deck is only a psychology experiment. All players try to broadcast misinformation in order to gain a strategic upper hand at all points in the game. That's what bluffing is. I had one of the world's leading Legacy Lands players (Jarvis Yu) Gitaxian Probe me on the play turn 1, see Glacial Chasm, and know exactly what he was up against. I beat him in 3.

What would be a better hypothesis, and one that @POXEVERYTURN has articulated, is that current deck choices aren't strategically equipped to deal with Lands. People get up in arms about how inbred blue is, talking about how maindeck Pyroblasts make no sense otherwise. Blue pilots build for blue and board for Oath, Dredge, and especially Shops. What if they had to build for another deck and simply can't squeeze any more countermeasures into their 75? I believe Lands to be that other deck, and I've had success so far attacking a metagame that is not prepared for a Prison deck that can pivot and combo off with an early Marit Lage.

@hierarchnoble I think your parable about Jarvis and misinformation speaks to another point. However I see the stragetic side differently (thats a personal difference of theory), I like discussion and dont want anyone to feel as though Im trying to debunk their play or ideals, so for sake of high ground I think we will agree to disagree on that point. Congrats on the finish and I look forward to continued development of theory with the deck and with you! I appreciate the work you do and always enjoy a fresh perspective, it keeps me grounded in facts.

@rolko Thank you for being the bigger man than me. TMD makes me weary of the intentions of others more than any other platform.

@Brass-Man Is there a fancy chop-and-move you can perform to take a chunk of this thread and move it to Vintage Strategy?

@hierarchnoble Do we have a Lands thread? If not, we should probably make one.

Also, how much of this do we want to move? We should give Brassy more specifics as to make it easier for him to "get right". Maybe we just cherry-pick everything onto a dedicated Lands thread?

@emopizza It looks like he moved the whole damn thing and renamed it, and honestly that was the best option. Thanks @Brass-Man!

Good call @hierarchnoble and @EmoPizza 🙂 This thread feels strategy-centric enough for me to just move the whole thing over.

@POXEVERYTURN I renamed the thread to make it more generic-vintage-strategy-ish, but feel free to re-rename it.

Just a reminder that now that the thread is in Strategy there will be stricter rules around B&R discussion (I only mention this because of the jokes in the first few posts, which are completely innocent - I don't imagine that we'll actually have a problem in this thread)

In the future I definitely have the ability to fork a thread onto a different forum if it makes sense, but in this case it seemed like the focus of the thread was already strategy, so that made it easier for me 🙂

last edited by Brass Man

So now that we are officially talking strategy... anyone have any thoughts on collective brutality? I know the card has been appearing more in certain storm lists but I feel like it could have a place in the sideboard here. It would let us pick off a swords against a blue opponent, kills a hate bear or something like a deathrite that can give us issues, and it lets us pitch away a riftstone portal as an added bonus. It also gets around misstep and even if we don’t hit a swords can help us clear the path for a Fastbond effect.

@poxeveryturn I think Collective Brutality could be interesting given that we can exploit all facets/modes. We might even wanna examine Ravens Crime eventually, though it can get hit by MM, we can strip their hand away quite efficiently.

@rolko raven's crime doesn't get hit by mental misstep, it hits mental misstep.

The new card Sylvan Awakening in Dominiria has a spot in lands? Extra wincon/protection for a turn?

@serracollector No. it is far too slow and leaves the deck too vulnerable.
Absent some circumstance where the opponent has nearly killed themself the critical mass on this card is way too high. If you had enough lands in play to kill someone with this you are incredibly far ahead already or should have already been able to make merit lage and win many turns ago.
It also leaves you insanely vulnerable if you don’t kill them. I don’t want my opponent to be able to swords my bazaar and I certainly don’t want a balance coming down on me which would basically end the game in their favor. I don’t think this has a place.

Anyone toying with Broken Bond from dominaria?

@tittliewinks22 I have not yet but yet seems like it would have good synergy with the deck for sure. It’s a shame it isn’t instant speed then it would be much easier to run.

Certainly would provide a nice little tempo boost in the blue matchup if you blow up a hate piece or even a mox and get a free land out of it. It also adds a little more tempo to a hand that doesn’t have a fastbond effect but gets you ahead.

I think we should def try to test this card out. I can see a lot of good interactions happening with this.

I’ve tested Hull Breach in the past and I see a lot of similarities here but this seems better on several levels.

last edited by Guest

One of the pitfalls of deck analysis is the question "why aren't you running X?" X can be anything, new or old, tested or untested, released or just on the horizon. It's not a very good question because diminishes the importance of the rest of the deck. 99.9% of the time players are trying to run 75 cards total, so each suggested card comes at the expense of another card. When you say "why aren't you running X?", you can take your question one step further and say "why aren't you running X in place of Y?" Y can still be broad, but it helps both parties understand that we are on the same page to how the deck functions.

@serracollector, your suggestion suggests you don't understand the deck's plan.

@tittliewinks22, your suggestion is much better, but again, readers of the thread may benefit by knowing where you are suggesting this change occur. Broken Bond is a Naturalize effect with the rider of an extra land drop. In the build I posted above, copies could replace some number of Nature's Claim (same effect), Ancient Grudge (same effect plus some), Abrupt Decay (some of the same effect), or Song of the Dryads (some of the same effect). I know what I would do, but what were you considering when you suggested it?

If this post comes off heavy-handed it's because it is. Too often threads like this are filled with every poster's passing thoughts that benefit no one.

@hierarchnoble I agree with this sentiment.
To clarify, my initial thought in response was a replacement for Nature’s Claim out of the board.
I don’t like it as a replacement for grudge because grudge is so important in the main giving us not only extra graveyard interaction and instant speed, but we can also move faster game one given we normally have the element of surprise (unless it’s someone that knows what deck you’re on) and can pitch extra cards to the yard.

I am not a fan of replacing decay due to the uncounterable nature of the card which I think places it ahead of Broken Bond quite a bit in my opinion despite being harder to cast.

I think it can replace nature’s claim for several reasons despite the fact it is a sorcery. First, it avoids misstep which I think is important for the deck on several levels because at first glance it is a card id be interested in for the blue match or against dredge for an out to leyline and extra tempo. Second, it doesn’t give the opponent 4 life which can be very relevant when swinging with Merit Lage. I think it is worth testing for these reasons.

As a side note, I tested Balance in the side this weekend and was very impressed with the card. I think it presents a strong out against a lot of decks especially as a hand destruction piece and I’m going to continue testing it in different matchups

@hierarchnoble I have just gotten my feet wet with lands in vintage (also I only play paper so much less proficient than most). I have been playing lands in legacy the past few years though.

My initial thought was to replace a manabond effect maindeck with a copy of broken bond. Much like you say on your stream, manabond is a double edge sword because you don't like discarding sideboard cards at the expense of gaining land tempo. I think broken bond is strong enough to maindeck, I wouldn't cut an Ancient Grudge because it's flashback is so important when you're dredging or bazaaring stuff.

Definatley would replace natures claim in the board, makes blowing up a 3ball or chalice on 1 much more enjoyable.

One other suggestion I have to your maindeck that you streamed recently, why not cut the mox ruby for a second mox diamond? I feel that the green production is way more important then a red mox.

So I also only play in paper as I’ve mentioned here before. I think in paper it’s so much of your meta game compared to modo. I love a high concentration of grudge in the main because I know I’ll see a lot of shops and I think that’s something to keep in mind as you go forward if you’re playing paper. If you’ve played legacy lands you have the mechanics down and it’s about learning the matchups and interactions in vintage. Personally I think broken bond is far inferior to grudge in the shops match.

I also want to point out I think a lot of people underestimate the power of manabond in vintage. I run a 3/3 split because I think the card is better than exploration in vintage and in my experience has proven that over and over again. The interaction between bazaar and loam with manabond is incredibly strong. In certain matchups you need to move faster and don’t need to worry about picking up side board cards as you go but would rather pitch as fast as possible to the yard. They share similarities but in a lot of ways this deck is much different than the legacy version which I think you’ll discover the more you play it.

The other nice thing is you can go a lot of different ways with this build as you see between my list and Mikes. I also like the manabond interaction a lot more and I’ve built in a lot more redundancy into my list to find those pieces I really need before a manabond comes down or after. Good luck building and testing!

In Legacy, there is another deck that shares some common point with Land deck, it is Jund Depths. It is more of something between a POX and a Land so basically it is less forward and more control, it runs several nice toolboxs. I don't think it could be intesting for Vintage but maybe some of the tools could be of interest.

Here is a link to a Legacy list of it.

Some hints about what could be tested for Vintage IMHO :

  • Entomb : people often forgets that it can catch any kind of card. In that deck it is often used to get nether spirit, punising fire, raven crime, loam or any sideboard card we want as silver bullet (grudge, coffin purge, ...).
  • Nether spirit : endless blocker. Maybe for the sideboard.
  • Raven's crime : is a real blast when running loam engine but it requires lots of black mana (Urborg)
  • Smallpox and Lilliana : are amazing cards but i am not sure we can afford to play them.
  • Flame Jab : is the red raven's crime. I am not sure we need it (it can be entombed but it is very slow)
  • Molten vortex : is nice as an alternate kill when surgical extraction or blood moon are played.
  • coffin purge / ancient grudge / ray of revelation : silver bullets that can be entombed.
  • Mirri's guile : is great too with loam but we have bazar so i am not sure we will need it.
last edited by albarkhane
  • 115
    Posts
  • 36263
    Views