|
It's about time we see some fresh decks and Affinity is no longer being held back
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:30 |
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Tournament victories are how I know Naya Lightsaber was a good deck. Agreed. Goblns Is Back Baby
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
Elyv posted:probably so your opponent can't look through your library I'll bet it's this, but not for the strategic implications, rather because it would take 5+ minutes for your opponent to write everything down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
It's almost like not having to dedicate half your sideboard to beating Twin means you can dedicate those slots to the deck everyone thinks is going to be the next most oppressive, wow. 4 tec edge in the board is pretty lulzy though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
There is some really phenomenal work being done on the "attribute this t8 to the twin ban" front and I think that should be applauded
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:02
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:There is some really phenomenal work being done on the "attribute this t8 to the twin ban" front and I think that should be applauded I 100% guarantee that if Twin were not banned that t8 would not be comprised of the same 8 players with the same 8 decks that are currently in it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:20
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:I 100% guarantee that if Twin were not banned that t8 would not be comprised of the same 8 players with the same 8 decks that are currently in it. Are you saying things would be different if they were different? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:It's almost like not having to dedicate half your sideboard to beating Twin means you can dedicate those slots to the deck everyone thinks is going to be the next most oppressive, wow. can you link me this decklist that had half its sideboard as twin hate?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
Elyv posted:can you link me this decklist that had half its sideboard as twin hate? Here you go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Are you saying things would be different if they were different? I'd say it would be the same 8 players playing different decks (all twin).
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
Elyv posted:can you link me this decklist that had half its sideboard as twin hate? http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=11234&d=263825&f=MO
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Now that Tron is free from its shackles its going to be lit
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
that extremely dumb ghostaway deck is pretty fun but also bad
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Are you saying things would be different if they were different? Yes, that's 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
Im heading to a modern event next week running UW Merfolk. I run 4 Spreading Seas main, 3 Sea's Claim side plus all the best white sideboard hate for everything else. It doesn't surprise me at all merfolk took 2 top spots already. My worst matchup by far is... elves? That's about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
Balon posted:Im heading to a modern event next week running UW Merfolk. I run 4 Spreading Seas main, 3 Sea's Claim side plus all the best white sideboard hate for everything else. Isn't the matchup vs affinity still slightly bad even as UW?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
Balon posted:Im heading to a modern event next week running UW Merfolk. I run 4 Spreading Seas main, 3 Sea's Claim side plus all the best white sideboard hate for everything else. What about affinity? Or now with twin gone is 4 Hurkyl's Recall in the sideboard no problem?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
Do you just get to start the game with a Hurkyls in hand post board
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:Isn't the matchup vs affinity still slightly bad even as UW? I think slightly bad is a bit of an understatement. It's a "did I draw my sideboard card" match which are all loving stupid if you ask me
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:What about affinity? Or now with twin gone is 4 Hurkyl's Recall in the sideboard no problem? UW gets stony silence / kataki if they want it, but I don't know if that really helps enough. Really most merfolk decks could probably get away with splashing kataki with 4 wanderwine + vials if they really wanted
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:I think slightly bad is a bit of an understatement. It's a "did I draw my sideboard card" match which are all loving stupid if you ask me I play merfolk, I'm well aware how bad the merfolk vs affinity match is, but I don't play a UW list even though I'm running 4 wanderwine
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
Affinity is a stupid deck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
Im running 4 wanderwine, 4 strands, 2 fountains. Sideboard has 3 Stoney Silence, 1 Recall specifically for Affinity. Being UW I also have 4 Paths main, which helps against everything Affinity has except Champions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Affinity is a stupid deck. It also doesn't deserve a ban. It'll probably also get one in a year with a lovely justification.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:UW gets stony silence / kataki if they want it, but I don't know if that really helps enough. Really most merfolk decks could probably get away with splashing kataki with 4 wanderwine + vials if they really wanted Maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way but it seems like those hose your own aether vials a lot more than a huryl's recall
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Affinity is a stupid deck. magic is dumb pew pew, i'm a wizard
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
In my experience I generally don't give a huge poo poo about a Stony Silence compared to Hurkyls
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:In my experience I generally don't give a huge poo poo about a Stony Silence compared to Hurkyls Are you saying this from a Merfolk perspective or an Affinity perspective?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:It also doesn't deserve a ban. I don't know, it sort of fit the ban criteria of the random "ban Nacatl" decision but it never got looked at so I sort of assume it will never really be banned. I just hate super linear decks when they also rock a very consistently high win percent. ThePeavstenator posted:Are you saying this from a Merfolk perspective or an Affinity perspective? Affinity. Stony Silence can't stop animated lands at all but a recall is a big blowout.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:23
|
|
|
Spreading Seas and Sea's Claim both shut down manlands though. I've been testing a lot against the whole gamut which led me to the decision to go UW as opposed to mono U. Much better board against affinity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:25
|
|
|
Yeah but it taking two cards to properly use your sideboard hate is really inefficient. edit: I seriously think if you're running specific Affinity sideboard hate it should be an inverse in numbers between Stony Silence and Hurkyl's Recall
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:28
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:I don't know, it sort of fit the ban criteria of the random "ban Nacatl" decision but it never got looked at so I sort of assume it will never really be banned. I just hate super linear decks when they also rock a very consistently high win percent. Yeah, Affinity's nowhere near as bad about it as Burn though. Not sure how I feel about a deck you could reasonably have a computer algorithm to play out being one of the top 5 decks in the format.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Yeah but it taking two cards to properly use your sideboard hate is really inefficient. edit: I seriously think if you're running specific Affinity sideboard hate it should be an inverse in numbers between Stony Silence and Hurkyl's Recall In my experience there are merits to both - Stoney Silence lets you run all over them with a better game, where Recall stops them dead if they try to go all-in. However if the affinity player expects the Recall and goes wide, it's AT BEST a one-turn setback for them. Where Stoney Silence is going to leave them with nothing but a handfull of 1/1s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Yeah, Affinity's nowhere near as bad about it as Burn though. isn't this every top tier deck of modern?Balon posted:In my experience there are merits to both - Stoney Silence lets you run all over them with a better game, where Recall stops them dead if they try to go all-in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:
If you can program the decisions for a computer casting Inquisition or Thoughtseize I'd unironically love to hear how you'd do it
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:
Yes. People tried to pretend that Twin wasn't this, when the deck was literally "stall out via remands, counterspells, bounce effects, and removal, until I can cast my kill combo, attack with my creatures if they don't have good blocks or they are willing to trade threats. Use snapcaster mage to get value out of bolts so i can kill their creatures or get my counterspells back, or use it to dig harder in my deck. Rinse and repeat"
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
anglachel posted:Yes. People tried to pretend that Twin wasn't this, when the deck was literally "stall out via remands, counterspells, bounce effects, and removal, until I can cast my kill combo, attack with my creatures if they don't have good blocks or they are willing to trade threats. Use snapcaster mage to get value out of bolts so i can kill their creatures or get my counterspells back, or use it to dig harder in my deck. Rinse and repeat" That's a lot of words to describe something you're alleging is braindead and simple
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:If you can program the decisions for a computer casting Inquisition or Thoughtseize I'd unironically love to hear how you'd do it Sure. You'd program the computer with most of the predominant deck lists. Then weight each card for it's power level and impact. (You can also have a modifer that makes cards where they don't have mana for them weighted less). If whatever flag you have set that its a rouge brew pops, you simply go to the general list of power level of each card in the programs card database (with adjustments based on mana in play and that the program sees in the hand). Then it takes a card. Of course this is the exact reason why Pro Players say they hate Modern. What your supposed to do is pretty rote at this point.....
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:That's a lot of words to describe something you're alleging is braindead and simple I can describe Affinity, and Burn with alot more words if you like? (Bogles might be a struggle though)
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:30 |
|
|
If you all want to be technical, any deck can be piloted skillfully by a computer with a series of decisions based around that deck and its spells. Even discard spells would be a matter of examining known information and figuring out what likely archetype is being run and then picking the high value card on a list.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 08:05
|
|
