There are two Leonin Arbiter decks that are popular. Death and Taxes (which is primarily mono white) and it is a lot of flicker tricks, the other is G/W Hatebears. I'm wanting to try my hand at one or the other but am not sure which to try.
I didn't ask it within the threads for each deck as I figured I would receive biased replies.
If it helps at all, in my local area its mostly:
Burn
Scapeshift
UR Twin
Melira Pod
Merfolk
Tron
Delver
Budget isn't part of the discussion with this, I'm purely wondering which of the two Leonin Arbiter decks are better against that meta.
Do you like the idea of winning through a resolved emakrul? Yea. Try death and taxes haha. Being serious though, there isn't a card more versatile than flickerwisp in modern. I'd run GW DnT and get the best compromise between the two decks. It's a plainly competitive deck and if that's the playstyle you're looking for you'll love it. EITHER WAY prepare to do a LOT of meta research. Both decks hinge on making the right tweaks to be successful.
I felt like the D&T version really needed turn 1 aether vial to function properly while GW doesn't even need vial at all. There are less tricks with GW but it feels more solid to me, playing uncounterable threats like Loxodon Smiter and versatile utility cards like scavenging ooze and qasali pridemage.
GW occasionally lets you live the dream of turn 1 dork into turn 2 arbiter + ghost quarter which is pretty amazing. In the end I stuck with GW.
Do you like the idea of winning through a resolved emakrul? Yea. Try death and taxes haha. Being serious though, there isn't a card more versatile than flickerwisp in modern. I'd run GW DnT and get the best compromise between the two decks. It's a plainly competitive deck and if that's the playstyle you're looking for you'll love it. EITHER WAY prepare to do a LOT of meta research. Both decks hinge on making the right tweaks to be successful.
What would a GW D&T look like? Are you just playing G/W Hatebears with Flickerwisp in it? Or is it something different?
I felt like the D&T version really needed turn 1 aether vial to function properly while GW doesn't even need vial at all. There are less tricks with GW but it feels more solid to me, playing uncounterable threats like Loxodon Smiter and versatile utility cards like scavenging ooze and qasali pridemage.
GW occasionally lets you live the dream of turn 1 dork into turn 2 arbiter + ghost quarter which is pretty amazing. In the end I stuck with GW.
So, you'd say that the dependency on Aether Vial tipped you over the edge towards G/W Hatebears?
Against Tron, D&T is really, really strong. MeliraPod isn't bad for D&T either; you've got search hate, you've got paths, you've got RiP from the board. The burn MU is again decent; probably better for D&T than hatebears, because if you can flicker a riftwatcher or finks they're in trouble. Scapeshift again is quite a good MU for D&T, I think, having not played much against it.
Merfolk is one I've not played against much, so can't comment on. UR Twin is probably a better MU for D&T assuming you're looking at a GW D&T as opposed to BW or mono-W (pridemage will probably help a ton)- you've got flickerwisps to exile the exarch in response to the trigger tapping down a vial, giving you an extra turn if it's done at EoT. It's not a great MU, but certainly winnable- D&T has the odd situation of having only a few decks it's really, really weak to, and few decks it's really, really strong against- most MUs are 45-55 or vice versa, I think.
D&T isn't great against Delver lists with pyromancer. That's a tough MU for us, having played against it once.
Not really sure how Hatebears stacks up in these MUs, not playing that deck, but it's probably similar, I'd guess. Less 3/3 first strikers, less flicker shenanigans, more beefy dudes, so probably a worse Twin/worse burn MUs and better Delver MU? Would need someone who plays Hatebears to chime in here. May be good to ask in the respective threads how that deck stacks up in your meta?
Thanks for chiming in on the discussion! I have posted a link to this thread in both of their threads, so hopefully people from both sides will show up.
Hmm, I have a decent amount of experience running GW Hatebears:
Merfolk: This matchup is very rough, they are just a better fair deck. Burn: I don't think anyone actually likes to see this deck...That said, usually you can race if your able to slow them down a turn or two with thalia or some lifegain. Scapeshift: I have found it favorable though it can be tricky. Especially important is if they see an anger or not games 2 and 3. UR Twin: Decently favorable. Better than death&taxes because you have the torpor orb effect in main and side or just side. Melira Pod: A good matchup for either deck. Tron: Depends, I have found GR favorable and blue slightly less so. Delver: This match has been extremely close for me, If you win the dice roll you have a significantly better chance of taking it in 3.
If you do a search in the Hatebears thread I have a post explaining my logic on Aether vial in hatebears if that helps: Link. As said earlier Death & Taxes is a little like pod in that the deck is completely different depending on if it has its crucial artifact to abuse or not.
The main difference between the two, in my eyes, is the style in which each executes their plan. Both want to represent a fast clock but Hatebears entirely consists of creatures that can attack but more importantly they "hate" in some form, This ideally slows your opponent down enough that they are dead. Death & Taxes has some hate but includes pure beatdown cards like blade splicer while leaning more heavily on combat and blink tricks to set their opponent off balance, gain value, and then kill them.
Do you like the idea of winning through a resolved emakrul? Yea. Try death and taxes haha. Being serious though, there isn't a card more versatile than flickerwisp in modern. I'd run GW DnT and get the best compromise between the two decks. It's a plainly competitive deck and if that's the playstyle you're looking for you'll love it. EITHER WAY prepare to do a LOT of meta research. Both decks hinge on making the right tweaks to be successful.
What would a GW D&T look like? Are you just playing G/W Hatebears with Flickerwisp in it? Or is it something different?
My sig. GW D&T is usually a regular D&T list with a few G cards, most notably Noble Hierarch and Ooze, sometimes also Qasali Pridemage and Gaddock Teeg. There is also room for more Resto/Linvala because of Hierarch. Most common SB options are probably Creeping Corrosion and Choke. This does NOT make it play like Hatebears.
Between the different D&T and Hatebears variants, I believe GW D&T has been putting up the best results, but I'm not 100% on that - it could just be where my attention is fixed.
Edit: As a D&T player, I think Epsilonson's above description of the differences between the decks looks spot on. I also think that Hatebears has a better matchup against GBx than D&T. D&T has a lot of internal synergy that can be picked apart by the black component, while Hatebears top decks somewhat better.
My sig. GW D&T is usually a regular D&T list with a few G cards, most notably Noble Hierarch and Ooze, sometimes also Qasali Pridemage and Gaddock Teeg. There is also room for more Resto/Linvala because of Hierarch. Most common SB options are probably Creeping Corrosion and Choke. This does NOT make it play like Hatebears.
Between the different D&T and Hatebears variants, I believe GW D&T has been putting up the best results, but I'm not 100% on that - it could just be where my attention is fixed.
Edit: As a D&T player, I think Epsilonson's above description of the differences between the decks looks spot on. I also think that Hatebears has a better matchup against GBx than D&T. D&T has a lot of internal synergy that can be picked apart by the black component, while Hatebears top decks somewhat better.
I agree completely. GW D&T and GW Hatebears play quite differently. I've also noticed D&T (of both variants) putting up more results than GW Hatebears (at least online and in large tournaments). I play GW Hatebears locally and do decently with it but it's hard to argue with tournament results.
I know this wasn't really a part of your question, but I'd consider your own personal playstyle.
GW Hatebears is exactly what it sounds like: creatures that hate on certain strategies. Playing the deck involves a lot of combat math and knowing when to drop your creatures.
D&T involves more internal interaction: frequently you'll flicker your own creatures for value, either as a combat trick or protection from a spell.
Full disclosure: I'm a D&T player, so I'm biased. That said, I prefer D&T because I like combat tricks and complex lines of play. D&T probably requires a deeper knowledge of any given metagame, because it incrementally gains an advantage over the course of the game and it's highly reactive to what your opponent is playing. GW Hatebears is probably easier to play in a "linear" fashion, involving a stock list, powerful creatures, and strong general taxing. I'd rather take GW Hatebears into an unknown meta, as I think it's more resilient to more decks. But if you're going to learn to play a deck for a long period of time, D&T is probably more rewarding, with more possible splashes (D&T can be mono-white, or any combination of WX).
Playing millions of cards every turn... Slowly and systematically obliterating any chance my opponent has of winning... Clicking the multitude of locking mechanisms into place... Not even trying to win myself until turn 10+ once I have nigh absolute control... Watching my opponent desperately trying to navigate the labyrinthine prison that I've constructed... Seeing the light of hope fade and ultimately extinguished in an excruciatingly slow manner... THAT'S fun Magic.
We have 2-3 users that are dramatically making this thread incomprehensible and non-productive for anyone else to possibly join in the discussion. This needs to change.
Every time I see [ktkenshinx] post in here, I get the impression of a stern dad walking in on a bunch of kids trying to do something dumb and just shaking his head in disappointment.
Near Mint: The same as Slightly Played, but we threw some Altoids in the box we stored it in to cover up the scent of dead mice. Slightly Played: The base condition for all MTG cards. This card looks OK, but there’s one minor annoying ding in it that will always irritate and distract you whenever you draw it. Moderately Played: This card looks like it survived the Tet Offensive tucked inside the waistband of GI underwear. It may smell like it, too. Heavily Played: This card looks like the remains of Mohammed Atta’s passport after 9/11. It may be playable if you double-sleeve it to stop the chunks from falling out. The condition formerly known as "Washing Machine Grade" Damaged: This card is the unfortunate victim of a Mirrorweave/March of the Machines/Chaos Confetti/Mindslaver combo.
[M]aking counterfeit cards is the absolute height of dishonesty. Ask yourself this question: Since most people...are totally cool with the use of proxies...what purpose do [high] quality counterfeit cards serve?
I've playrd both for a while and settled on Hatebears. It's more my style, and as others have said is more reliable in topdecks and without Vial. Both are difficult to adjust properly for a given meta and playing out your hand accordingly, but this can be remedied through experience playing the deck.
Do you like the idea of winning through a resolved emakrul? Yea. Try death and taxes haha. Being serious though, there isn't a card more versatile than flickerwisp in modern. I'd run GW DnT and get the best compromise between the two decks. It's a plainly competitive deck and if that's the playstyle you're looking for you'll love it. EITHER WAY prepare to do a LOT of meta research. Both decks hinge on making the right tweaks to be successful.
What would a GW D&T look like? Are you just playing G/W Hatebears with Flickerwisp in it? Or is it something different?
A lot of the decks identified as G/W Hatebears in threads about tournament winners are actually G/W Death and Taxes. The difference in the decks are relatively minuscule, with Death and Taxes lists recognizable by having Blade Splicer, Flickerwisp and Restoration Angel.
They look very similar when you're looking at the lists, but I think I can safely claim that most D&T or Hatebears players will tell you that they feel and play quite differently. Jund and GB Souls also have a huge overlap in cards, but they're far from the same deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When I hit my 3000 post mark, I'm gone for good.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
I've been wondering the same myself. I'm torn between the two myself. Either way I'm going green and white as I've traded for 3 Nobles. Only thing is I really don't want to rely on flashing in and out blade splicer, but the combat tricks from flashing other creatures could be fun. and on the other hand if someone sides in Hushwing Gryff things'll go down fast for DnT.
In my experience, GW is the way to go. These are essentially the pros as I see them.
-Windswept Heath will reduce some of the mana consistency issues.
-Being able to 'go big' seems relevant against some of the decks you mentioned.
-Stirring Wildwood is a total hoss and should be regarded accordingly.
-Access to green provides more hate options within your 75. (Scooze, Smiter, Qasali Pridemage, etc)
-As mentioned above, sometimes the tricky interactions in D&T don't line up quite right and leave you out to dry. This is the main reason for me; I'm a man that prefers consistency.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Decks
Standard: Mono Red #GetSwol
Elsewhere: Random Brews All Day, Erreday
~
They look very similar when you're looking at the lists, but I think I can safely claim that most D&T or Hatebears players will tell you that they feel and play quite differently. Jund and GB Souls also have a huge overlap in cards, but they're far from the same deck.
this is a good point I forgot to bring up. Losing to Torpor Orb in the side for decks like Pod and Twin is a bummer.
In my experience, GW is the way to go. These are essentially the pros as I see them.
-Windswept Heath will reduce some of the mana consistency issues.
-Being able to 'go big' seems relevant against some of the decks you mentioned.
-Stirring Wildwood is a total hoss and should be regarded accordingly.
-Access to green provides more hate options within your 75. (Scooze, Smiter, Qasali Pridemage, etc)
-As mentioned above, sometimes the tricky interactions in D&T don't line up quite right and leave you out to dry. This is the main reason for me; I'm a man that prefers consistency.
That last part is true and a valid reason to pick bears. Sometimes the synergies don't click, and while the pieces are good on their own, they aren't as chock full of isolated value as those in HB. Sometimes you top deck Wisp with no Vial and no good targets, sometimes you draw a Splicer when you've just played your Restos/Wisp. Sometimes you don't get your Vial until it's too late to be good, and it's an almost dead draw. I feel that GW D&T might be the better deck when it clicks, but HB should easily be more consistent and less susceptible to misplays.
They look very similar when you're looking at the lists, but I think I can safely claim that most D&T or Hatebears players will tell you that they feel and play quite differently. Jund and GB Souls also have a huge overlap in cards, but they're far from the same deck.
this is a good point I forgot to bring up. Losing to Torpor Orb in the side for decks like Pod and Twin is a bummer.
I've always felt that the Orb/Gryff problem is exaggerated. The only card it completely breaks is Splicer, and GW D&T plays Pridemage. It's a bit like Pod not drawing Birthing Pod. I've lost more to Moon and Ghostly Prison.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When I hit my 3000 post mark, I'm gone for good.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
I have lost games because I couldn't get around Torpor Orb. I also like to play Orb in my sideboard, which is a terrible idea for DnT, but not really a problem for Hatebears.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I didn't ask it within the threads for each deck as I figured I would receive biased replies.
If it helps at all, in my local area its mostly:
Burn
Scapeshift
UR Twin
Melira Pod
Merfolk
Tron
Delver
Budget isn't part of the discussion with this, I'm purely wondering which of the two Leonin Arbiter decks are better against that meta.
Thanks in advance for any discussion!
Edited: Formatting
I felt like the D&T version really needed turn 1 aether vial to function properly while GW doesn't even need vial at all. There are less tricks with GW but it feels more solid to me, playing uncounterable threats like Loxodon Smiter and versatile utility cards like scavenging ooze and qasali pridemage.
GW occasionally lets you live the dream of turn 1 dork into turn 2 arbiter + ghost quarter which is pretty amazing. In the end I stuck with GW.
What would a GW D&T look like? Are you just playing G/W Hatebears with Flickerwisp in it? Or is it something different?
So, you'd say that the dependency on Aether Vial tipped you over the edge towards G/W Hatebears?
Thanks for chiming in on the discussion! I have posted a link to this thread in both of their threads, so hopefully people from both sides will show up.
Merfolk: This matchup is very rough, they are just a better fair deck.
Burn: I don't think anyone actually likes to see this deck...That said, usually you can race if your able to slow them down a turn or two with thalia or some lifegain.
Scapeshift: I have found it favorable though it can be tricky. Especially important is if they see an anger or not games 2 and 3.
UR Twin: Decently favorable. Better than death&taxes because you have the torpor orb effect in main and side or just side.
Melira Pod: A good matchup for either deck.
Tron: Depends, I have found GR favorable and blue slightly less so.
Delver: This match has been extremely close for me, If you win the dice roll you have a significantly better chance of taking it in 3.
If you do a search in the Hatebears thread I have a post explaining my logic on Aether vial in hatebears if that helps: Link. As said earlier Death & Taxes is a little like pod in that the deck is completely different depending on if it has its crucial artifact to abuse or not.
The main difference between the two, in my eyes, is the style in which each executes their plan. Both want to represent a fast clock but Hatebears entirely consists of creatures that can attack but more importantly they "hate" in some form, This ideally slows your opponent down enough that they are dead. Death & Taxes has some hate but includes pure beatdown cards like blade splicer while leaning more heavily on combat and blink tricks to set their opponent off balance, gain value, and then kill them.
GUGEdric, Spymaster of Trest - Elfball
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic- Doomsday!
RWUEphara, God of the Polis - Blink + Control
GBGGlissa, the Traitor - Stax & Lands
URGMaelstrom Wanderer - Goodstuff RUG
RGWMayael the Anima - Timmy
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher - The One Hit Wonder
RGWMarath, Will of the Wild - Old-school Enchantress Hate
RWRAurelia, the Warleader - Equipment Aggro
GGGReki, the History of Kamigawa - Legends + Banding
UBRSedris, the Traitor King - Creatures with : Ability
BUBPhenax, God of Deception - Mill
*Sidenote, I specifically excluded infinite combos from all these decks with the exception of Marath and the squirrel nest + Earthcraft combo.
Looking for something Aggressive in modern? Try - BR Aggro
Between the different D&T and Hatebears variants, I believe GW D&T has been putting up the best results, but I'm not 100% on that - it could just be where my attention is fixed.
Edit: As a D&T player, I think Epsilonson's above description of the differences between the decks looks spot on. I also think that Hatebears has a better matchup against GBx than D&T. D&T has a lot of internal synergy that can be picked apart by the black component, while Hatebears top decks somewhat better.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
I agree completely. GW D&T and GW Hatebears play quite differently. I've also noticed D&T (of both variants) putting up more results than GW Hatebears (at least online and in large tournaments). I play GW Hatebears locally and do decently with it but it's hard to argue with tournament results.
GW Hatebears is exactly what it sounds like: creatures that hate on certain strategies. Playing the deck involves a lot of combat math and knowing when to drop your creatures.
D&T involves more internal interaction: frequently you'll flicker your own creatures for value, either as a combat trick or protection from a spell.
Full disclosure: I'm a D&T player, so I'm biased. That said, I prefer D&T because I like combat tricks and complex lines of play. D&T probably requires a deeper knowledge of any given metagame, because it incrementally gains an advantage over the course of the game and it's highly reactive to what your opponent is playing. GW Hatebears is probably easier to play in a "linear" fashion, involving a stock list, powerful creatures, and strong general taxing. I'd rather take GW Hatebears into an unknown meta, as I think it's more resilient to more decks. But if you're going to learn to play a deck for a long period of time, D&T is probably more rewarding, with more possible splashes (D&T can be mono-white, or any combination of WX).
WUDeath&TaxesWG
Legacy
UBRGDredgeUBRG
UHigh TideU
URGLandsURG
WR Card Choice List
WUR American D&T
WUB Esper D&T
The Reserved List
Heat Maps
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
Commander
U Tetsuko Umezawa, Fugitive
RG Zilortha, Strength Incarnate
WB Amalia Benavides Aguirre
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
-Windswept Heath will reduce some of the mana consistency issues.
-Being able to 'go big' seems relevant against some of the decks you mentioned.
-Stirring Wildwood is a total hoss and should be regarded accordingly.
-Access to green provides more hate options within your 75. (Scooze, Smiter, Qasali Pridemage, etc)
-As mentioned above, sometimes the tricky interactions in D&T don't line up quite right and leave you out to dry. This is the main reason for me; I'm a man that prefers consistency.
Standard: Mono Red #GetSwol
Elsewhere: Random Brews All Day, Erreday
~
this is a good point I forgot to bring up. Losing to Torpor Orb in the side for decks like Pod and Twin is a bummer.
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=13642&iddeck=100212
for reference.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF