That's not a statistical fact. You are talking about some long-term probability. I can draw my three of more than you draw your four of over thousands of games and still be within a perfectly normal statistical distribution.
so is variance and luck what you depend on? that's what you're saying... why aren't your 4-ofs, 3-ofs in your deck if you truly feel that way?
I don't depend on anything. I was just pointing out how wrong your logic was. Also, you keep making logical fallacies. You keep saying that Map is good against Rejection. Rejection is there to counter map and chalice. How exactly are you countering T2 chalice on the play?
We've taught this to death, but let's try one more time. Expedition Map and Chalice of the Void are VERY good against our deck. Rejection is extremely good against these card but it has the added bonus of countering all their creatures.
A common play I make is counter T1 Map and counter T3 Thought Knot Seer with flashback from snapcaster. Happens ALOT.
That's not a statistical fact. You are talking about some long-term probability. I can draw my three of more than you draw your four of over thousands of games and still be within a perfectly normal statistical distribution.
so is variance and luck what you depend on? that's what you're saying... why aren't your 4-ofs, 3-ofs in your deck if you truly feel that way?
I don't depend on anything. I was just pointing out how wrong your logic was. Also, you keep making logical fallacies. You keep saying that Map is good against Rejection. Rejection is there to counter map and chalice. How exactly are you countering T2 chalice on the play?
apell snare
YOu can counter Map with Spell Snare? JUUUUDDDGGGGEEEE = p
so is variance and luck what you depend on? that's what you're saying... why aren't your 4-ofs, 3-ofs in your deck if you truly feel that way?
I don't depend on anything. I was just pointing out how wrong your logic was. Also, you keep making logical fallacies. You keep saying that Map is good against Rejection. Rejection is there to counter map and chalice. How exactly are you countering T2 chalice on the play?
apell snare
YOu can counter Map with Spell Snare? JUUUUDDDGGGGEEEE = p
talking about chalice t2 on the play don't know what are u talking about
We were talking about Ceremonious rejection and the fact that it stops map and chalice. Spell Snare is an unreliable answer to EldraziTron. It might make the cut post-sideboard depending on your list but it's often rotting in hand. I usually keep it in because Walking Ballista for 1 is a real play the deck sometimes maes and the off chance to hit Chalice on 1 is usually better than some other spell in my deck.
A little late but I've been sick, short report on my run at MKM. All in all it went... fine. I got a lot of bad beats with harsh matchups and some ungodly poor luck, ending at 6-3 winning nothing but the flu
A little late but I've been sick, short report on my run at MKM. All in all it went... fine. I got a lot of bad beats with harsh matchups and some ungodly poor luck, ending at 6-3 winning nothing but the flu
Thanks for the report, Bearscape, it was a good read! 6-3 with some valuable lessons in there! Didn't you used to run Staticaster?
Have you or anybody else for that matter run Gideon of the Trials in a Nahiri list, and if so, what are their experiences with it?
Gideon of the trials doesn't fit well. The plan for Nahiri is keep the board relatively clear, land a Nahiri and tick up, secondary plan is use Nahiri as removal in grindy matchups and let cards like AV get you ahead in card advantage.
Gideon of the trials doesn't fit well. The plan for Nahiri is keep the board relatively clear, land a Nahiri and tick up, secondary plan is use Nahiri as removal in grindy matchups and let cards like AV get you ahead in card advantage.
Thanks for the response, TappingStones. Couldn't Gideon act as a removal spell of sorts with his +1? It would also give the deck utility from the +0 emblem, and the +0 beatdown fits well with a back-up plan of burn + snap + attack step.
I'm eventually going to give it a test when I get my copies of Nahiri, the Harbinger. Do you or anybody have any insight as to which part of the meta Gideon of the Trials is strong or weak against at the moment? A cross section of the two walkers strengths and weaknesses would help me get a better idea of how a trial set-up might look!
Open question to the forum as well of course!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
------------ URW Jeskai Control GUWRB Amulet Titan GR Ponza
Gideon of the trials doesn't fit well. The plan for Nahiri is keep the board relatively clear, land a Nahiri and tick up, secondary plan is use Nahiri as removal in grindy matchups and let cards like AV get you ahead in card advantage.
Thanks for the response, TappingStones. Couldn't Gideon act as a removal spell of sorts with his +1? It would also give the deck utility from the +0 emblem, and the +0 beatdown fits well with a back-up plan of burn + snap + attack step.
I'm eventually going to give it a test when I get my copies of Nahiri, the Harbinger. Do you or anybody have any insight as to which part of the meta Gideon of the Trials is strong or weak against at the moment? A cross section of the two walkers strengths and weaknesses would help me get a better idea of how a trial set-up might look!
Open question to the forum as well of course!
I don't think the gideon emblem has much value in our deck. The idea is to use removal or counters on T3 and then stick nahiri. I think Gideon deviates from the plan enough to make the deck quite a bit weaker. But I wish you luck in testing it for yourself.
A little late but I've been sick, short report on my run at MKM. All in all it went... fine. I got a lot of bad beats with harsh matchups and some ungodly poor luck, ending at 6-3 winning nothing but the flu
Thanks for the report, Bearscape, it was a good read! 6-3 with some valuable lessons in there! Didn't you used to run Staticaster?
Have you or anybody else for that matter run Gideon of the Trials in a Nahiri list, and if so, what are their experiences with it?
I had staticaster but ended up cutting it as people (correctly) noted my list was very weak to valakut. With the release of Opt I will kind of start from scratch, not even sure whether I will stick with Nahiri (even though she performed very well that weekend).
I tried Trials Gideon with Nahiri when he just came out, but it didn't work very well. You have to tap out way too often, and as TStones said they do not match each others' gameplan very well.
[quote]That's not a statistical fact. You are talking about some long-term probability. I can draw my three of more than you draw your four of over thousands of games and still be within a perfectly normal statistical distribution.
I don't depend on anything. I was just pointing out how wrong your logic was. Also, you keep making logical fallacies. You keep saying that Map is good against Rejection. Rejection is there to counter map and chalice. How exactly are you countering T2 chalice on the play?
the point of the numbers was that you cannot keep map and/or chalice and/or relic off of the board continually and consistently... it is why the matchup is unfavorable.. they will eventually.. usually by turn 4 or 5 and sometimes earlier... will resolve something extremely problematic...
there are gonna be games where rejection, snap rejection is going to make you feel nice... you may even win that game.. but it's not going to happen nearly enough... you know what the numbers are on that? 11.7%... i don't know how anyone terms that as often...
We've taught this to death, but let's try one more time. Expedition Map and Chalice of the Void are VERY good against our deck. Rejection is extremely good against these card but it has the added bonus of countering all their creatures.
A common play I make is counter T1 Map and counter T3 Thought Knot Seer with flashback from snapcaster. Happens ALOT.
Card is sick.
So how do you deal with Chalice, Expedition Map and so forth when you don't have Ceremonious Rejection? Statistically, there's no way you always have it in your opening hand against them after game 1.
We've taught this to death, but let's try one more time. Expedition Map and Chalice of the Void are VERY good against our deck. Rejection is extremely good against these card but it has the added bonus of countering all their creatures.
A common play I make is counter T1 Map and counter T3 Thought Knot Seer with flashback from snapcaster. Happens ALOT.
Card is sick.
So how do you deal with Chalice, Expedition Map and so forth when you don't have Ceremonious Rejection? Statistically, there's no way you always have it in your opening hand against them after game 1.
I never said always. They also don't always have T1 map and I have other counters online for T2 if I don't have rejection. Also 4 Serum visions to find stuff on T1.
We've taught this to death, but let's try one more time. Expedition Map and Chalice of the Void are VERY good against our deck. Rejection is extremely good against these card but it has the added bonus of countering all their creatures.
A common play I make is counter T1 Map and counter T3 Thought Knot Seer with flashback from snapcaster. Happens ALOT.
Card is sick.
So how do you deal with Chalice, Expedition Map and so forth when you don't have Ceremonious Rejection? Statistically, there's no way you always have it in your opening hand against them after game 1.
I never said always. They also don't always have T1 map and I have other counters online for T2 if I don't have rejection. Also 4 Serum visions to find stuff on T1.
And what happens when the counters you have from turn 2 onward don't work because they decide to fetch a Cavern of Souls?
On the Rejection issue, I think we need to consolidate the debate;
Question: Is it worth running Ceremonious Rejection in the sideboard to combat E-Tron?
Strengths
a) Hits every single E-Tron play apart from T1 Map or Relic while they are on the play and us on the draw
b) Is the most efficient 1 for 1 answer we can possible have for their deck, being a 1 mana spell that counters All is Dust, Planeswalkers, 0-Stones, Walking Ballistas, etc.
Weaknesses
a) is an awkward top-deck to a resolved Chalice of the Void in the corner case in which we are on the draw, we do not have rejection in hand, and they have chalice in their opening hand.
b) Utility is diminished against T1 Map into Cavern of Souls while they are on the play, or opening hand caverns.
If everybody agrees this is the essence of the argument, the rest is just symantics. It's obviously powerful against them but there are some cases where it is an awkward card. Regardless of the percentages either way, it's a high reward card with some risks (lets just say the chance of them finiding a cavern on the play is equaled by the chance the maximum value range of rejection / snap-rejection), and take the middle ground of single-use with no cavern as the median value point of the card.
a) Is Eldrazi Tron is prevalent in the local or current meta?
b) Is Rejections median value point in this MU worth the slot?
c) Does rejection hit other relevant MU's in the current meta?
d) Are there better cards specifically against E-Tron that we could use?
My answers would be;
a) Yes
b) Yes
c) Yes
d) No
So I would run Rejection. It's never dead on the play, and has small chance that it will be dead on the draw to some of their opening hands. I think it's important to run a high number, 3 or 4, since the t1/t2 plays are important ones. Even if one is afraid of cavern, I think it's plausible to board OUT 3 or 4 logic knots for 3 or 4 rejections, so that you keep your dead card count down for cavern, and keep your efficiency high. It's also worth noting that if you run 1 or 2 wear // tear or Engineered Explosives in your sideboard these can be a reliable way to remove chalice of the void x=1.
TLDR;
Rejection is the most efficient and comprehensive answer to E-Tron we can play, but has some awkward scenarios. It's power ranges from rejection / snap-rejection (hyper-efficiency) to a unplayable against chalice and cavern (dead).
There is a high prevalence of of E-Tron in the meta. Even a single cast of Rejection (not counting it's upper power limit and lower limit) is the most efficient thing we can answer E-Tron with, being at 1-mana. Rejection hits other decks like Affinity, Lantern and KCI, and the lack of a better answer to E-Tron specifically means that I feel bad leaving my sideboard without them.
The alternative I think is hope to dodge and use an incidental sideboard, usually a mix of Supreme Verdict, Stony Silence, Disdainful Stroke. But I do believe that the only way to get this MU into positive territory in games 2 and 3 involves Ceremonious Rejection. Good luck dodging E-Tron without it, Firer certainly had some!
On the Rejection issue, I think we need to consolidate the debate;
Question: Is it worth running Ceremonious Rejection in the sideboard to combat E-Tron?
Strengths
a) Hits every single E-Tron play apart from T1 Map or Relic while they are on the play and us on the draw
b) Is the most efficient 1 for 1 answer we can possible have for their deck, being a 1 mana spell that counters All is Dust, Planeswalkers, 0-Stones, Walking Ballistas, etc.
Weaknesses
a) is an awkward top-deck to a resolved Chalice of the Void in the corner case in which we are on the draw, we do not have rejection in hand, and they have chalice in their opening hand.
b) Utility is diminished against T1 Map into Cavern of Souls while they are on the play, or opening hand caverns.
If everybody agrees this is the essence of the argument, the rest is just symantics. It's obviously powerful against them but there are some cases where it is an awkward card. Regardless of the percentages either way, it's a high reward card with some risks (lets just say the chance of them finiding a cavern on the play is equaled by the chance the maximum value range of rejection / snap-rejection), and take the middle ground of single-use with no cavern as the median value point of the card.
a) Is Eldrazi Tron is prevalent in the local or current meta?
b) Is Rejections median value point in this MU worth the slot?
c) Does rejection hit other relevant MU's in the current meta?
d) Are there better cards specifically against E-Tron that we could use?
My answers would be;
a) Yes
b) Yes
c) Yes
d) No
So I would run Rejection. It's never dead on the play, and has small chance that it will be dead on the draw to some of their opening hands. I think it's important to run a high number, 3 or 4, since the t1/t2 plays are important ones. Even if one is afraid of cavern, I think it's plausible to board OUT 3 or 4 logic knots for 3 or 4 rejections, so that you keep your dead card count down for cavern, and keep your efficiency high. It's also worth noting that if you run 1 or 2 wear // tear or Engineered Explosives in your sideboard these can be a reliable way to remove chalice of the void x=1.
TLDR;
Rejection is the most efficient and comprehensive answer to E-Tron we can play, but has some awkward scenarios. It's power ranges from rejection / snap-rejection (hyper-efficiency) to a unplayable against chalice and cavern (dead).
There is a high prevalence of of E-Tron in the meta. Even a single cast of Rejection (not counting it's upper power limit and lower limit) is the most efficient thing we can answer E-Tron with, being at 1-mana. Rejection hits other decks like Affinity, Lantern and KCI, and the lack of a better answer to E-Tron specifically means that I feel bad leaving my sideboard without them.
The alternative I think is hope to dodge and use an incidental sideboard, usually a mix of Supreme Verdict, Stony Silence, Disdainful Stroke. But I do believe that the only way to get this MU into positive territory in games 2 and 3 involves Ceremonious Rejection. Good luck dodging E-Tron without it, Firer certainly had some!
I am not sure I would agree with it being "excellent" be other decks. If I had it in my sb, I'm not necessarily brining it in vs affinity. Could be too slow on the draw.
Moreover, The only time rejection excels is if it stops a turn 2 chalice.
Honestly from my experience chalice for 1 is the biggest way I loose this matchup. Rejection doesn't help with that.
@SunnY, Calm yourself. I was only asking questions because TappingStones seems to imply that Ceremonious Rejection is the best thing ever with several of his responses. It's great when it's good, but honestly, I really don't feel like that it's really so good you shouldn't consider alternatives. Even with 3 Ceremonious Rejection, the match is still not that good imo.
I am not sure I would agree with it being "excellent" be other decks. If I had it in my sb, I'm not necessarily brining it in vs affinity. Could be too slow on the draw.
Moreover, The only time rejection excels is if it stops a turn 2 chalice.
Honestly from my experience chalice for 1 is the biggest way I loose this matchup. Rejection doesn't help with that.
I'm sorry for nit-picking but since you have put the word "excellent" in quotation marks I must point out that I said 'Rejection hits other decks' twice and not 'excellent' against other decks. I would add here though that if you have rejection in your SB but don't bring it in against affinity, then I assume for some reason you would be sideboarding your mana-leaks and logic knots out? Rejection is a strict upgrade from logic knot against affinity 90% of the time. It also is one of few outs to etched champion. At the moment I don't see an argument that proves rejection does not improve the affinity MU...
In regards to the chalice point... yes, chalice on 1 is bad beats for us, but as discussed, if you run 3-4 rejection, then you dramatically increase your play against an opening hand chalice if you draw it on turns 0-2.
@SunnY, Calm yourself. I was only asking questions because TappingStones seems to imply that Ceremonious Rejection is the best thing ever with several of his responses. It's great when it's good, but honestly, I really don't feel like that it's really so good you shouldn't consider alternatives. Even with 3 Ceremonious Rejection, the match is still not that good imo.
Is it really necessary to calm me? I feel that most of what I say is quite composed to be honest. The post was just trying to get a birds eye of the debate rather than let it get bogged down with semantics and 1% points. I know your question was valid, and if you read my post you would see that it identifies a few points that agree with what you're saying, even though my result was a decision to run Rejection.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
------------ URW Jeskai Control GUWRB Amulet Titan GR Ponza
I thought i posted the numbers... but if you play 4 rejections you have a 57% chance of seeing at least one in the first 3 turns.. etron has a 87% chance of having one of map, cavern or chalice...
That means theres an approximate 37% chance(.87 times .43) that you wont draw rejection in time... im sorry thats not a rare occurrence...
You might say i didnt include logic knot but i also didnt include relic either..
Why does UW have a good etron matchup? Because they can deal with cavern and chalice in their main deck... why does GDS have a great matchup? They have discard and kcommand for chalice and cavern is irrelevant whem they have one mana 5/5s...
It points to why jeskai has a tough time.. we dont have an answer to them resolving chalice and finding cavern... and both of them together nukes about 19 cards... and their win percentage is much higher when they resolve either than the times where we draw one or even 2 or 3 rejections...
This is why im saying counters are not where you want to be.. and this goes for dstroke also.. the problem is dealing with resolved things.. if you are depending on countering everything.. i guarantee you that you are going to have a really bad time...
I thought i posted the numbers... but if you play 4 rejections you have a 57% chance of seeing at least one in the first 3 turns.. etron has a 87% chance of having one of map, cavern or chalice...
That means theres an approximate 37% chance(.87 times .43) that you wont draw rejection in time... im sorry thats not a rare occurrence...
You might say i didnt include logic knot but i also didnt include relic either..
Why does UW have a good etron matchup? Because they can deal with cavern and chalice in their main deck... why does GDS have a great matchup? They have discard and kcommand for chalice and cavern is irrelevant whem they have one mana 5/5s...
It points to why jeskai has a tough time.. we dont have an answer to them resolving chalice and finding cavern... and both of them together nukes about 19 cards... and their win percentage is much higher when they resolve either than the times where we draw one or even 2 or 3 rejections...
This is why im saying counters are not where you want to be.. and this goes for dstroke also.. the problem is dealing with resolved things.. if you are depending on countering everything.. i guarantee you that you are going to have a really bad time...
More 1% arguments. "Dies to doomblade" is not a rational argument and it's the same rationale a lot of people are using here. We have access to a one mana spell that counters almost every card in 2 tier one decks and a bunch of cards in a couple other strong decks you might run into. It's one of the only solid answers to Map...yet I still see people suggesting map is a problem. You can only lead horses to water so many times before you just give up.
If some of you want to keep losing to Eldrazi Tron feel free to do so. Many of us have shifted the post-board match-up significantly and we feel very good about our chances. If you don't want to use the best cards no one will force you to.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't depend on anything. I was just pointing out how wrong your logic was. Also, you keep making logical fallacies. You keep saying that Map is good against Rejection. Rejection is there to counter map and chalice. How exactly are you countering T2 chalice on the play?
A common play I make is counter T1 Map and counter T3 Thought Knot Seer with flashback from snapcaster. Happens ALOT.
Card is sick.
YOu can counter Map with Spell Snare? JUUUUDDDGGGGEEEE = p
We were talking about Ceremonious rejection and the fact that it stops map and chalice. Spell Snare is an unreliable answer to EldraziTron. It might make the cut post-sideboard depending on your list but it's often rotting in hand. I usually keep it in because Walking Ballista for 1 is a real play the deck sometimes maes and the off chance to hit Chalice on 1 is usually better than some other spell in my deck.
Thanks for the report, Bearscape, it was a good read! 6-3 with some valuable lessons in there! Didn't you used to run Staticaster?
Have you or anybody else for that matter run Gideon of the Trials in a Nahiri list, and if so, what are their experiences with it?
------------
URW Jeskai Control
GUWRB Amulet Titan
GR Ponza
Gideon of the trials doesn't fit well. The plan for Nahiri is keep the board relatively clear, land a Nahiri and tick up, secondary plan is use Nahiri as removal in grindy matchups and let cards like AV get you ahead in card advantage.
Thanks for the response, TappingStones. Couldn't Gideon act as a removal spell of sorts with his +1? It would also give the deck utility from the +0 emblem, and the +0 beatdown fits well with a back-up plan of burn + snap + attack step.
I'm eventually going to give it a test when I get my copies of Nahiri, the Harbinger. Do you or anybody have any insight as to which part of the meta Gideon of the Trials is strong or weak against at the moment? A cross section of the two walkers strengths and weaknesses would help me get a better idea of how a trial set-up might look!
Open question to the forum as well of course!
------------
URW Jeskai Control
GUWRB Amulet Titan
GR Ponza
I don't think the gideon emblem has much value in our deck. The idea is to use removal or counters on T3 and then stick nahiri. I think Gideon deviates from the plan enough to make the deck quite a bit weaker. But I wish you luck in testing it for yourself.
I had staticaster but ended up cutting it as people (correctly) noted my list was very weak to valakut. With the release of Opt I will kind of start from scratch, not even sure whether I will stick with Nahiri (even though she performed very well that weekend).
I tried Trials Gideon with Nahiri when he just came out, but it didn't work very well. You have to tap out way too often, and as TStones said they do not match each others' gameplan very well.
the point of the numbers was that you cannot keep map and/or chalice and/or relic off of the board continually and consistently... it is why the matchup is unfavorable.. they will eventually.. usually by turn 4 or 5 and sometimes earlier... will resolve something extremely problematic...
there are gonna be games where rejection, snap rejection is going to make you feel nice... you may even win that game.. but it's not going to happen nearly enough... you know what the numbers are on that? 11.7%... i don't know how anyone terms that as often...
So how do you deal with Chalice, Expedition Map and so forth when you don't have Ceremonious Rejection? Statistically, there's no way you always have it in your opening hand against them after game 1.
And what happens when the counters you have from turn 2 onward don't work because they decide to fetch a Cavern of Souls?
Question: Is it worth running Ceremonious Rejection in the sideboard to combat E-Tron?
Strengths
a) Hits every single E-Tron play apart from T1 Map or Relic while they are on the play and us on the draw
b) Is the most efficient 1 for 1 answer we can possible have for their deck, being a 1 mana spell that counters All is Dust, Planeswalkers, 0-Stones, Walking Ballistas, etc.
Weaknesses
a) is an awkward top-deck to a resolved Chalice of the Void in the corner case in which we are on the draw, we do not have rejection in hand, and they have chalice in their opening hand.
b) Utility is diminished against T1 Map into Cavern of Souls while they are on the play, or opening hand caverns.
If everybody agrees this is the essence of the argument, the rest is just symantics. It's obviously powerful against them but there are some cases where it is an awkward card. Regardless of the percentages either way, it's a high reward card with some risks (lets just say the chance of them finiding a cavern on the play is equaled by the chance the maximum value range of rejection / snap-rejection), and take the middle ground of single-use with no cavern as the median value point of the card.
a) Is Eldrazi Tron is prevalent in the local or current meta?
b) Is Rejections median value point in this MU worth the slot?
c) Does rejection hit other relevant MU's in the current meta?
d) Are there better cards specifically against E-Tron that we could use?
My answers would be;
a) Yes
b) Yes
c) Yes
d) No
So I would run Rejection. It's never dead on the play, and has small chance that it will be dead on the draw to some of their opening hands. I think it's important to run a high number, 3 or 4, since the t1/t2 plays are important ones. Even if one is afraid of cavern, I think it's plausible to board OUT 3 or 4 logic knots for 3 or 4 rejections, so that you keep your dead card count down for cavern, and keep your efficiency high. It's also worth noting that if you run 1 or 2 wear // tear or Engineered Explosives in your sideboard these can be a reliable way to remove chalice of the void x=1.
TLDR;
Rejection is the most efficient and comprehensive answer to E-Tron we can play, but has some awkward scenarios. It's power ranges from rejection / snap-rejection (hyper-efficiency) to a unplayable against chalice and cavern (dead).
There is a high prevalence of of E-Tron in the meta. Even a single cast of Rejection (not counting it's upper power limit and lower limit) is the most efficient thing we can answer E-Tron with, being at 1-mana. Rejection hits other decks like Affinity, Lantern and KCI, and the lack of a better answer to E-Tron specifically means that I feel bad leaving my sideboard without them.
The alternative I think is hope to dodge and use an incidental sideboard, usually a mix of Supreme Verdict, Stony Silence, Disdainful Stroke. But I do believe that the only way to get this MU into positive territory in games 2 and 3 involves Ceremonious Rejection. Good luck dodging E-Tron without it, Firer certainly had some!
------------
URW Jeskai Control
GUWRB Amulet Titan
GR Ponza
I am not sure I would agree with it being "excellent" be other decks. If I had it in my sb, I'm not necessarily brining it in vs affinity. Could be too slow on the draw.
Moreover, The only time rejection excels is if it stops a turn 2 chalice.
Honestly from my experience chalice for 1 is the biggest way I loose this matchup. Rejection doesn't help with that.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
I'm sorry for nit-picking but since you have put the word "excellent" in quotation marks I must point out that I said 'Rejection hits other decks' twice and not 'excellent' against other decks. I would add here though that if you have rejection in your SB but don't bring it in against affinity, then I assume for some reason you would be sideboarding your mana-leaks and logic knots out? Rejection is a strict upgrade from logic knot against affinity 90% of the time. It also is one of few outs to etched champion. At the moment I don't see an argument that proves rejection does not improve the affinity MU...
In regards to the chalice point... yes, chalice on 1 is bad beats for us, but as discussed, if you run 3-4 rejection, then you dramatically increase your play against an opening hand chalice if you draw it on turns 0-2.
Is it really necessary to calm me? I feel that most of what I say is quite composed to be honest. The post was just trying to get a birds eye of the debate rather than let it get bogged down with semantics and 1% points. I know your question was valid, and if you read my post you would see that it identifies a few points that agree with what you're saying, even though my result was a decision to run Rejection.
------------
URW Jeskai Control
GUWRB Amulet Titan
GR Ponza
That means theres an approximate 37% chance(.87 times .43) that you wont draw rejection in time... im sorry thats not a rare occurrence...
You might say i didnt include logic knot but i also didnt include relic either..
Why does UW have a good etron matchup? Because they can deal with cavern and chalice in their main deck... why does GDS have a great matchup? They have discard and kcommand for chalice and cavern is irrelevant whem they have one mana 5/5s...
It points to why jeskai has a tough time.. we dont have an answer to them resolving chalice and finding cavern... and both of them together nukes about 19 cards... and their win percentage is much higher when they resolve either than the times where we draw one or even 2 or 3 rejections...
This is why im saying counters are not where you want to be.. and this goes for dstroke also.. the problem is dealing with resolved things.. if you are depending on countering everything.. i guarantee you that you are going to have a really bad time...
More 1% arguments. "Dies to doomblade" is not a rational argument and it's the same rationale a lot of people are using here. We have access to a one mana spell that counters almost every card in 2 tier one decks and a bunch of cards in a couple other strong decks you might run into. It's one of the only solid answers to Map...yet I still see people suggesting map is a problem. You can only lead horses to water so many times before you just give up.
If some of you want to keep losing to Eldrazi Tron feel free to do so. Many of us have shifted the post-board match-up significantly and we feel very good about our chances. If you don't want to use the best cards no one will force you to.