im getting pretty tired of the old 'x needs more skills than y' discussion.
i don't think that control is dead, just is not an easy meta (mainly due to resilient creatures and cavern and other stuff), but eventually, when the t1 decks list settle, they will come back has an answer to them.
is hard to play control when there is so much variance or the meta is so wide open like right now... imo
A lot of variables have come together to make Control a very weak strategy in our current meta. I think one of the bigger factors is the lack of a boogie man for Control to dedicate itself towards beating. If the health of control is inversely related to the diversity of the meta, I hope I never see Control again. This meta is awesome.
A lot of variables have come together to make Control a very weak strategy in our current meta. I think one of the bigger factors is the lack of a boogie man for Control to dedicate itself towards beating. If the health of control is inversely related to the diversity of the meta, I hope I never see Control again. This meta is awesome.
Also a really good point.
Control decks typically thrive either because they're the nail that can poke a hole in the meta, or because they're the hammer that is powerful enough to ignore the meta.
Without any one deck to focus on beating, it's a crapshoot. Midrange is HUGE in this format, and that's something we haven't seen since Boat Brew, which makes your matchups that much more erratic.
As you said...if this is the consequence, then thank ****ing gawd. No one archetype has been truly dismissed in this format (you could argue combo, but Reckoner/Blasphemous, and even Door to Nothingness have made waves), and I can't see any way that isn't a positive.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
Dredge, Evo-Chord, U/G Faeries, Living End, Something New
Control is insanely easier to play then aggro is, you seem like one of the players that have become elitist from casting to many jaces in your life.
I am a control and tempo player and even admit that aggro is way more difficult to play.
give me a reason why planning sweepers and countering cards is easier than calculating combat damage, playing around sweepers and removal, and keeping a steady clock on your opponent while accounting for multiple hidden variables.
Neither style...scratch that, no style of deck is inherently easier to play, even though some builds of deck are easier to play. For example, Naya Blitz is a fairly easy to play aggro deck, but still requires some skills as an aggro player.
Which is where the clincher in this lies. Different strategies require different skills and different focuses. Control focuses on "control" not worrying about rushing to victory, it makes sure to stabilize repeatedly and maintains control of a given situation, understanding that when it loses that control it will lose. It often requires patience, for thought, and planning several steps ahead of the opponent. It is the chess of magic.
Midrange focuses on maximum efficiency of cards. It focuses on playing the very best of what it has to offer, and forcing the opponent to spend to many resources to keep up. It also requires an understanding of "scrapping" or staying alive. It is the survivalist strategy of magic and requires a different set of thought skills.
Combo focuses on one strategy, but because it's one strategy is often worried about being disrupted. A good combo player must be able to bate, and misdirect the opponent so that the opponent walks into the combo and loses. It also requires a different set of skills for card power determination, since the combo player is all about synergy and less about power. You have to understand full deck cohesion to work your deck to your style and make it a tighter fit.
Finally aggro requires an understanding of continued pressure. You must keep clocks up and never over-extend yourself into dangerous territory. You have to force up your opponents shields at the right time to crush them and ride to victory. It requires quick and fluid understandings of basic math, with no room for error, and also requires you to understand your full situation so you don't walk into traps. You have to strike correctly less you lose your momentum, because momentum, much like control's control, is your road to victory, and once lost won't come back.
All deck types require skill, although specific decks of any type may be easier to play. I can say that Naya Blitz is a pretty easy deck to play right now, but Cawblade was pretty easy to play as well.
This. Aggro takes way more skill. When I play aggro or aggro/combo decks there are so many variables because they have cards in hand and I dont. Also the combat math is very complicated. The balance or overcommiting or not is extreme. Control on the other hand? Vs an aggro guy its simple as all his stuff is on the table probably. Then you just use a counter spell, whatever, its not complex in any way. Sweepers are an example of dumbed down magic.
A bad aggro player will lose alot of games a good one wont lose. I know because I play aggro and as I have improved and had competitive close games I find that its very very frequent for games to be decided by me making a tiny error.
Yeah man, all that basic arithmetic is pretty taxing. I mean, pattern finding, solving a problem when all of the pieces are in front of you... that's hard stuff.
Or not.
If you're struggling with the maths in a game of magic, I feel bad for you. By your own admission, the hardest part of a game for you is when you have no cards in hand, and the control player is holding answers. This is Bayesian probability; you have to make a decision based on probabilities whose certainties are unknown to you. This is the default game state for a control deck, and is why control vs. control matches are some of the best games you'll ever play or see. Aggro doesn't really care about what a player has in his or her hand. Funny that when they do have to care, the game gets a lot harder. In contrast, a control deck always cares about what a player is holding in hand.
Neither style...scratch that, no style of deck is inherently easier to play, even though some builds of deck are easier to play. For example, Naya Blitz is a fairly easy to play aggro deck, but still requires some skills as an aggro player.
Which is where the clincher in this lies. Different strategies require different skills and different focuses. Control focuses on "control" not worrying about rushing to victory, it makes sure to stabilize repeatedly and maintains control of a given situation, understanding that when it loses that control it will lose. It often requires patience, for thought, and planning several steps ahead of the opponent. It is the chess of magic.
Midrange focuses on maximum efficiency of cards. It focuses on playing the very best of what it has to offer, and forcing the opponent to spend to many resources to keep up. It also requires an understanding of "scrapping" or staying alive. It is the survivalist strategy of magic and requires a different set of thought skills.
Combo focuses on one strategy, but because it's one strategy is often worried about being disrupted. A good combo player must be able to bate, and misdirect the opponent so that the opponent walks into the combo and loses. It also requires a different set of skills for card power determination, since the combo player is all about synergy and less about power. You have to understand full deck cohesion to work your deck to your style and make it a tighter fit.
Finally aggro requires an understanding of continued pressure. You must keep clocks up and never over-extend yourself into dangerous territory. You have to force up your opponents shields at the right time to crush them and ride to victory. It requires quick and fluid understandings of basic math, with no room for error, and also requires you to understand your full situation so you don't walk into traps. You have to strike correctly less you lose your momentum, because momentum, much like control's control, is your road to victory, and once lost won't come back.
All deck types require skill, although specific decks of any type may be easier to play. I can say that Naya Blitz is a pretty easy deck to play right now, but Cawblade was pretty easy to play as well.
I agree with this... each archtype requires a different set of skills. I have played every archetype in the last two years none are inherently easy.
Stop being elitest.
I reiterate Aristocrats is the hardest deck to play and it has a ton more play to it than basic maths... I know of an esper control player that tried to play it but gave up because it was too hard.
Personally I still think that wizards has gone too far, what I want to see is that all controls options are conditional, mana leak was too strong. However cavern was a huge mistake and I don't like what voice and sire do to a control player... and thrag is also massive pain in the arse (however without it mid range wouldn't work). Control being forced to meta game is a good thing but completely losing tools they need to work against anything and at the same time being hated on is a big problem. I'll jump through hoops but I want to be rewarded at the end.
P.S Humanimator is a combo deck that exists in the meta game
Yeah man, all that basic arithmetic is pretty taxing. I mean, pattern finding, solving a problem when all of the pieces are in front of you... that's hard stuff.
Or not.
If you're struggling with the maths in a game of magic, I feel bad for you. By your own admission, the hardest part of a game for you is when you have no cards in hand, and the control player is holding answers. This is Bayesian probability; you have to make a decision based on probabilities whose certainties are unknown to you. This is the default game state for a control deck, and is why control vs. control matches are some of the best games you'll ever play or see. Aggro doesn't really care about what a player has in his or her hand. Funny that when they do have to care, the game gets a lot harder. In contrast, a control deck always cares about what a player is holding in hand.
I added the bold for emphasis, because this sentence is blatantly wrong.
Aggro cares just as much as Control cares, it's just that Aggro cannot deal with the answers as well. Thus a good Aggro player also has to predict what the opponent is holding, is likely to draw into, etc. It's exactly the same calculations a Control player goes through. Except Aggro has fewer answers. Aggro has to work toward virtual CA (meaning killing the Control player before he finds enough answers to empty the aggro player's hand and board of threats).
Control vs. Control games may be "interesting" to watch because of all their interactions, but Control vs. Aggro is the hardest match-up in Magic. For the Aggro player. Aggro always cares what's in his opponent's hand. A great Aggro player can usually tell you, at least the percentages of what's likely there, and whether they'll (be able to) play around it or not.
Personally I still think that wizards has gone too far, what I want to see is that all controls options are conditional, mana leak was too strong. However cavern was a huge mistake and I don't like what voice and sire do to a control player... and thrag is also massive pain in the arse (however without it mid range wouldn't work). Control being forced to meta game is a good thing but completely losing tools they need to work against anything and at the same time being hated on is a big problem. I'll jump through hoops but I want to be rewarded at the end.
See... I think what is going on here is Wizards for 1 year decided that the metagame would be like this. The lack of really strong control finisher for the past year is pretty telling (no Wurmcoil Engine or anything like that). Thragtusk kind of fit the mold of Wurmcoil Engine, but because it was green it led to mostly midrange decks playing it.... and ironically it ended up being enemy #1 for control anyway. Stuff like Cavern of Souls finished the job.
But in a few months all those cards are going to rotate out. And now we have stuff like Aetherling. It's looking like it could be the new control finisher. Or perhaps there will be another card in the next set.
But I like that wizards is doing this. Stuff like counters and board wipes are always going to exist, but they don't have to have a format so that control decks play the same way every single time (counters, removal, boardwipe, card draw, finishers). I like that the metagame is different and you don't always have the same types of decks.
The same could be said about aggro, it's not just reckless "get you down to 0 ASAP" like it can be in other formats (although admittedly Blitz did this). The existence of Hellrider, Thundermaw, Aristocrat and Reckoner let you go bigger and more resilient. When Zombies was popular, undying and Blood Artist added an extra layer of complexity to those decks.
I don't think Control will be permanently dead, you'll probably look up next year and find that control is doing just fine. It will be a different meta with different cards and strategies.
Yeah man, all that basic arithmetic is pretty taxing. I mean, pattern finding, solving a problem when all of the pieces are in front of you... that's hard stuff.
I get by. But then, this is a case of false equivalence. MTG combat is most assuredly not chess, and if you're comparing the complexity of the two it's not even close. Magic combat is pretty straight forward for the most part, and spatial reasoning is generally more taxing than mathematical reasoning.
I added the bold for emphasis, because this sentence is blatantly wrong.
Aggro cares just as much as Control cares, it's just that Aggro cannot deal with the answers as well. Thus a good Aggro player also has to predict what the opponent is holding, is likely to draw into, etc. It's exactly the same calculations a Control player goes through. Except Aggro has fewer answers. Aggro has to work toward virtual CA (meaning killing the Control player before he finds enough answers to empty the aggro player's hand and board of threats).
Control vs. Control games may be "interesting" to watch because of all their interactions, but Control vs. Aggro is the hardest match-up in Magic. For the Aggro player. Aggro always cares what's in his opponent's hand. A great Aggro player can usually tell you, at least the percentages of what's likely there, and whether they'll (be able to) play around it or not.
Wrong. Aggro doesn't pack answers because it doesn't care about its opponent's hand, and instead packs threats to create virtual card advantage that is hard to interact with. Some aggro decks do care about their opponents, and we call those tempo decks. But ideally, a good aggro deck should be as un-interactive as possible. Think affinity or Naya blitz. You get in as much damage as you can before your opponent builds the resource base to overcome your initial advantage.
I guess it was only a matter of time before this thread devolved into "Aggro vs. Control". Both sides are equally as wrong and arrogant in their assumptions about a deck type or style they likely never play. What a novice argument. You guys aren't doing this site any justice.
Of course, that's assuming you aren't willing to splashred.
What even is this, UWR Control is still viable anyway.
Dr. Joe, Jayec! You can't just show up and start telling the TRUTH like that, in the middle of all this whine! You might get through to someone, which might... I don't know give them a stroke, or heart attack or something...
The truth is the format has working control decks but some of these guys want it to be "Easy".
Super easy. Well at least vs, aggro and midrange, the crappy part being they'll likely get it. . . with all the undying rotating.
However... to be sure what you want is for it to be unbalanced TOWARD contol. Some of them feel like the natural state of the game is for control to be winning. I hear things get said like "control vs control are some of the best matches you see". . . and as much as that some guys obviously biased opinion (the aristocrats says high btw) its still kinda offensive. The only reason control has won soooo much over the years is because they haven't given cards to aggro that were as strong... not the players but the control CARDS have been stronger. Here's some more truth simplified: 1. Any tier 1 deck has a *Nuts draw. Some decks will never beat that. 2. Same deck type vs same deck type = Skill match. 3. Differing deck types = Someones not going to able to do their job.
Most of the time its the aggro deck, but when you look at "Card advantage"
there have to be cards that fit the aggro/midrange strategy that provide it or yeah control will win, at the first wrath. When all the undying options rotate out... if they don't reprint MORE things like that, in m14 and theros?
Supreme verdict & co is going to crush sooo many decks, once people get the formula down, correctly, the control decks will have it again.
That being said the title of this thread could have ended it /thread.
On, nuts draws and tier 1 decks
It varies on what a deck is trying to do vs it's opponent. If the opponent doesn't have exactly what he to counter it he will just lose before he gets to play.
Sometimes its Champion of the Parish, Emissary, Emissary, Lightning mauler.
Occasionally it looks like Pillar of flame, farseek, Huntmaster, Thragtusk, Thragtusk, Kessig Wolfun.
...and for many years: Draw Card spell, cheap removal spell, 1 & 2cc random counter, wrath of god, Self protecting finisher was one also. . .
There are many games that have went like that. . . It has to be accepted that tier 1 decks present games where at moments you're opponent doesn't get to do anything (or alternatively, Nothing they do: Matters). In anycase, when it happens to you, people should not to be too pissy at an archetype presenting good cards, and a solid strategy at you.... even when it a strategy you might not prefer, or even 1 you dislike.
A kid in a penguin costume just played Standard control fairly well.
Control is fine, and will only get better with time.
Yeah... I saw that. Pretty poignant, its what I was thinking, its about to get much much better for them, unless Theros gives resilience guys.
Edit: But if you watch right now. . . Brad Nelson just played 2 Voice in junk aristocrats vs James Buckinghams, Esper Control decks.
UWR looks a lot better suddenly, but honestly... if he hadn't draw 2 it'd have been much better for James.
Edit:2 3rd voice, and game
Edit:3
Okay there's a point in that where they're talking about how "voice is a mistake". I personally disagree, but only because I've been seeing things like that being said all season about thrag, and geist and other things. Specifically, he says:
You're hoser card's aren't supposed to "Hose everyone"...
I think, that his analysis is wrong, because the point of "Good Cards" is to have a card that you almost never hate seeing.
Voice is good apparently vs everydeck. Its an interesting thing.
A kid in a penguin costume just played Standard control fairly well.
Control is fine, and will only get better with time.
That's not exactly just "a kid in a penguin costume", that's A.J. Kerrigan, a 16-year old child prodigy and regular SCG columnist. He's a better pilot than most of his opponents.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sig by ChibiSwan~!
"Well, well, if it isn't the most diabolical haters this side of the Mississippi." Alters and Commissions at [URL="noodlesndoodlesalters.tumblr.com/"]Noodles & Doodles Alters[/URL]!
Have a helicopter drop you off out front. Light your cigar with a small Indonesian boy holding a black lotus. Then bust out a craw wurm deck with no sleeves. Raw dog shuffle, loose terribly, flip the table, leave in a hovercraft.
That's not exactly just "a kid in a penguin costume", that's A.J. Kerrigan, a 16-year old child prodigy and regular SCG columnist. He's a better pilot than most of his opponents.
Hey looks really young, I had the suspicion that he did that to throw off his opponent. He could have someone thinking about the wrong thing, poker of the aspect of the game. Maybe I'm being suspicious, but at 16 years old... yeah, interesting tactic.
Hey looks really young, I had the suspicion that he did that to throw off his opponent. He could have someone thinking about the wrong thing, poker of the aspect of the game. Maybe I'm being suspicious, but at 16 years old... yeah, interesting tactic.
He did it for the hell of it, just like GerryT's various hairstyles. They're not trying to "get one up" on their opponents; they're good enough to win pretty consistently without circus tricks like that. They just do it cause of bets or dares or to be funny, probably.
Anyway, didn't mean to derail the thread. Please, continue.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sig by ChibiSwan~!
"Well, well, if it isn't the most diabolical haters this side of the Mississippi." Alters and Commissions at [URL="noodlesndoodlesalters.tumblr.com/"]Noodles & Doodles Alters[/URL]!
Have a helicopter drop you off out front. Light your cigar with a small Indonesian boy holding a black lotus. Then bust out a craw wurm deck with no sleeves. Raw dog shuffle, loose terribly, flip the table, leave in a hovercraft.
He did it for the hell of it, just like GerryT's various hairstyles. They're not trying to "get one up" on their opponents; they're good enough to win pretty consistently without circus tricks like that. They just do it cause of bets or dares or to be funny, probably.
Anyway, didn't mean to derail the thread. Please, continue.
Sure. Bant Control, vs UWR flash was awfully intersting, bant being able to field voice, and aetherling is really looked good.
Edit: This scene, that I'm watching unfold is overwhelmingly control filled.
Sure. Bant Control, vs UWR flash was awfully intersting, bant being able to field voice, and aetherling is really looked good.
Edit: This scene, that I'm watching unfold is overwhelmingly control filled.
Yeah, Maryland is Control City, Virginia is Midrange-ville, North Carolina is Aggro Town.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sig by ChibiSwan~!
"Well, well, if it isn't the most diabolical haters this side of the Mississippi." Alters and Commissions at [URL="noodlesndoodlesalters.tumblr.com/"]Noodles & Doodles Alters[/URL]!
Have a helicopter drop you off out front. Light your cigar with a small Indonesian boy holding a black lotus. Then bust out a craw wurm deck with no sleeves. Raw dog shuffle, loose terribly, flip the table, leave in a hovercraft.
i don't think that control is dead, just is not an easy meta (mainly due to resilient creatures and cavern and other stuff), but eventually, when the t1 decks list settle, they will come back has an answer to them.
is hard to play control when there is so much variance or the meta is so wide open like right now... imo
Also a really good point.
Control decks typically thrive either because they're the nail that can poke a hole in the meta, or because they're the hammer that is powerful enough to ignore the meta.
Without any one deck to focus on beating, it's a crapshoot. Midrange is HUGE in this format, and that's something we haven't seen since Boat Brew, which makes your matchups that much more erratic.
As you said...if this is the consequence, then thank ****ing gawd. No one archetype has been truly dismissed in this format (you could argue combo, but Reckoner/Blasphemous, and even Door to Nothingness have made waves), and I can't see any way that isn't a positive.
Modern
Dredge, Evo-Chord, U/G Faeries, Living End, Something New
Neither style...scratch that, no style of deck is inherently easier to play, even though some builds of deck are easier to play. For example, Naya Blitz is a fairly easy to play aggro deck, but still requires some skills as an aggro player.
Which is where the clincher in this lies. Different strategies require different skills and different focuses. Control focuses on "control" not worrying about rushing to victory, it makes sure to stabilize repeatedly and maintains control of a given situation, understanding that when it loses that control it will lose. It often requires patience, for thought, and planning several steps ahead of the opponent. It is the chess of magic.
Midrange focuses on maximum efficiency of cards. It focuses on playing the very best of what it has to offer, and forcing the opponent to spend to many resources to keep up. It also requires an understanding of "scrapping" or staying alive. It is the survivalist strategy of magic and requires a different set of thought skills.
Combo focuses on one strategy, but because it's one strategy is often worried about being disrupted. A good combo player must be able to bate, and misdirect the opponent so that the opponent walks into the combo and loses. It also requires a different set of skills for card power determination, since the combo player is all about synergy and less about power. You have to understand full deck cohesion to work your deck to your style and make it a tighter fit.
Finally aggro requires an understanding of continued pressure. You must keep clocks up and never over-extend yourself into dangerous territory. You have to force up your opponents shields at the right time to crush them and ride to victory. It requires quick and fluid understandings of basic math, with no room for error, and also requires you to understand your full situation so you don't walk into traps. You have to strike correctly less you lose your momentum, because momentum, much like control's control, is your road to victory, and once lost won't come back.
All deck types require skill, although specific decks of any type may be easier to play. I can say that Naya Blitz is a pretty easy deck to play right now, but Cawblade was pretty easy to play as well.
Yeah man, all that basic arithmetic is pretty taxing. I mean, pattern finding, solving a problem when all of the pieces are in front of you... that's hard stuff.
Or not.
If you're struggling with the maths in a game of magic, I feel bad for you. By your own admission, the hardest part of a game for you is when you have no cards in hand, and the control player is holding answers. This is Bayesian probability; you have to make a decision based on probabilities whose certainties are unknown to you. This is the default game state for a control deck, and is why control vs. control matches are some of the best games you'll ever play or see. Aggro doesn't really care about what a player has in his or her hand. Funny that when they do have to care, the game gets a lot harder. In contrast, a control deck always cares about what a player is holding in hand.
I agree with this... each archtype requires a different set of skills. I have played every archetype in the last two years none are inherently easy.
Stop being elitest.
I reiterate Aristocrats is the hardest deck to play and it has a ton more play to it than basic maths... I know of an esper control player that tried to play it but gave up because it was too hard.
Personally I still think that wizards has gone too far, what I want to see is that all controls options are conditional, mana leak was too strong. However cavern was a huge mistake and I don't like what voice and sire do to a control player... and thrag is also massive pain in the arse (however without it mid range wouldn't work). Control being forced to meta game is a good thing but completely losing tools they need to work against anything and at the same time being hated on is a big problem. I'll jump through hoops but I want to be rewarded at the end.
P.S Humanimator is a combo deck that exists in the meta game
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own
I added the bold for emphasis, because this sentence is blatantly wrong.
Aggro cares just as much as Control cares, it's just that Aggro cannot deal with the answers as well. Thus a good Aggro player also has to predict what the opponent is holding, is likely to draw into, etc. It's exactly the same calculations a Control player goes through. Except Aggro has fewer answers. Aggro has to work toward virtual CA (meaning killing the Control player before he finds enough answers to empty the aggro player's hand and board of threats).
Control vs. Control games may be "interesting" to watch because of all their interactions, but Control vs. Aggro is the hardest match-up in Magic. For the Aggro player. Aggro always cares what's in his opponent's hand. A great Aggro player can usually tell you, at least the percentages of what's likely there, and whether they'll (be able to) play around it or not.
Currently Working On: Jund Ramp (RTR Block)
GR My Blog RG (Std)
See... I think what is going on here is Wizards for 1 year decided that the metagame would be like this. The lack of really strong control finisher for the past year is pretty telling (no Wurmcoil Engine or anything like that). Thragtusk kind of fit the mold of Wurmcoil Engine, but because it was green it led to mostly midrange decks playing it.... and ironically it ended up being enemy #1 for control anyway. Stuff like Cavern of Souls finished the job.
But in a few months all those cards are going to rotate out. And now we have stuff like Aetherling. It's looking like it could be the new control finisher. Or perhaps there will be another card in the next set.
But I like that wizards is doing this. Stuff like counters and board wipes are always going to exist, but they don't have to have a format so that control decks play the same way every single time (counters, removal, boardwipe, card draw, finishers). I like that the metagame is different and you don't always have the same types of decks.
The same could be said about aggro, it's not just reckless "get you down to 0 ASAP" like it can be in other formats (although admittedly Blitz did this). The existence of Hellrider, Thundermaw, Aristocrat and Reckoner let you go bigger and more resilient. When Zombies was popular, undying and Blood Artist added an extra layer of complexity to those decks.
I don't think Control will be permanently dead, you'll probably look up next year and find that control is doing just fine. It will be a different meta with different cards and strategies.
You must be awesome at chess.
Esper does currently have a few playable options.
Of course, that's assuming you aren't willing to splash red.
Currently Working On: Jund Ramp (RTR Block)
GR My Blog RG (Std)
I get by. But then, this is a case of false equivalence. MTG combat is most assuredly not chess, and if you're comparing the complexity of the two it's not even close. Magic combat is pretty straight forward for the most part, and spatial reasoning is generally more taxing than mathematical reasoning.
Wrong. Aggro doesn't pack answers because it doesn't care about its opponent's hand, and instead packs threats to create virtual card advantage that is hard to interact with. Some aggro decks do care about their opponents, and we call those tempo decks. But ideally, a good aggro deck should be as un-interactive as possible. Think affinity or Naya blitz. You get in as much damage as you can before your opponent builds the resource base to overcome your initial advantage.
Dr. Joe, Jayec! You can't just show up and start telling the TRUTH like that, in the middle of all this whine! You might get through to someone, which might... I don't know give them a stroke, or heart attack or something...
The truth is the format has working control decks but some of these guys want it to be "Easy".
Super easy. Well at least vs, aggro and midrange, the crappy part being they'll likely get it. . . with all the undying rotating.
However... to be sure what you want is for it to be unbalanced TOWARD contol. Some of them feel like the natural state of the game is for control to be winning. I hear things get said like "control vs control are some of the best matches you see". . . and as much as that some guys obviously biased opinion (the aristocrats says high btw) its still kinda offensive. The only reason control has won soooo much over the years is because they haven't given cards to aggro that were as strong... not the players but the control CARDS have been stronger.
Here's some more truth simplified:
1. Any tier 1 deck has a *Nuts draw. Some decks will never beat that.
2. Same deck type vs same deck type = Skill match.
3. Differing deck types = Someones not going to able to do their job.
Most of the time its the aggro deck, but when you look at "Card advantage"
there have to be cards that fit the aggro/midrange strategy that provide it or yeah control will win, at the first wrath. When all the undying options rotate out... if they don't reprint MORE things like that, in m14 and theros?
Supreme verdict & co is going to crush sooo many decks, once people get the formula down, correctly, the control decks will have it again.
That being said the title of this thread could have ended it /thread.
On, nuts draws and tier 1 decks
Sometimes its Champion of the Parish, Emissary, Emissary, Lightning mauler.
Occasionally it looks like Pillar of flame, farseek, Huntmaster, Thragtusk, Thragtusk, Kessig Wolfun.
...and for many years: Draw Card spell, cheap removal spell, 1 & 2cc random counter, wrath of god, Self protecting finisher was one also. . .
There are many games that have went like that. . . It has to be accepted that tier 1 decks present games where at moments you're opponent doesn't get to do anything (or alternatively, Nothing they do: Matters). In anycase, when it happens to you, people should not to be too pissy at an archetype presenting good cards, and a solid strategy at you.... even when it a strategy you might not prefer, or even 1 you dislike.
Yeah... I saw that. Pretty poignant, its what I was thinking, its about to get much much better for them, unless Theros gives resilience guys.
Edit: But if you watch right now. . . Brad Nelson just played 2 Voice in junk aristocrats vs James Buckinghams, Esper Control decks.
UWR looks a lot better suddenly, but honestly... if he hadn't draw 2 it'd have been much better for James.
Edit:2 3rd voice, and game
Edit:3
Okay there's a point in that where they're talking about how "voice is a mistake". I personally disagree, but only because I've been seeing things like that being said all season about thrag, and geist and other things. Specifically, he says:
You're hoser card's aren't supposed to "Hose everyone"...
I think, that his analysis is wrong, because the point of "Good Cards" is to have a card that you almost never hate seeing.
Voice is good apparently vs everydeck. Its an interesting thing.
That's not exactly just "a kid in a penguin costume", that's A.J. Kerrigan, a 16-year old child prodigy and regular SCG columnist. He's a better pilot than most of his opponents.
Sig by ChibiSwan~!
"Well, well, if it isn't the most diabolical haters this side of the Mississippi."
Alters and Commissions at [URL="noodlesndoodlesalters.tumblr.com/"]Noodles & Doodles Alters[/URL]!
Hey looks really young, I had the suspicion that he did that to throw off his opponent. He could have someone thinking about the wrong thing, poker of the aspect of the game. Maybe I'm being suspicious, but at 16 years old... yeah, interesting tactic.
He did it for the hell of it, just like GerryT's various hairstyles. They're not trying to "get one up" on their opponents; they're good enough to win pretty consistently without circus tricks like that. They just do it cause of bets or dares or to be funny, probably.
Anyway, didn't mean to derail the thread. Please, continue.
Sig by ChibiSwan~!
"Well, well, if it isn't the most diabolical haters this side of the Mississippi."
Alters and Commissions at [URL="noodlesndoodlesalters.tumblr.com/"]Noodles & Doodles Alters[/URL]!
Sure. Bant Control, vs UWR flash was awfully intersting, bant being able to field voice, and aetherling is really looked good.
Edit: This scene, that I'm watching unfold is overwhelmingly control filled.
Yeah, Maryland is Control City, Virginia is Midrange-ville, North Carolina is Aggro Town.
Sig by ChibiSwan~!
"Well, well, if it isn't the most diabolical haters this side of the Mississippi."
Alters and Commissions at [URL="noodlesndoodlesalters.tumblr.com/"]Noodles & Doodles Alters[/URL]!
Are you referring to SCG : BALT when you say "this scene"...? Because the top 16 is
Naya Aggro
Naya Aggro
Junk Aristocrats
Jund
B/R Zombies
Reanimator
BUG walkers
Esper Control
Jund
Naya Aggro
Jund
Naya Aggro
Naya Aggro
U/W/R Flash
U/W/R Flash
Thats one or three (depending on your definition) control decks in the entire top 16 and none of them are in the top 8...
More like 4-7, depending on if you count Jund or not.
Esper obviously is.
Looking at the UWR lists, I would say the 15th place is not control, but the 16th is.
Of note is that the Esper list is also very walker heavy - perhaps that is the way to go for control right now?
Cash? Credit? Gold? or Jace?