i personally dont think this deck is all that. It seems inconsistent.
at a recent FNM, someone brought piloted it and he did make top 8 with it. BUT prior to that,i was matched up against it and i actually finished the round in 6min with mono-green aggro.
Game 1: his board presence was pretty good (3 invisible stalker with 2 rancors on 2 of them.),but mine was better( 3 Strangleroot geist with 2 rancored up )
Game 2: Almost the same as g1 but i had one drops and miracled twice.
i personally dont think this deck is all that. It seems inconsistent.
at a recent FNM, someone brought piloted it and he did make top 8 with it. BUT prior to that,i was matched up against it and i actually finished the round in 6min with mono-green aggro.
Game 1: his board presence was pretty good (3 invisible stalker with 2 rancors on 2 of them.),but mine was better( 3 Strangleroot geist with 2 rancored up )
Game 2: Almost the same as g1 but i had one drops and miracled twice.
A single FNM isn't a good indicator. The deck has finished at the top of the last two major tournaments so I believe it's consistent enough.
It feels odd defending this deck but people are dismissing it too quickly.
i personally dont think this deck is all that. It seems inconsistent.
at a recent FNM, someone brought piloted it and he did make top 8 with it. BUT prior to that,i was matched up against it and i actually finished the round in 6min with mono-green aggro.
Game 1: his board presence was pretty good (3 invisible stalker with 2 rancors on 2 of them.),but mine was better( 3 Strangleroot geist with 2 rancored up )
Game 2: Almost the same as g1 but i had one drops and miracled twice.
>gets 1st and 2nd at a Grand Prix
>loses one match at a FNM
>inconsistent
While I have yet to play against this deck, I do feel my Jund has quite a few ways to deal with it . . . am looking forward to getting to try sometime.
This deck IS the new infect. It can win out of nowhere and the 8 hexproof creatures can be really hard to stop. Not to mention that one creature can kill you, it makes board wipes somewhat ineffective. So glad for at least one of the new cards in crash just to slow this down.
It's not quite as fast as infect was but it has harder to kill creatures.
I played it at an IQ yesterday, was surprised no one else was playing it. I came in third. It's fun(in my opinion) and can be brutal. Game three of my first match of top eight, I won with two lands. I just happen to have a stalker, 1 rancor and two spectral flights. Opponent couldn't do anything with it(Br zombies) and had a semi-slow start. Turn two geists with multiple auras on turn three will get you there. What I found from playing it was the trouble match ups were RDW if they get out faster than you and Bant control if they get their sweepers. Mid-range and the like just can't keep up if you get even an average hand.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." Frederic Bastiat
Flavor of the month deck. When I was playing it at the beginning of the rotation, it had pretty bad matchups vs Jund and other early decks... now it's good vs the actual meta, but is gonna be bad again in a few weeks.
It's hard to tell. With what we've seen so far, the coming meta looks to slow down, possibly quite a bit. A deck like this that doesn't "need" to turn sideways every time it drops a guy could be poised to consistently place. True there are cards to hate in against it, the same can be said for every deck. I think it's something we will just have to be patient and see how the meta reshapes.
That's sort of the point of the deck... there are many different combinations of cards for explosive kills like that. Your friend was lucky their opponent was apparently not playing any spells of any kind.
What spells can they play?
Heres the opponents play
T1 tapped hollowed fountain
T2 tapped temple garden
T3 land into auger of bolas draws 2nd supreme verdict
T4 gg
Again, i don't care how this deck loses with a bad draw.
I would rather face any other deck.
Anyone claiming there are "easy" answers to this deck is foolish.
It's hard to tell. With what we've seen so far, the coming meta looks to slow down, possibly quite a bit. A deck like this that doesn't "need" to turn sideways every time it drops a guy could be poised to consistently place. True there are cards to hate in against it, the same can be said for every deck. I think it's something we will just have to be patient and see how the meta reshapes.
This is what I think too. It's not a meta-call. What it is - is a very hard to stop goldfish.
If traditional aggro decks lose presence there are more control-oriented versions of this that maintain 90% of the goldfish capability but are also much more resilient against big threats. All of the Bant threats are in our toolbox but we can't use most of them because decks like RDW and GW aggro keep us honest.
I played against this deck today. It was just both of us goldfish to see who kills the other first. It was the stupidest thing ever. I could have played the game through email.
Not as explosive as Infect, but I think it's a bit more consistent. I like it a lot, definitely want to see more of it show up, as it helps balance the meta for Bant a little more. No deck can combo draw quite as well as this one.
It simply got beat, not sure what you mean by "hated out of" -- taking up half of the top four is still pretty alarming for a deck of this nature.
I was being sarcastic.
Out of everyone on this forum I'm one of the few who has been playing this deck since shortly after RtR was spoiled and I have long felt that it would get results if it got played more.
Speaking out of my experience with it - there will be times when you don't get the right draws, you have to mull aggressively and you struggle to get your cards lined up. Your opponent will come out of those games wondering what the big deal is and thinking it's just a flavor of the week deck that got over-rated.
So in other words I understand exactly where a few of you are coming from when you say that it didn't seem that good, or that you played it last friday and beat it easily. That kind of stuff happens and there's no way to pilot out of it aside from being really good at knowing what to mulligan.
On the other hand the deck is virtually unbeatable when it lines up properly. There's only one card that was spoiled in Gatecrash so far that seems capable of changing that, and I don't think any serious player will be able to afford running it in their side unless Bant Enchant becomes a huge part of the meta.
There's only one card that was spoiled in Gatecrash so far that seems capable of changing that, and I don't think any serious player will be able to afford running it in their side unless Bant Enchant becomes a huge part of the meta.
The edict? Jund will play it mainboard, almost a guarantee. It's a little bit better than Bonfire in some of the matchups where you'd want Bonfire.
at a recent FNM, someone brought piloted it and he did make top 8 with it. BUT prior to that,i was matched up against it and i actually finished the round in 6min with mono-green aggro.
Game 1: his board presence was pretty good (3 invisible stalker with 2 rancors on 2 of them.),but mine was better( 3 Strangleroot geist with 2 rancored up )
Game 2: Almost the same as g1 but i had one drops and miracled twice.
Understandable if it's game 1. Postboard, the Bant player should be mulling aggressively for Farseek and a stabilizer.
A single FNM isn't a good indicator. The deck has finished at the top of the last two major tournaments so I believe it's consistent enough.
It feels odd defending this deck but people are dismissing it too quickly.
>gets 1st and 2nd at a Grand Prix
>loses one match at a FNM
>inconsistent
Fires Rf Salvation
It's not quite as fast as infect was but it has harder to kill creatures.
Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici.
What spells can they play?
Heres the opponents play
T1 tapped hollowed fountain
T2 tapped temple garden
T3 land into auger of bolas draws 2nd supreme verdict
T4 gg
Again, i don't care how this deck loses with a bad draw.
I would rather face any other deck.
Anyone claiming there are "easy" answers to this deck is foolish.
This is what I think too. It's not a meta-call. What it is - is a very hard to stop goldfish.
If traditional aggro decks lose presence there are more control-oriented versions of this that maintain 90% of the goldfish capability but are also much more resilient against big threats. All of the Bant threats are in our toolbox but we can't use most of them because decks like RDW and GW aggro keep us honest.
It simply got beat, not sure what you mean by "hated out of" -- taking up half of the top four is still pretty alarming for a deck of this nature.
I was being sarcastic.
Out of everyone on this forum I'm one of the few who has been playing this deck since shortly after RtR was spoiled and I have long felt that it would get results if it got played more.
Speaking out of my experience with it - there will be times when you don't get the right draws, you have to mull aggressively and you struggle to get your cards lined up. Your opponent will come out of those games wondering what the big deal is and thinking it's just a flavor of the week deck that got over-rated.
So in other words I understand exactly where a few of you are coming from when you say that it didn't seem that good, or that you played it last friday and beat it easily. That kind of stuff happens and there's no way to pilot out of it aside from being really good at knowing what to mulligan.
On the other hand the deck is virtually unbeatable when it lines up properly. There's only one card that was spoiled in Gatecrash so far that seems capable of changing that, and I don't think any serious player will be able to afford running it in their side unless Bant Enchant becomes a huge part of the meta.
The edict? Jund will play it mainboard, almost a guarantee. It's a little bit better than Bonfire in some of the matchups where you'd want Bonfire.
Because we care about facts.