Part 1: Narrow question
I borrowed the following from Wikipedia (source) to make sure everyone understands what I'm referring to.
Traditionally, Aggro was seen as advantaged over Control, Control advantaged over Combo, and Combo advantaged over Aggro.[41] Wizards of the Coast has sought to make high-casting cost spells more powerful than in the early days of Magic, and have also wanted to play up creature combat more - an aggressive deck should have to worry about blocking and opposing creatures even from Control and Combo decks.[41] To that end, R&D member Zac Hill described an ideal metagame structured like so:
[Aggro] < [Midrange] < [Ramp and Combo] < [Control and Disruptive Aggro] < [Aggro] ...[41]
Each of these 4 buckets would ideally occupy around 25% of a given metagame. In Hill's definition, Aggro refers most specifically to the fastest creature decks built to punish slow starts, ponderous Control decks, and aggressive decks who've substituted out damage for disruption.
I don't know where I'd fit the deck given this cycle. It's definitely not a control deck. I've been playing this for months and the matchup that I love more than anything is against your average midrange deck. I don't like seeing a fast aggro deck and I don't like seeing a control deck. It seems to me that it fits into that "Ramp and Combo" bucket and yet the deck plays more like an aggro deck. Not only that but everyone talks about it as if it were an aggro deck. Everyone pretty much agrees that it's an aggro deck but the strongest matchup it has is against midrange. Unlike other aggro decks it doesn't have an advantage against control. It's like... "reverse aggro"?
Part 2: Broad question
So is Zac Hill's metagame ideal? If that's ideal then what does it mean to have an aggro deck (or aggro-combo if you prefer) that whoops up on midrange decks? Is that a problem for the design team? Is there reason to believe that Bant Enchant is bad for the format because of this or is it possible that this deck is good. An aggro deck that beats midrange yet loses to control.
Its hard. To say. Personally I love that bant enchant makes people scared to play midrange. Makes things much better for my red deck. However overall im not keen on a deck like this that seems to push so many other deck archetypes out of viability. Im enjoying the broad meta and not liking the possiblity of going back to only 3 or 4 real viable decks simply because stuff doesnt beat auras
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Big thanks to DarkNightCavalier from heroes of the planes studios for the sig!
Everyone pretty much agrees that it's an aggro deck but the strongest matchup it has is against midrange.
I think you'll find that if you go watch some of the top pros respond to this deck winning the GP in Atlantic City pretty much no one agrees that it's an aggro deck. It IS a combo deck (or at least as close as standard is going to come to one). It just happens to be more creature focused than many combo decks.
I think it's hard to say the deck is "bad" for the meta since it's hated out so easily. People seem to have lost their head on this one. I've been playing some version of the deck in standard for a month give or take. Last friday one of my only losses was to someone who showed up with two copies of Barter in Blood in her sideboard. There are answers. They're just not the cards people seem to be running right now.
I think you'll find that if you go watch some of the top pros respond to this deck winning the GP in Atlantic City pretty much no one agrees that it's an aggro deck. It IS a combo deck (or at least as close as standard is going to come to one). It just happens to be more creature focused than many combo decks.
I think it's hard to say the deck is "bad" for the meta since it's hated out so easily. People seem to have lost their head on this one. I've been playing some version of the deck in standard for a month give or take. Last friday one of my only losses was to someone who showed up with two copies of Barter in Blood in her sideboard. There are answers. They're just not the cards people seem to be running right now.
I've been playing versions of this as my only deck across formats since the day RtR was spoiled. I don't usually like combo decks so it took a long time for me to come up with the idea that this might be a combo deck. It's definitely not a normal one but I think that is probably part of the appeal.
I actually had a hard time deciding what to call the deck when I played a similar version pre-ravnica at a RTR-PTQ qualifier in Oslo, June 2012. The deck was quite aggressive back then as well, but due to no shock-lands the mana was a bit of a risk(It didn't really work out to play silverblade consistently) and ran into problems against aggro, but I still managed to go top 8 with it (where I lost to a delver deck, after beating 2 delvers to get to top 8). The deck looked something like this:
The sideboard had some swords, although I did not have access to Sword of War and Peace unfortunatly, Mirran Crusader, and some Negate against Barter in Blood and sweepers. I really didn't know how to classify it back then, think I settled for bant midrange, although it was quite aggro with fairly consistently getting a geist or stalker powered up and hitting for 5-11 in turn 3. I guess it is sort of a combo deck, but with every combo piece being very good on its own, it really doesn't feel that way. With Ethereal Armor I suppose it fits better into that category as it really isn't that great by itself.
if flipping a coin means easy, then yes.
its not easy to hate out. its haveing a better opening draw
its pretty much a combo deck id say.
Personal preference I guess. All I'm suggesting is that there are plenty of good sideboard options if you want to beat this deck. That no one is seemingly running them in standard is a different issue all together. The perfect example to me is Barter in Blood. It's a perfectly playable card, comes off as a boardwipe some decent percentage of the time, and hoses this deck like mad. However, this isn't the only matchup that it's playable for. Seems perfect to me.
Other good choices include Tribute to Hunger and Nevermore or Rakdos' Return naming one of the problem enchantments. I lost a match the other day simply on the back of a pair of Barters and a Nevermore naming Rancor.
lets examine the abstract strategic gameplans of archetypes to help understand the situation.
A pure combo deck has the plan: "assemble a combo of 2 or more specific cards (or categories of cards) such that the interaction between those cards produces an overwhelming effect that defeats my opponent".
A pure aggro deck has the plan: "play too many threats for my opponent to answer quickly enough to stabilize before I kill my opponent with damage too quickly for him to kill me first."
either description could be used to describe Hexproof Auras, but in my opinion the plan looks alot more like a combo deck than an aggro deck. the deck responds to disruption the same way as well. for example, have you severely disrupted an aggro deck if you Essence Scatter their 2 drop? No, not at all. Have you severely disrupted Hexproof Auras if you Essence Scatter their Invisible Stalker? Yeah, definitely. It behaves like a combo deck, not an aggro deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I borrowed the following from Wikipedia (source) to make sure everyone understands what I'm referring to.
I don't know where I'd fit the deck given this cycle. It's definitely not a control deck. I've been playing this for months and the matchup that I love more than anything is against your average midrange deck. I don't like seeing a fast aggro deck and I don't like seeing a control deck. It seems to me that it fits into that "Ramp and Combo" bucket and yet the deck plays more like an aggro deck. Not only that but everyone talks about it as if it were an aggro deck. Everyone pretty much agrees that it's an aggro deck but the strongest matchup it has is against midrange. Unlike other aggro decks it doesn't have an advantage against control. It's like... "reverse aggro"?
Part 2: Broad question
So is Zac Hill's metagame ideal? If that's ideal then what does it mean to have an aggro deck (or aggro-combo if you prefer) that whoops up on midrange decks? Is that a problem for the design team? Is there reason to believe that Bant Enchant is bad for the format because of this or is it possible that this deck is good. An aggro deck that beats midrange yet loses to control.
Modern:
Twinning End
Commander:
Mayael the Anema
I think you'll find that if you go watch some of the top pros respond to this deck winning the GP in Atlantic City pretty much no one agrees that it's an aggro deck. It IS a combo deck (or at least as close as standard is going to come to one). It just happens to be more creature focused than many combo decks.
I think it's hard to say the deck is "bad" for the meta since it's hated out so easily. People seem to have lost their head on this one. I've been playing some version of the deck in standard for a month give or take. Last friday one of my only losses was to someone who showed up with two copies of Barter in Blood in her sideboard. There are answers. They're just not the cards people seem to be running right now.
I've been playing versions of this as my only deck across formats since the day RtR was spoiled. I don't usually like combo decks so it took a long time for me to come up with the idea that this might be a combo deck. It's definitely not a normal one but I think that is probably part of the appeal.
if flipping a coin means easy, then yes.
its not easy to hate out. its haveing a better opening draw
its pretty much a combo deck id say.
Avacyn's Pilgrimx3
Birds of Paradisex4
Nearheath Pilgrimx3
Invisible Stalkerx4
Geist of Saint Traftx3
Thrun, The Last Trollx2
Sigarda, Host of Heronsx1
Wolfir Silverheartx1
Angelic Destinyx3
Increasing Savageryx4
Mana Leakx3
Temporal Masteryx1
Abundant Growthx3
Oblivion Ringx2
The sideboard had some swords, although I did not have access to Sword of War and Peace unfortunatly, Mirran Crusader, and some Negate against Barter in Blood and sweepers. I really didn't know how to classify it back then, think I settled for bant midrange, although it was quite aggro with fairly consistently getting a geist or stalker powered up and hitting for 5-11 in turn 3. I guess it is sort of a combo deck, but with every combo piece being very good on its own, it really doesn't feel that way. With Ethereal Armor I suppose it fits better into that category as it really isn't that great by itself.
Mabbz on MTGO | Demgrinds on Twitch & Twitter | Helpdesk
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
Personal preference I guess. All I'm suggesting is that there are plenty of good sideboard options if you want to beat this deck. That no one is seemingly running them in standard is a different issue all together. The perfect example to me is Barter in Blood. It's a perfectly playable card, comes off as a boardwipe some decent percentage of the time, and hoses this deck like mad. However, this isn't the only matchup that it's playable for. Seems perfect to me.
Other good choices include Tribute to Hunger and Nevermore or Rakdos' Return naming one of the problem enchantments. I lost a match the other day simply on the back of a pair of Barters and a Nevermore naming Rancor.
A pure combo deck has the plan: "assemble a combo of 2 or more specific cards (or categories of cards) such that the interaction between those cards produces an overwhelming effect that defeats my opponent".
A pure aggro deck has the plan: "play too many threats for my opponent to answer quickly enough to stabilize before I kill my opponent with damage too quickly for him to kill me first."
either description could be used to describe Hexproof Auras, but in my opinion the plan looks alot more like a combo deck than an aggro deck. the deck responds to disruption the same way as well. for example, have you severely disrupted an aggro deck if you Essence Scatter their 2 drop? No, not at all. Have you severely disrupted Hexproof Auras if you Essence Scatter their Invisible Stalker? Yeah, definitely. It behaves like a combo deck, not an aggro deck.