Since the M10 spoiler is nearly complete, I spent last weekend testing for the viability of various control archetypes.
I started out playing 5cc variations, then simplified it down to Grixis control. Neither blue-based strategie proved fast or consistent enough to contain aggro, especially if the aggro player opened with a series of fast creatures that lowered my life total quickly. With no access to early mass removal for x/3 creatures and no way to recover life and tempo into the late game, these decks proved a failure.
I then switched my focus to more proactive strategies, including UB and RB based Reanimator powered by the promising disruption suite of Duress and Thoughtseize, plus Sign in Blood as a means of card advantage. The basic plan was to use Bogardan Hellkite as a means to swing the board and win quickly. With no access to more than 4 reanimation spells costing 4 or less, this also proved too slow and unreliable to counter aggro.
I ditched the reanimation plan to see if the disruption suite plus powerful RB removal proved enough to hold the fort long enough to start dropping Bogardan Hellkites and similar late-game threats, again to no avail. Although seemingly powerful against aggro, the deck just fails to win before the opponent reduces your life total to zero. It also has severe problems against x/3 creatures if you don't open with a Terminate.
Finally, I ditched red altogether and focused on the several variants of Mono-Black control, leveraging the power of cards like Bitterblossom, Sign in Blood and Thoughtseize with cost-effective removal/life-gain effects like Tendrils of Corruption and Corrupt. This proved considerably more effective, and I slowly polished the build with fast win conditions, including Demigod of Revenge. The build proved extremely powerful against midrange, but at the cost of utter failure against slower decks relying on Bitterblossom and Cryptic Command (which also lose against aggro). It also has SEVERE problems recovering tempo and card advantage against planeswalkers, or even a single Kitchen Finks or Ranger of Eos.
Bottom line:
Aggro is just too damn fast for almost any blue or black creature-light control variant to effectively compete in Type II. The combination of Persist, efficient creatures with Haste and the complete lack of effective early-game mass removal (by which I mean, removal that ACTUALLY clears the board, instead of leaving x/3, x/4 or Persisters alive), means you find yourself too often overwhelmed by a swarm of creatures you cannot answer on a one-on-one basis.
Even powerhouses such as Tendrils of Corruption on a mono-black deck are too slow and pricey to have a significant impact on your opponent's board, leaving you open to devastating plays you can do nothing about.
I won't go into discussions of whether control should be the dominant archetype in any given metagame. I won't even claim that it's necessary to maintain a relative balance between aggro, combo and control within the tournament scene. Instead, I'll ask you a question:
Do you find it fun to see 90% of the games degenerate into a race where the guy who got the most creatures in play faster wins?
'cause I sure as hell don't...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
People hiss and grunt at Mark Rosewater for the state of the game. Few realize, though, that it is Aaron Forsythe who is directly responsible of the current state of affairs due to negligence as head of Magic R&D and a completely skewed view of the game as a whole.
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
in that reanimator build you mentioned, did you give Empyreal Archangel a shot at all? I'm assuming you use vivids in said build to smooth the base, along with reflecting pool. that would mean, then, that not only is she a great target, but a great hardcast finisher as well.
I ramble, but the point is if you're running reanimator, you should be using Archangel as one of your mannequin targets.
Take your monoblack deck, then set aside 14 swamps. Add 4 Creeping Tar Pits, 4 Darkslick Shores, 4 Drowned Catacombs, and 2 Jwar isle Refuge and add 4 Jace, the Mindsculptors. Your monoblack deck is instantly better. Better yet, drop those refuges, throw in some islands and some mana leaks, and lo and behold, you're now playing a real deck. Congratulations. Welcome to the world of competitive M:TG.
QQ more? Learn magic history. Blue Mages (Control Freaks to be more precise) has been "OMG, Core shafted control" and always gets the last laugh.
Yep. This always happens. Blue mages whine about being "nerfed" and half a year later people are complaining about blue dominating.
The only relevance that blue being bad in M10 would have would be for limited. There are 2 blocks to "help" blue out for Standard.
Also, who said you're the be all/end all to deckbuilding? If more accomplished/proven competitive deck builders can't make control viable, then you can cry.
Creature control will still work; Wall of Denial and Wall of Reverence.
QFT.
Just because Wrath will no longer be availible and there isn't a plethora of amazing Blue counterspells, people suddenly think Control will roll over and die. Considering what a person considers "Control" is not only highly subjective, but also gets redefined in every single game of Magic (for anyone who hasn't read it, Mike Flores's "Who'se the Beatdown?" article is one of the most interesting pieces of Magic Theory, like, ever). So no, Control is not dead in Standard as soon as M10 becomes legal. Some of the oldest and most classical control styles take severe hits, possibly to the point that they no longer are viable, but that does not mean all Control strategies are null and void.
The reason this baseless argument comes up is that most any player willing to make this outcry is probably not a good enough deck designer to build a control deck outside of certain scopes. As such, the immediate reaction is to blame the lack of good Control cards.
Now, it might very well pan out that even the better Control options availible, those ones sitting on the fringe of deck design, may not be totally viable. The format is particularly fast at the moment. But I am pretty sure that no one at this point in time has tested the diversity of the new format to its extremes and, as such, any claims that Control is dead are being overblown, if not entirely false.
QQ more? Learn magic history. Blue Mages (Control Freaks to be more precise) has been "OMG, Core shafted control" and always gets the last laugh.
This is not about blue control, a point I believe I made perfectly clear when I stated I tried several RB and mono-black decks. This is about over-reliance on creatures for building a competitive deck. This is also not knee-jerk reaction or a theoretical analysis about what I think might happen; I've put my fair share of playtest hours before making this point, and the results are (even against the plethora of non-tuned test decks that show up with a new set), to say the least, scary... =/
Personally, I find that creature-against-creature interactions are so shallow that you need to factor in quality variance for the game to have any sort of challenge; that's why I have no trouble at all playing aggro and midrange deck in limited formats.
My point in question is this: in order to maximize your chances to win in Type 2 in the following months, you'll be practically forced to play decks with at least 20 efficient creatures and means to answer your opponent's 20 efficient creatures. I think that this is monotonous, shallow and hands-down unfun. I just wondered if other people thought the same.
The fact that the metagame can be "fixed" when the next expansion shows up is kinda moot, considering that the entire Nationals season revolves around the current state of affairs. If I wanted to win my Nats, I'd go for a shallow, aggro build and with a bit of luck even have a shot at winning, but it would certainly not be the most fulfilling or fun use of my time. Hence the root of my question: why spend time and money in an activity I find unfun in the first place?
In case you're curious, the only creature-light strategy that seems like it has any shot at working come M10 is, ironically, TurboFog.
People hiss and grunt at Mark Rosewater for the state of the game. Few realize, though, that it is Aaron Forsythe who is directly responsible of the current state of affairs due to negligence as head of Magic R&D and a completely skewed view of the game as a whole.
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
Also, who said you're the be all/end all to deckbuilding? If more accomplished/proven competitive deck builders can't make control viable, then you can cry.
Walls are only temporary solutions to creatures. They do not solve them for good like Wrath and counterspells do.
Walls are also really bad against handling tokens and massive amounts of weenies that just have one guy crash into the wall the rest overwhelm your life total.
The problem does not just come from the lack of good counterspells. If anything, the loss of *** with a ****ty substitute is MUCH worse for control decks than the lower quality countermagic. Countermagic was already struggling against cascade, and people think it would dominate with just 1, maybe 2 good counterspells? Maybe people just need to learn how to beat countermagic.
Personally, I find that creature-against-creature interactions are so shallow that you need to factor in quality variance for the game to have any sort of challenge; that's why I have no trouble at all playing aggro and midrange deck in limited formats.
My point in question is this: in order to maximize your chances to win in Type 2 in the following months, you'll be practically forced to play decks with at least 20 efficient creatures and means to answer your opponent's 20 efficient creatures. I think that this is monotonous, shallow and hands-down unfun. I just wondered if other people thought the same.
Same can be said about control (I like Control BTW, but I'm not blind). In a game where the primary way to win is with creature combat (this is a thruth, you have to accept it), counter control can very well feel boring/unfun/etc. Permisive magic isn't fun except to it's user.
Same can be said about control (I like Control BTW, but I'm not blind). In a game where the primary way to win is with creature combat (this is a thruth, you have to accept it), counter control can very well feel boring/unfun/etc. Permisive magic isn't fun except to it's user.
Granted, as is burn, land destruction, discard, tokens and pretty much any strategy that allows you to kick an opponent's butt.
Aggro isn't fun to me because it feels "unfair." It isn't fun because it turns the match into a game of chance: you don't have enough time to draw out of the statistical randomness of your deck, develop your resources and beat your opponent on equal terms. You know, win because you're actually better, instead of because you shuffled your deck nicer.
This is not about control against aggro, either; it applies to aggro mirrors as well: given relatively equal deck strengths and player skills, whoever draws the most resources in the right order wins.
That's about as random as it gets in Magic, and the whole reason I play Magic over, say, poker, blackjack or any other game of chance is because my skill as a player is actually supposed to be more relevant than statistical randomness.
Quote from kayvee »
So many people seem not to realise that aggro hasn't been viable in the face of serious control for a staggering amount of time. As bizarre as it sounds, this is the metagame reaching what I assume is an intended equilibrium. When creature decks can invest EVERY resource at their disposal into building an army of awesome, versatile threats and STILL get blown out by 5CC (with no combo in the format to actually give them a decent chance in the competitive metagame), something is wrong.
Your life is being made harder. Embrace it. Imagine how much better you'll be at playing against this kind of deck when blue gets back to its old, broken self.
So the fact that aggro was the underdog for so long sanctions the game designers to set up the aggro equivalent to Combo Winter?
From my playtest experience, if the aggro deck has the chance to invest EVERY resource at their disposal into building their army, no 5cc, white, black, blue, purple or beeble control player will be able to stop it with the current card pool, no matter how they build their deck or how their relative piles are stacked! The current metagame borders on the realm of fully dominant choices, where no game worth its salt should EVER tread...
People hiss and grunt at Mark Rosewater for the state of the game. Few realize, though, that it is Aaron Forsythe who is directly responsible of the current state of affairs due to negligence as head of Magic R&D and a completely skewed view of the game as a whole.
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
Oh yeah, *counter* *counter* *counter* *bomb* *counter* *counter* *win*= skill? Please, if anything, it shows lack of it.
Even in the prime of Draw-Go, the deck didn't dominate the format back in 1998. The best it did back in 1998 worlds was Randy Buehler getting 12th with the deck.
You also can't counter spells willy nilly. You don't have an unlimited amount of counterspells at your disposal, even if you decide to pack your deck to the brim with them. Anyone who's played MUC or any other form of U/x control would agree.
Have you tried a Jund, Boat Brew, or 5c Bloodraid control strategy? These decks are the base for control in M10 until Zendikar rolls in. Aggro players are going to be at the tables a huge amount of the time, but (midrange) control decks are still going to be a viable option. And rest assured, Cryptic Command will still be every others color MVP...or most hated.
You're right, look at all the cards this deck loses...
hmmmm tidings...which is a one of....hmmm ahwell one card out of 61...oh no so bad...deck is ruined (sarcasm of course)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
type 2 decks:
Blue/Red runeflare trap combo
Cruel Control
Legacy decks:
LEDless Ichorid
EDH decks:
mirkie ri berit
Doran the Explorer
Kami of the Crescent Moon
Originally Posted by badjuju As the Last of the Control Players, we are all part of a sacred brotherhood; a band of brothers who would rather die on their knees tapping islands and giving permission than live on our feet cascading into Blightning.
I'm pretty sure that every time a new set comes out, people are wowed by the amazing new aggro cards and cry out at the lack of amazing control magic cards. This is flawed for a few reasons:
- Control cards often aren't as screamingly awesome as good aggro cards, since control strategies are usually more complex and meta-dependent. When Cryptic Command was previewed, it looked great, but did the initial glance really get people as excited as Goldmeadow Stalwart into Wizened Cenn? Probably not.
- Every time a block rotates, people spew about how the format is getting faster, but in the end it settles into a regular format.
Oh yeah, *counter* *counter* *counter* *bomb* *counter* *counter* *win*= skill? Please, if anything, it shows lack of it.
Are you saying playing control takes less skill than aggro? Stop embarrasing yourself. People who think that blue is cheap and that countermagic is easy to play don't have a good understanding of the game.
The game is shifting to aggro vs midrange. I actually welcome this change and feel that the game is going in the right direction. Basically they are making creatures that cost 3+ mana a lot better than they used to be, and at the same time balancing it by keeping cheap removal in the format, thus creating a risk vs reward dynamic.
Midrange is the new control; you stop aggro by playing efficient midrange creatures that must be timely answered with spot removal or they will shut down the aggro players offense and perhaps allow a plainswalker to dominate the game over time and eventually swing the game around to crush the aggro player.
If the aggro player succeeds in keeping the tempo advantage long enough to drop an evasion finisher such as demigod of revenge or to overwhelm with the smaller creatures, he will probably win. If the midrange/control player can reverse the tempo and accumulate counters on a plainswalker or beat down with a large evasion creature, he will probably win.
Of course plainswalkers can help aggro decks too if they help keep a tempo advantage (e.g. sarkan vol, ajani); I was just giving an example. Note that the line between aggro and midrange/control is not defined as much by deck construction principles and changes for each matchup.
I started out playing 5cc variations, then simplified it down to Grixis control. Neither blue-based strategie proved fast or consistent enough to contain aggro, especially if the aggro player opened with a series of fast creatures that lowered my life total quickly. With no access to early mass removal for x/3 creatures and no way to recover life and tempo into the late game, these decks proved a failure.
I then switched my focus to more proactive strategies, including UB and RB based Reanimator powered by the promising disruption suite of Duress and Thoughtseize, plus Sign in Blood as a means of card advantage. The basic plan was to use Bogardan Hellkite as a means to swing the board and win quickly. With no access to more than 4 reanimation spells costing 4 or less, this also proved too slow and unreliable to counter aggro.
I ditched the reanimation plan to see if the disruption suite plus powerful RB removal proved enough to hold the fort long enough to start dropping Bogardan Hellkites and similar late-game threats, again to no avail. Although seemingly powerful against aggro, the deck just fails to win before the opponent reduces your life total to zero. It also has severe problems against x/3 creatures if you don't open with a Terminate.
Finally, I ditched red altogether and focused on the several variants of Mono-Black control, leveraging the power of cards like Bitterblossom, Sign in Blood and Thoughtseize with cost-effective removal/life-gain effects like Tendrils of Corruption and Corrupt. This proved considerably more effective, and I slowly polished the build with fast win conditions, including Demigod of Revenge. The build proved extremely powerful against midrange, but at the cost of utter failure against slower decks relying on Bitterblossom and Cryptic Command (which also lose against aggro). It also has SEVERE problems recovering tempo and card advantage against planeswalkers, or even a single Kitchen Finks or Ranger of Eos.
Bottom line:
Aggro is just too damn fast for almost any blue or black creature-light control variant to effectively compete in Type II. The combination of Persist, efficient creatures with Haste and the complete lack of effective early-game mass removal (by which I mean, removal that ACTUALLY clears the board, instead of leaving x/3, x/4 or Persisters alive), means you find yourself too often overwhelmed by a swarm of creatures you cannot answer on a one-on-one basis.
Even powerhouses such as Tendrils of Corruption on a mono-black deck are too slow and pricey to have a significant impact on your opponent's board, leaving you open to devastating plays you can do nothing about.
I won't go into discussions of whether control should be the dominant archetype in any given metagame. I won't even claim that it's necessary to maintain a relative balance between aggro, combo and control within the tournament scene. Instead, I'll ask you a question:
Do you find it fun to see 90% of the games degenerate into a race where the guy who got the most creatures in play faster wins?
'cause I sure as hell don't...
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
I ramble, but the point is if you're running reanimator, you should be using Archangel as one of your mannequin targets.
~RW Soldiers / RW Aggro (with a side of Giants) [T2]~
No doubt. Just because we have not had to deal with MUC in ages doesn't mean the other control that appears "doesn't count."
Ugh, good riddance... *counter* *counter* *counter* *Keiga* *counter response to Keiga* *Meloku* *counter response to Meloku* *die now*
Standard:
Transmuter Elixir WUB
Naya Knight 'Blade RGW
Mighty Polymorphin' Progenitus UR
Extended:
RoflThopter UB
Casual:
Teferi Control/Mill U
Yep. This always happens. Blue mages whine about being "nerfed" and half a year later people are complaining about blue dominating.
The only relevance that blue being bad in M10 would have would be for limited. There are 2 blocks to "help" blue out for Standard.
Also, who said you're the be all/end all to deckbuilding? If more accomplished/proven competitive deck builders can't make control viable, then you can cry.
100% true, and likely the funniest thing I have read on this forum in ages.
and do we really need another thread wailing about the end of control/blue?
QFT.
Just because Wrath will no longer be availible and there isn't a plethora of amazing Blue counterspells, people suddenly think Control will roll over and die. Considering what a person considers "Control" is not only highly subjective, but also gets redefined in every single game of Magic (for anyone who hasn't read it, Mike Flores's "Who'se the Beatdown?" article is one of the most interesting pieces of Magic Theory, like, ever). So no, Control is not dead in Standard as soon as M10 becomes legal. Some of the oldest and most classical control styles take severe hits, possibly to the point that they no longer are viable, but that does not mean all Control strategies are null and void.
The reason this baseless argument comes up is that most any player willing to make this outcry is probably not a good enough deck designer to build a control deck outside of certain scopes. As such, the immediate reaction is to blame the lack of good Control cards.
Now, it might very well pan out that even the better Control options availible, those ones sitting on the fringe of deck design, may not be totally viable. The format is particularly fast at the moment. But I am pretty sure that no one at this point in time has tested the diversity of the new format to its extremes and, as such, any claims that Control is dead are being overblown, if not entirely false.
This is not about blue control, a point I believe I made perfectly clear when I stated I tried several RB and mono-black decks. This is about over-reliance on creatures for building a competitive deck. This is also not knee-jerk reaction or a theoretical analysis about what I think might happen; I've put my fair share of playtest hours before making this point, and the results are (even against the plethora of non-tuned test decks that show up with a new set), to say the least, scary... =/
Personally, I find that creature-against-creature interactions are so shallow that you need to factor in quality variance for the game to have any sort of challenge; that's why I have no trouble at all playing aggro and midrange deck in limited formats.
My point in question is this: in order to maximize your chances to win in Type 2 in the following months, you'll be practically forced to play decks with at least 20 efficient creatures and means to answer your opponent's 20 efficient creatures. I think that this is monotonous, shallow and hands-down unfun. I just wondered if other people thought the same.
The fact that the metagame can be "fixed" when the next expansion shows up is kinda moot, considering that the entire Nationals season revolves around the current state of affairs. If I wanted to win my Nats, I'd go for a shallow, aggro build and with a bit of luck even have a shot at winning, but it would certainly not be the most fulfilling or fun use of my time. Hence the root of my question: why spend time and money in an activity I find unfun in the first place?
In case you're curious, the only creature-light strategy that seems like it has any shot at working come M10 is, ironically, TurboFog.
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
This.
UGR Intet, the Dreamer
B Korlash, Heir to Blackblade
WUBRG Sliver Overlord
W Rune-Tail, Kitsune Ascendant
Walls are also really bad against handling tokens and massive amounts of weenies that just have one guy crash into the wall the rest overwhelm your life total.
The problem does not just come from the lack of good counterspells. If anything, the loss of *** with a ****ty substitute is MUCH worse for control decks than the lower quality countermagic. Countermagic was already struggling against cascade, and people think it would dominate with just 1, maybe 2 good counterspells? Maybe people just need to learn how to beat countermagic.
Same can be said about control (I like Control BTW, but I'm not blind). In a game where the primary way to win is with creature combat (this is a thruth, you have to accept it), counter control can very well feel boring/unfun/etc. Permisive magic isn't fun except to it's user.
~RW Soldiers / RW Aggro (with a side of Giants) [T2]~
5c Control
Main Deck
61 cards
1 Cascade Bluffs
2 Exotic Orchard
3 Island
3 Mystic Gate
4 Reflecting Pool
3 Sunken Ruins
4 Vivid Creek
4 Vivid Marsh
3 Vivid Meadow
27 lands
2 Broodmate Dragon
3 Mulldrifter
1 Nucklavee
6 creatures3 Broken Ambitions
2 Cruel Ultimatum
4 Cryptic Command
4 Esper Charm
2 Firespout
3 Hallowed Burial
2 Maelstrom Pulse
2 Pithing Needle
2 Pyroclasm
3 Runed Halo
1 Tidings
28 other spellsSideboard
2 Glen Elendra Archmage
1 Hallowed Burial
4 Negate
4 Paladin en-Vec
1 Primal Command
1 Thought Hemorrhage
1 Vexing Shusher
1 Wall of Reverence
15 sideboard cards
You're right, look at all the cards this deck loses...
Granted, as is burn, land destruction, discard, tokens and pretty much any strategy that allows you to kick an opponent's butt.
Aggro isn't fun to me because it feels "unfair." It isn't fun because it turns the match into a game of chance: you don't have enough time to draw out of the statistical randomness of your deck, develop your resources and beat your opponent on equal terms. You know, win because you're actually better, instead of because you shuffled your deck nicer.
This is not about control against aggro, either; it applies to aggro mirrors as well: given relatively equal deck strengths and player skills, whoever draws the most resources in the right order wins.
That's about as random as it gets in Magic, and the whole reason I play Magic over, say, poker, blackjack or any other game of chance is because my skill as a player is actually supposed to be more relevant than statistical randomness.
So the fact that aggro was the underdog for so long sanctions the game designers to set up the aggro equivalent to Combo Winter?
From my playtest experience, if the aggro deck has the chance to invest EVERY resource at their disposal into building their army, no 5cc, white, black, blue, purple or beeble control player will be able to stop it with the current card pool, no matter how they build their deck or how their relative piles are stacked! The current metagame borders on the realm of fully dominant choices, where no game worth its salt should EVER tread...
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
~RW Soldiers / RW Aggro (with a side of Giants) [T2]~
Even in the prime of Draw-Go, the deck didn't dominate the format back in 1998. The best it did back in 1998 worlds was Randy Buehler getting 12th with the deck.
You also can't counter spells willy nilly. You don't have an unlimited amount of counterspells at your disposal, even if you decide to pack your deck to the brim with them. Anyone who's played MUC or any other form of U/x control would agree.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
hmmmm tidings...which is a one of....hmmm ahwell one card out of 61...oh no so bad...deck is ruined (sarcasm of course)
Blue/Red runeflare trap combo
Cruel Control
Legacy decks:
LEDless Ichorid
EDH decks:
mirkie ri berit
Doran the Explorer
Kami of the Crescent Moon
Originally Posted by badjuju
As the Last of the Control Players, we are all part of a sacred brotherhood; a band of brothers who would rather die on their knees tapping islands and giving permission than live on our feet cascading into Blightning.
Yep, Rock Paper Scissors
~RW Soldiers / RW Aggro (with a side of Giants) [T2]~
- Control cards often aren't as screamingly awesome as good aggro cards, since control strategies are usually more complex and meta-dependent. When Cryptic Command was previewed, it looked great, but did the initial glance really get people as excited as Goldmeadow Stalwart into Wizened Cenn? Probably not.
- Every time a block rotates, people spew about how the format is getting faster, but in the end it settles into a regular format.
Are you saying playing control takes less skill than aggro? Stop embarrasing yourself. People who think that blue is cheap and that countermagic is easy to play don't have a good understanding of the game.
I WANT YOUR DEATH BARONS! Message me if you want to get rid of them!
Midrange is the new control; you stop aggro by playing efficient midrange creatures that must be timely answered with spot removal or they will shut down the aggro players offense and perhaps allow a plainswalker to dominate the game over time and eventually swing the game around to crush the aggro player.
If the aggro player succeeds in keeping the tempo advantage long enough to drop an evasion finisher such as demigod of revenge or to overwhelm with the smaller creatures, he will probably win. If the midrange/control player can reverse the tempo and accumulate counters on a plainswalker or beat down with a large evasion creature, he will probably win.
Of course plainswalkers can help aggro decks too if they help keep a tempo advantage (e.g. sarkan vol, ajani); I was just giving an example. Note that the line between aggro and midrange/control is not defined as much by deck construction principles and changes for each matchup.