- MrENigmas
- Registered User
-
Member for 10 years and 10 days
Last active Thu, Dec, 1 2016 16:29:16
- 0 Followers
- 84 Total Posts
- 2 Thanks
-
1
huktonfonix posted a message on MBD Built from Underworld HeraldThememan, I don't disagree with your aggro advice. If you read my post, you'll see that I suggested the same aggro approach that you're advocating. My concern was that the MBD deck is stronger than the mono-black aggro deck. If he does want a more aggro focus, your advice is spot on.Posted in: Standard Archives -
1
thememan posted a message on MBD Built from Underworld HeraldAlright, so this is going to be in part a reply to the original thread that knocked my suggests, and part general advice. The first is necessary to understand *why* suggestions were made in the first place, and the second is going to be on general game theory.Posted in: Standard Archives
To answer the one critique of "Don't cut the best cards in your deck to better synergize with Xathrid Necromancer" completely misses the point. Your decklist there was heavily leaning towards aggro. Aggro does not run the best cards in a given color(s). It runs the best, but cheapest, options available under the concept that you are flying under the radar of most decks. It is about mana efficiency and building board presence first and foremost. The fact you were running Necromancer, which I would disagree with being a "marginal" card in certain lists, gives you an added bonus. Concessions were not made for Necromancer, rather that Necromancer makes your cheaper to play options better to begin with. It is a very difficult creature for many decks to deal with, and for good reason. If you were building a deck to abuse it fully, it would be W/B humans. Rather, Necromancer gives the build you presented additional ability to maintain board position.
Let me reiterate something that is central to aggro decks in general: Aggro does *not* lose because it is low on life, it loses because it lacks board position. Maintaining board position, and constantly putting pressure on the board are first and foremost.
Consider: Hero's Downfall is the best spot removal in standard currently. And yet I suggested, originally, not to run it. Why? Because there is more to a deck than piling the best cards in a color into a deck and calling it good. An aggressive deck needs to do multiple things a turn, particularly on turns 3-5. Downfall means that at best you can cast it and 1-drop on turn 4. To be blunt, that is not good enough. Most planeswalkers are not a huge issue to aggro. They come down a bit too late to have a massive effect. The best right now against pure aggro is Jace, Architect of Thought. Depending on the exact position in the game, he's either easy to deal with through attacking or just straight up ignoring to finish out the game.
Other "good" cards are not good for aggro either; Whip just doesn't do much for you. Once again, you're trying to fly low and finish the game before your life total matters. You will also rarely have a creature in the graveyard that will make it's activation really worth while. Gray Merchant is one of the best black commons in standard, and easily one of the best black creatures in standard period. It is either mediocre or just plain bad in an aggro list, depending on your exact configuration.
The point is, there was a good deal of thought put into what I said, and it wasn't just willy-nilly inclusions for the sake of inclusions.
That said, aggro isn't the only option available, obviously. You may not want to play an aggressive deck; merely this was where I saw your deck leaning towards in the original thread and gave input based on this. It could just as easily "scale up", if you will, to resembling something more akin to Mono-B devotion lists. I'm not sure this is the right direction, as the bare-bones parts are much more expensive, however, and the event deck is missing several necessary components to it.
That said, if you do go the midrangy/Mono-B devotion route there are things to keep in mind:
Rakdos Cackler, Thrill-Kill Assassin, and Tormented Hero are aggro cards, pure and simple. They won't do anything for you. You won't outrace very many opponents trying to ride them to victory. They work in aggro as they are supported by a dozen or more other 1-2 cost creatures (Most aggro decks have about 20+ 1-2 drops). They are played because they overwhelm the board in conjunction with other creatures. These are all terrible late game top-decks. Cackler and Hero are amazing turn 1; by turn 5 or six you will wish you had drawn anything else (And trust me, this will happen).
Whip of Erebos is a 1-of Mainboard, maybe. You will have to trust me on this one, but Underworld Connections is one of the best cards you can play. I run 4 in my Mono-B list, and I loathe siding them out. Mono-B's removal is mostly 1-for-1, and all it takes is a single creature to stick to ruin your day. Being able to draw 2 or more cards a turn turns the tide quickly, and Mono-B can ride the lower life totals if it controls the board *very* well(I have won more games hanging on at 5 or less life than I care to admit). Whip has proved useful, but unnecessary in many match-ups. It's solid against some more aggressive matches, and can be stellar against the Mirror where their 1-for-1 trades are bad. Still, after all of my experience with Mono-B, I'd much rather have 4 Connections than 3 whips. In fact, I'd much rather just have 4 connections.
The point I'm getting at, essentially, is that you're trying to go at it from two different angles, which just doesn't work in the end. You won't be fast enough to threaten most opponent's life totals significantly a good many times, and you won't have enough of a late game presence to pull back from being pressured by more aggressive decks.
Y
None of this is meant to be insulting to you; you clearly recognize some of the strongest cards in the format for black, and know why they are good. Rather, it is pointing out that there is a lack of focus here. If you go the aggro route, which is probably the easiest to build given the event deck contents, there is a given focus. If you go the midrangy/Mono-B devotion route, there is an entirely different focus. Mixing the two rarely works well. And each comes with inclusions/exclusions that some would scoff at, as it means getting rid of the best cards in the color for the reason that said cards simply don't mesh with the plan.
That said, Herald of Torment belongs in the list either way. It's a cheap alternative to Nightveil Specter in the more devotion centerred concept, and is a great beater on the upper end in the aggro lists. You also need more removal/thoughtseizes either way, but I think you've figured that out given what you said.
So the question I really need to ask you, before any more input can be given: Do you want to be more aggressive or do you want to be more midrangy? There is a bit of a spectrum to be had here (You could go very all-in on the aggro, with loads of 1-2 drops, very few 3 drops, and nothing else; or you could go a bit more mid-rangy, dropping the 1 drops and many 2 drops in favor of strong creatures that hit later for instance). Trying to split the difference of Mono-B aggro and Mono-B devotion just isn't going to work well. They are two completely different decks, and do what they do in completely different ways and have different priorities. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
2