Yes but like Russ mentioned, if they tap out turn 2/3, you have to take full advantage, so I feel like not having that Ritual is a hedge in the wrong direction, no? The first few turns are huge for us against them.
It certainly won't feel good to cast a bridge against control, but I wonder if at least having it available would be better than having say a higher ritual count. A bridge and Spellskite(as bridge protection) will still have to be dealt with if they hope to win. And with a low bridge count, you're a little more likely to draw it at a better time. Like mid game off a Chandra (instead of that ritual or t. voice).
How many accelerators can be pulled out without hitting the core too hard? (They're really all that's left to pull out that's not some kind of a clock). I've heard of only one being pulled ever really. I suppose there is T. Voice as well. I think this really comes down to wanting 1-2 bridges without diminishing your aggression in any way.
I definitely agree with what you're bringing in, but perhaps there are other things that could be removed instead of all 4 bridges? How aggressive is Ballista for instance? (I've always thought of it more as disruption rather than aggro). How strong is blood moon here? Perhaps we don't need 6 iterations of a blood moon? (I'd keep magus in this case as it keeps our threat density up.)
I'm currently working on the UW control match up for the pyro-prison meta doc. While I agree with Russ that full aggression should be brought in (we are not going to out control UW control), I also can't deny bridge's strength here as it blanks all of UW's win cons, as Ray pointed out. I'd like to see some discussion on bridge in this match up. I'll start by just saying fairly confidently that we shouldn't go down to 0 despite it not being an aggressive card. But bridge as a 4 of is not necessarily the right number either as dragging a game out against control is not where we want to be.
UW currently runs about 7 outs to a resolved bridge. Cryptic Command bounce, snapcasters to hit said cryptics, and D. Sphere. (Some lists don't run D. sphere but do run additional snapcaster mages.)
I think the most rewarding games tend to be those that we lose and learn something from. Winning games is what everyone strives for, but it doesn't make players better. Losing is where progress is made. If you had won that Spellskite game, I'd imagine its application wouldn't be as ingrained into your mind as it is now. Those who follow these tournament results on the forum are learning these lessons as well, so its very appreciated. Failure is the greatest teacher after all. Great job at the tournament Russ.
@Revenged: Definitely like the idea of evaluating cards on a score basis, it's a pretty awesome idea. But I don't know how practical it is because there are SO many different factors and dimensions to why you'd want a particular card. Especially with a shifting meta. In your example for instance, you're going off of the strength of the card on a match up basis. But other factors might include things like converted mana costs, or meta differences between high level tournaments, local tournaments, FNM, and mtgo. If you're comparing an enchantment vs an artifact for instance, then you have to consider how much artifact and enchantment hate is in each of those types of metas (subtracting from the overall score).
There is one more subtle point that I think a lot of players don't think about. Their own skill level and their specific play styles. Two different pilots can pick separate lines of play. Neither of them are necessarily wrong, as you could pick the incorrect line and still win. But in general, the correct line, or card choice in a sb, is about what has the highest % of winning. Even though the higher % choice could actually end up with a loss where the more risky (lower % choice), would have won. (Maybe a good discussion for Goblin Rabblemaster (risky) vs Goblin Charbelcher (safe)).
As an example of playstyles/skill, some pilots of Pyro-Prison may feel quite confident against UW control. But others may have a little more difficulty with this matchup. If this is the case, one player might opt for 2 Boils, where many other pilots run 1 or 0. I for one run into Tron nonstop online, so while the community has recently dropped down on spyglasses and pushed 1-2 Dampening Matrix, I ended up keeping 2x spyglass and dropped something else for a matrix because that's what 'I' was running into frequently.
The downside of her is actually some counter synergy with bridge (sort of, read on). She herself can't attack with it up. But the idea of her is that against aggro, we don't try to race so bridge is fine and she acts as a draw engine. In matchups where you take bridge out, she's a 4/4 flying (that's some decent aggression) as well as the engine. One other possible issue is that first discard where you potentially have some useful cards. My argument here is that by the time you are casting this 4 cmc dragon, most likely, you are pretty low on cards anyway. You can also play it later should you have something pivotal in your current hand.
Secondly, when we have the mana to cast her, that means anything we draw from her is going to be castable. We are already great at top deck mode but she doubles our effectiveness there.
With that said, she's a four drop so in terms of replacements, the known contender here would be Pia and Kiran Nalaar.
So Pia has 3 bodies. That's a lot of blocking against aggro decks..
Ava is 1 body, but a stronger single blocker and attacker that may halt attacks entirely in order not to just throw creatures away.
Both cards equal out in how much power is put on the board, though the full amount from Ava is flying while Pia has the paid reach/removal and numbers to attack.
Ava is a draw engine in a deck with a measly 2 Tormenting voices. Also, recent discussions suggest Koth as well could be a contender for the bench.
So yeah, I think she looks great on paper, but I'd like to hear some big picture stuff on her that potentially disqualifies her as a valid option. It's possible she's not up to snuff but I'd sure love to test her out and hear opinions.
Speaking of Boil, I'm not a huge fan of just one in the sb. Even against mono blue, one is just not going to come up often. With how difficult I find counter decks against Pyro Prison, I feel like two need to be pushed for consistency's sake.
Yeah, Trinisphere on the other hand I have had trouble with making work. I have always felt that it's just 1 mana too expensive to really make the cut in a lot of decks. I feel like typically you just can't get it out soon enough. In our shell, that's not really the point because it's possible to do it on T1, but all that means is that you're both drawing and passing until you're both at 3 lands. I suppose it's good against decks with tons of 1-2 drops but eh.
Totally on board with Defense Grid to the point where I might even want two in sb. I personally love the idea of having more tools against UW/UWx decks (really any deck that runs lots of instants). Our single abrade is really the only thing we would cast on opponents turn so it also doesn't really hurt our deck.
Great points guys. Storage Matrix is definitely an odd card to analyze but it's true that it simply doesn't make enough of an impact. At its best, I found it really was just a speed bump while testing.
What are everyone's thoughts on Storage Matrix? Frankly I find it difficult to analyze and just looking at it, seems not so great. However, after doing a search of the thread, it's never actually been discussed. I just don't know if it really goes the distance against even the right opponent but wanted to get everyone's take. In aggro match ups, where we tend to take out our aggression anyway, the opponent is going to have to choose between developing a board and swinging, while we just choose to develop our board full of locks. Decks most effected are those that not only tap lands, but tap creatures as well. This kind of feels like a much weaker, but combined blood moon and ensnaring bridge. There are pros to this that moon and bridge don't deal with such as a tapped land (even basics) are worse than a ruined land from moon. Creatures that would not normally swing but tap are hit by the 'bridge' part of it.
My overall thought on it is that it can slow the game down but isn't a true lock. It could, however, equate to a few extra turns (which we really want against aggro). But this isn't even getting into what would be replaced. Mostly just wanted to open the card up for analysis among some mountainfolk.
I've got all the pieces for this now. Could someone direct me to the comprehensive primer, sideboarding guide, etc? And hopefully a recent successful decklist? Looking forward to many T1 BMs & CoVs. Thanks.
Hey all, I'm back from the holidays and picking back up on the role evaluation guide. Maybe I'll call it The Shield or the Spear? I want to go ahead and get the ball rolling on one of the highest played decks at the moment, Death Shadow. Tron/Eldrazi aggro coming up soon. I worked a little with Russ on this one but with it being one of the highest played, I believe this one deserves a little more attention than most. Especially with it being another midrange deck. *Note, the guide hasn't been broken up into Fair/Unfair segments yet so it does lack that discussion in the guide.
I post these and request information and advice from the community because like you all, I'm also trying to master the deck. (The learning curve on this deck is quite high despite the free wins we are able to produce.) Please feel free to add any additional information or suggest removing some. The goal is to give a small but concise/accurate understanding of the match ups in order to make sideboarding and play decisions feel intuitive because you'll know the direction you should be going in.
UW currently runs about 7 outs to a resolved bridge. Cryptic Command bounce, snapcasters to hit said cryptics, and D. Sphere. (Some lists don't run D. sphere but do run additional snapcaster mages.)
There is one more subtle point that I think a lot of players don't think about. Their own skill level and their specific play styles. Two different pilots can pick separate lines of play. Neither of them are necessarily wrong, as you could pick the incorrect line and still win. But in general, the correct line, or card choice in a sb, is about what has the highest % of winning. Even though the higher % choice could actually end up with a loss where the more risky (lower % choice), would have won. (Maybe a good discussion for Goblin Rabblemaster (risky) vs Goblin Charbelcher (safe)).
As an example of playstyles/skill, some pilots of Pyro-Prison may feel quite confident against UW control. But others may have a little more difficulty with this matchup. If this is the case, one player might opt for 2 Boils, where many other pilots run 1 or 0. I for one run into Tron nonstop online, so while the community has recently dropped down on spyglasses and pushed 1-2 Dampening Matrix, I ended up keeping 2x spyglass and dropped something else for a matrix because that's what 'I' was running into frequently.
Has anyone tested out Avaricious Dragon?
- 4/4 flying (pretty decent spear)
- 4 Toughness passes the burn test.
- And last but not least.. An actual draw engine in this beautiful red deck with sweet synergy next to Ensnaring Bridge.
First off, Ava will never disrupt bridge and can even lower it completely when we otherwise couldn't. (Note the discard happens on our end step). We will begin every turn with two cards. Pretty interesting when you consider that Goblin Rabblemaster, Mutavault, Simian Spirit Guide, Eidolon of the Great Revel, and Magus of the Moon all have 2 power.. (Oh hi Ensnaring Bridge!) She's also not half bad when she's partnered up with Hazoret the Fervent. (Extra discard fuel late game behind bridge.)The downside of her is actually some counter synergy with bridge (sort of, read on). She herself can't attack with it up. But the idea of her is that against aggro, we don't try to race so bridge is fine and she acts as a draw engine. In matchups where you take bridge out, she's a 4/4 flying (that's some decent aggression) as well as the engine. One other possible issue is that first discard where you potentially have some useful cards. My argument here is that by the time you are casting this 4 cmc dragon, most likely, you are pretty low on cards anyway. You can also play it later should you have something pivotal in your current hand.
Secondly, when we have the mana to cast her, that means anything we draw from her is going to be castable. We are already great at top deck mode but she doubles our effectiveness there.
With that said, she's a four drop so in terms of replacements, the known contender here would be Pia and Kiran Nalaar.
So Pia has 3 bodies. That's a lot of blocking against aggro decks..
Ava is 1 body, but a stronger single blocker and attacker that may halt attacks entirely in order not to just throw creatures away.
Both cards equal out in how much power is put on the board, though the full amount from Ava is flying while Pia has the paid reach/removal and numbers to attack.
Ava is a draw engine in a deck with a measly 2 Tormenting voices. Also, recent discussions suggest Koth as well could be a contender for the bench.
So yeah, I think she looks great on paper, but I'd like to hear some big picture stuff on her that potentially disqualifies her as a valid option. It's possible she's not up to snuff but I'd sure love to test her out and hear opinions.
My overall thought on it is that it can slow the game down but isn't a true lock. It could, however, equate to a few extra turns (which we really want against aggro). But this isn't even getting into what would be replaced. Mostly just wanted to open the card up for analysis among some mountainfolk.
I post these and request information and advice from the community because like you all, I'm also trying to master the deck. (The learning curve on this deck is quite high despite the free wins we are able to produce.) Please feel free to add any additional information or suggest removing some. The goal is to give a small but concise/accurate understanding of the match ups in order to make sideboarding and play decisions feel intuitive because you'll know the direction you should be going in.
See attached for GDS match up.