It's funny that a sub-optimal version of the deck did so well. I don't think its really worth diluting the speed of the deck on the off chance you run into a leyline.
Standard is a money pit especially recently, when I first started playing there were 1 or 2 chase rares needed for a competitive deck. If you don't trade off your stuff 6 months - 1 year prior to rotation you lose a ton of value.
^ Its because of matchups like Affinity that I still can't get rid of Smash to Smithereens. The card just disrupts their gameplan so efficiently.
Yeah I was walking into an unknown meta so had to start somewhere for a baseline. There are 3 affinity players and 3 DnT players so I will definitely be running smash to smithereens next time. It would probably be fine to main deck some searing blazes in that particular meta.
I should note I have seen a 4 of Leyline in a sideboard... not sure how pervasive it is throughout the meta but if it is, possibly I should switch to a more creature based approach with keldon marauders, figure of destiny etc.
Small event 3 rounds of swiss with roughly patrick sullivans list
Round 1: vs Burn 2-0
Was pretty interactive seeing who could cast lightning bolts the fastest.
-4 Price of Progress, +4 Searing Blaze
Round 2: Affinity 1-2
Whoever went first won, seems even enough. Although game 3 was a blow out because I made the mistake of not killing a vault skirge turn 1 then had it hit me for a bunch with cranial plating.
Playing in my first Legacy event today with something similar to patrick sullivan's list and looking for some general sideboarding advice as a baseline (I have never played this format before).
If sideboarding 4 Mindbreak Trap against storm, how aggressively do you mulligan for one? I could see keeping a fast hand without one but what if looks marginal to win by turn 4, which may not even be fast enough depending on if you are on the play or not.
I suppose I could ask the same about siding in 4 REB and 3 Ensnaring Bridges vs show and tell.
From a U/B perspective I hope Theos has a good finisher. Aetherling seems like the best available post rotation. If devotion becomes a real thing that decks need to be built around I think this format is going to be annoying.
4 mana does not equal 6 mana. Also, if your opponent is good (and if you are good) you will end up getting the 2 better cards or the 3 almost as good cards (if it is a 3:2 split).
This WILL NOT (most of the time) be used in a "get the right card or die" situation. Usually, it will be used in a "crushing you under card advantage" situation, which this does very well at 4 mana.
All I'm saying is if I needed card draw for my deck I'd rather have opportunity or even thoughtflare if I was in those colors. I think its more about the card slots for card draw than the mana cost.
There are many times playing control at least where you are digging for that land drop, wrath, counter or removal you need to not die and this won't help you.
This card is going to dominate the format for 2 years. That's abundantly clear.
It's different from FoF, but not directly worse. I mean, the cost is clearly worse--but aside from that, it has upsides and downsides. FoF forces your opponent to split 2 piles, which puts the burden on your opponent to set up something along the lines of a number of permutations between 5 cards. A lot of the time, your opponent will screw that up. Not a lot of players really know how to split those kinds of piles, and even if they do--there's always the possibility that they're going to make a bad judgment call.
With this card, it's different. You don't get to be so lazy and just flip them over and hand them to your opponent; you have to reveal them and then show your opponent the piles as you make them, which can be a tell--a major slip of information. It also can be a slip of false information, based upon body language and which order you arrange the cards. In addition, you're also going to gain the advantage (over FoF) by being able to set up two piles that can't possibly fail you, regardless of which one you get. Often, that's going to mean: "I'll get the 3 cards if you don't give me the 2 best cards," or "I'll get the 3 cards, or I'll get the best card and something else I can use (like a land)."
Most of the time, this is going to be an Inspiration that gives you 2 really, really good cards out of 5. The rest of the time, it's going to draw you 3 cards. If you built your deck with cards that don't suck, getting the 3 pile is going to be pretty good.
FoF isn't insane just because of graveyard interactions. Those are honestly just icing on the cake. FoF is insane because it costs 4 mana and digs 5 cards deep, and very few draw spells chain together as effectively as FoFs. Steam Augury's biggest downside is that your opponent can break the chain--but, then again, what happens when your deck has more than just 4 Steam Auguries for the draw spells? What happens when you split Steam Augury+X and another draw spell+Y+X? You're going to get another Augury, or you're going to get some kind of draw spell out of 3 cards? I mean, they can break the chain if you only play Steam Auguries...but if you have any way of digging it back out of your yard, or you have other draw spells in the deck, they're just not going to break the chain.
What will be interesting/funny (to me) is how often people are going to screw this up and lose both their Aetherlings, without a way to get them back. More interesting than funny will be how people actually solve this problem. This card is going to see lots of play. The question is: what does it do to deck design?
Relying on your opponent to be bad might work at FNM, but otherwise playing against anyone competent you will almost never get what you want or what they don't have an answer for. I'd rather just play opportunity.
In what matchups would you side out grim lavamancer. I see how he can be good against some creature decks but he seems kinda clunky and slow for just going to the dome.
Hi, I don't know much about the intricacies of this deck. The primer says the LED version of this deck is more unstable and susceptible to hate. Why is that? Is this still the case or are both versions hated out as easily now?
I think you're mistaken to consider employee productivity as the only source of compensation for increased wages. That money can be made up for via a stronger business model, by increased prices, improvements in efficiency, etc. etc.
Again assuming profit maximizing behavior it's already the case that they are being as efficient as they are able to be.
Can we talk about the fact that places like WalMart are only able to get people to 'freely' agree to work for them on wages so poor that you can't live off them is because our government effectively subsidizes WalMart employees with various benefits such as food stamps?
Considering how much profit that corporation is making, it wouldn't kill them to pay a livable wage. Or, to generalize a bit, if you can't be profitable while paying a living wage, you don't deserve to have the rest of us subsidize your labor costs.
I do agree there are many corporations that are subsidized by the government. Walmart in particular is heavily subsidized through the public highway/transportation system that they use for shipping products over large areas that smaller local stores don't use to such an extent yet are forced to pay for it. Corporate welfare is a pretty gigantic problem but there is a revolving door that makes it difficult to resolve.
Yeah I was walking into an unknown meta so had to start somewhere for a baseline. There are 3 affinity players and 3 DnT players so I will definitely be running smash to smithereens next time. It would probably be fine to main deck some searing blazes in that particular meta.
I should note I have seen a 4 of Leyline in a sideboard... not sure how pervasive it is throughout the meta but if it is, possibly I should switch to a more creature based approach with keldon marauders, figure of destiny etc.
Round 1: vs Burn 2-0
Was pretty interactive seeing who could cast lightning bolts the fastest.
-4 Price of Progress, +4 Searing Blaze
Round 2: Affinity 1-2
Whoever went first won, seems even enough. Although game 3 was a blow out because I made the mistake of not killing a vault skirge turn 1 then had it hit me for a bunch with cranial plating.
-4 Flame Rift, + 4 Searing Blaze
Round 3: Affinity 1-2
Same deal whoever went first won.
-4 Flame Rift, + 4 Searing Blaze
If sideboarding 4 Mindbreak Trap against storm, how aggressively do you mulligan for one? I could see keeping a fast hand without one but what if looks marginal to win by turn 4, which may not even be fast enough depending on if you are on the play or not.
I suppose I could ask the same about siding in 4 REB and 3 Ensnaring Bridges vs show and tell.
All I'm saying is if I needed card draw for my deck I'd rather have opportunity or even thoughtflare if I was in those colors. I think its more about the card slots for card draw than the mana cost.
There are many times playing control at least where you are digging for that land drop, wrath, counter or removal you need to not die and this won't help you.
Relying on your opponent to be bad might work at FNM, but otherwise playing against anyone competent you will almost never get what you want or what they don't have an answer for. I'd rather just play opportunity.
I found a VoD on twitch of someone playing High Tide against you on the 30th haha.
Again assuming profit maximizing behavior it's already the case that they are being as efficient as they are able to be.
I do agree there are many corporations that are subsidized by the government. Walmart in particular is heavily subsidized through the public highway/transportation system that they use for shipping products over large areas that smaller local stores don't use to such an extent yet are forced to pay for it. Corporate welfare is a pretty gigantic problem but there is a revolving door that makes it difficult to resolve.