Welcome back everyone. I know its a been a couple weeks since I've been around, but I finished up my summer semester and just wanted some me time. I am now recovered from basically 46 weeks of school in a year though. This week I have decklists from July 31st and July 24th. I also have a few ideas for the next special event based on what has and what has not worked in the past. For new readers we hold these events every Saturday at 12:30 EDT in the room /join Tribal. Please bring you're best and have at it. Now without further ado, the decks.
July 24th
2-1
Jhoke13 came out this week with Red-White Humans and focusing on sweepers. The Silver Knights are guaranteed to live through any sweeper he throws out so he should always be on top afterwards. Otherwise he is running a larger number of pingers. I love the idea of the deck. Also Mark of Asylum makes up for the lack of actual Pro-Red guys like Paladin en-Vec or Auriok Champion.
Well its about time someone built a Relentless Rats deck. I don't know what took everyone so long, but Blippy ran this version with Bloodbond March which is a great card I have always enjoyed. Personally I would have upped the Marches to 4 and exchanged Wretched Banquet with Bone Splinters. Saccing a Rat is not too horrible when you get it back next time you play a creature. Oh and every creature being a Glorious Anthem? Yeah, that is pretty sweet.
The deck always plays out a little oddly due to the nature of rogues, but if I manage to get down the creatures in the right order things get nasty quickly
(example: one game managed to get a
Oona's Prowler to 8/2). The
Mana Drain replaced
Negate and I realize that makes the deck more competitive in that the
Negate was originally there to prevent the ability to counter creatures and protect my own but after getting 4x Drain with the credits from my final videos it made little to no sense to not make that change as it can still help save my creatures while also helping power out stuff for free if not next to free.
3-1 Decks
Shuyin came ready to go this weekend with a very interesting toolbox build. The Training Grounds is a great addition as far as Incandescent Soulstoke goes. Inner-Flame Igniter and Flamekin Spitfire both also benefit from the reduction in activated abilities.
4-0 Decks
And James once again has Rats. I have talked about this deck more than any other. I have nothing left to say. I mean it's obviously a good deck, if it gets included so much. I've just run out of things to say.
July 31st
2-1 Decks
For the first time in a long time Goblins have once again reared their scaly brutish heads. Pretty much we are looking at a stereotypical Goblin deck here. But It is viciously efficient. I know I played this deck round 2 and after a brutal reaming coupled with ym intense exhaustion at the time I was finished. Like all Goblin decks this thing I just FAST.
AJ_impy showcased his creativity as always with this very interesting -1/-1 counter theme deck. The ultimate answer to infinite persists lies in the power of cards like Heartmender and Power Conduit. It's a very interesting concept and each time I see it, I really enjoy Midnight Banshee more and more. And I will probably be trying to abuse it personally in the near future.
Of course we all knew someone would be rocking the new tech of M11 this past week. And who better than Flippers_Giraffe with his Sun Titan themed Giant deck. Eschewing obvious burn and removal for spells like Seal of Fire and Oblivion Ring are obvious when you have reanimation available every turn. Also Flinging renewable Taurean Maulers can't be bad either.
3-0 Decks
Ranth returns to the top spot with what is quickly becoming his signature deck, Kiln Fiend burn. Once again the deck of speedy fast elementals got the job done. Im still wondering if Chandra's Spitfire will ever make it into to the deck.
Announcements
Well it's almost time for the next Tribal Special Event. So far we have tried Single-Tribe, Pauper, and 2hg. To be totally honest 2hg was kind of a let down. Pauper was great and Single-Tribe was average. This leads me to the following poll. I think we have two good possibilities as too what the next event will be. We can either re-visit Pauper or we can do Singleton. These seem to be two of the most popular alternative formats on MTGO and I think may stand to attract the most new players. So let me know your opinions below.
Pictures of the Week
These are just two pictures I found online that I find to be quite awesome.
And that is all this week. Thanks for reading and hopefully we will see you at the next Tribal Apocalypse event.
-Shard
38 Comments
A discussion after the last pauper event between Ranth, AJ, Winter.Wolf, and myself once again got into the topic of sideboards. So, as the discussion went, one thing we all considered was running the next special event for Tribal Apocalypse as a sideboards allowed event.
I dont think SBs should really be needed. You should just bring what you got with the 60 and see what happens.
I would like to second the motion for sideboards. Without sideboards it's incredibly difficult to make a deck that has a chance against all types of decks, and certain matches feel like rock-paper-scissors.
I really dislike the whole debate about what answers to play. Do I play a deck that has answers to Moat/ghostly prison effects or graveyard recursion or discard or burn. How many answers do I want to include in the deck? At which point do I just start using counterspells as an answer to everything?
I think sideboards would actually increase creativity as you don't have to limit your maindeck choices to cards that answer everything.
If this becomes the general consensus then an Event with sideboards would qualify as a special event. And its a great testing ground for the idea.
We all came to the conclusion as well that it as a alt event would be the perfect place to test it out.
My personal proposed rules for and alt event with SB's:
#1 Keep all current building rules the same while useing the Legacy the Filter (This is the obvious change needed to allow SB's and we keep the same B/R list this way)
#2 1/3rd creatures build rule only applies to your main deck!
(Keeping things simple and this will make more sense with the next rule)
#3 No creatures allowed in your sideboard and No sideboarding out any creatures.
(To put this into prospective imagine 2 tribes having a drawn out War, while they may change tactics during this they don't change who's participating in it.)
Hope this helps, Obviously this is just my personal opinion/view. Everything said is also open for debate. So what does the rest of you think?
Why the legacy filter instead of the classic filter? Are there cards under either filter that are not banned in tribal?
Just curious and haven't had a chance to look at those formats' banned lists.
i believe the legacy filter auto bans some stuff that we added to the B/R list but truth be told the filter doesn't matter and never has it's the players following the build/sideboarding rules that does.
As far as legacy goes, well OK I guess...I don't personally care one way or the other since I don't own any of the cards affected that weren't banned anyway. #2-3 seem ridiculous to me. 1. You can't enforce that and it seems arbitrary. and 2. It makes for near creatureless (-5 cards) decks once you sideboard which is a whole other level of broken. Bad idea imho.
But then again, I probably won't participate anyway so my vote is rather moot.
Ranth,
Why cut out the possibility of sideboarding creatures? There are plenty of fun sideboardable creatures that you miss out on this way. I think you can maintain the tribal setting by changing the 3rd rule so that you have to keep your maindeck 1/3 tribal creatures post-sideboarding. If you take out a creature from your tribe, you have to replace it with a creature from your tribe.
I basically agree with your first 2 rules btw...
main reason is to prevent from people being able to completely change tribes between matches and more or less to keep the overall flavor of TW. As i said a tribes tactics may change between games but at least the tribe remains the same under these proposed rules.
That's a trust issue. Either we trust people to keep their decks in accordance with the spirit of the event or we don't.
There's a complete difference in keeping within the spirit and within the rules.
Keep in mind that this is still a tournament and rules should tend to be less subjective, where as the words spirit/intent/casual mean different things to different people and create grey areas that really are not needed.
Unless we define the spirit through the rules, as the banned list does.
Exactly my point and why I was suggesting the rules the way I did. :)
I think what AJ is talking about is making a RULE that says "No RDW." I think it should be more like "don't bring the same deck twice in a row" but basically some rules change is needed.
Paul seriously get off that soap box, Archtypes such as RDW (efficiently costed creatures backed up with burn),Sleigh ,mono blue control, mono black control, and elves have more or less existed since the early days of magic if you going to complain about the basic fundamentals of magics color pie your in the wrong game period.
As for the dont bring the same deck twice in a row rule.. who's been constantly bringing the same deck other then James and his rats?
Do yourself a favor and go look at hammy's article and read what people are saying about the TNM and read the debates there. infact i love this quote.
"You can't seriously expect people who are trying to break into competitive play to hobble themselves by not playing the best cards/decks they can."
PRE's are also a gateway to larger tournaments and in this case this is the only outlet for this format so expect people to bring decks that try to win within the rules.
Believe me I am not even on a soap box (I am just that tall :p). If I was I would be far more wordy. No seriously, my caring about this is very low. I think it IS an issue however.
I am just putting solutions out there until one sticks. Or someone else finds a better one. Arguing that there is no need for a solution is a little peculiar after your earlier rants.
Also What is the difference between banning cards in RDW and just banning the deck or banning running the same deck twice? I see little difference.
Your tone in this comment suggests that I haven't been a part of Hammy's articles comments, but clearly that is erroneous. Go reread them yourself if you don't believe me.
I disagree regarding THIS PRE. No one playing this PRE is going to make the leap to competitive play if they are not already competing in larger tourneys. There are no sanctioned tribal wars tourneys and for the reasons you and everyone else here has stated. Were YOU on a soap Box when you started preaching that? Hmmm maybe not but maybe something.
Actually my previous comments in past issues of tribal apoc were directed at early turn combo decks that give little to no recourse period for opposing decks. Never will u see me advocate bans simply because of social pressures.
Once again Some tribes just do certain things better then others and I'll never fault someone to playing to a particular tribes strengths.
Elemental burn, goblin sligh,kithkin rush,elf aggro, merfolk control,rat control ect...these are more or less the foundations of each color on the pie and as such a player shouldnt be hated on just for choosing to play a deck optimally.
As for the no same deck twice rule u suggested? I was just asking simply who's been running the same deck week after week? Far as I'm aware its only been one player and he doesn't even win that often but does tend to do well.
I'm fully aware you've been part of Hammy's article and made comments in it but the point was still the same. Expect people to play within the rules not what we would like to be socially acceptable for a given event.
Be it casual or competitive alot of players will play with what they own regardless of what others think. And honestly they should do exactly that and enjoy themselves.
And to give you a direct example I personally started playing PRE's (This one when it was run by duxdotter and Dark Wars when it was a FFA event that was run by Darkprincess) and built at least 50-70% of my collection from them alone from starting into MTGO with only 10$ when I was broke and it was a cheap form of entertainment. Where I am now and what I own is more or less a direct result of playing in PRE's here on MTGO.
this one isnt really a rebirth of duxdotters or any other ck event...it just happens to share a format.
"Elemental burn, goblin sligh,kithkin rush,elf aggro, merfolk control,rat control ect...these are more or less the foundations of each color on the pie and as such a player shouldnt be hated on just for choosing to play a deck optimally."
Easy button. That is all I have to say about it. (Thanks Staples)
Shard I never said it was the rebirth of those tourneys (infact CK wasn't even around when i started playing MTGO and was playing in thoes PRE's), I just pointed out that all players have a starting point and there's no reason that Tribal can't be or hasn't been a starting point in a tournament players career.
As for the "easy button" debate its more or less the same debate of playing "net decks". And all too often even if decks are different then the "net deck" people will still accuse them of playing one. (my personal fav was the player that recently got flamed for playing "zoo" in tribal (It was a cats deck).
I mean really? Who woulda thunk playing a efficient creature base deck in a creature based format. We should ban their deck for playing that right? /rolls eyes.
Don't expect someone to water down their decks, or change playing archtypes or cards that they enjoy that happen to follow the rules, just to appease the crowds.
I think it's one thing to recognize something for what it is, and quite another to pass judgment. I have no problems facing the easy button decks except maybe in cas cas when I am testing some jank that I don't need to see top tiered decks in. Otherwise bring it. But recognize it for what it is.
Looking at the course of the debate, here seems the best place to make my point. To quote you, 'My previous comments in past issues of tribal apoc were directed at early turn combo decks that give little to no recourse period for opposing decks'.
This most recent Tribal Apocalypse, I played a shoehorned early turn deck that could, and did during the course of the event, go off on turn 3, giving my opponents little to no recourse to prevent me winning.
On the basis of that statement, given your previous stance as quoted above, should that turn 3 win deck be treated the same as the other 'early turn combo decks' against which you successfully got the banned list adjusted?
I ask that you give your answer before looking at the decklist at the following link, for the sake of principle.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75846/25558013/Tribal_Apocal...
Aj im already fully aware that you played a variant on my elementals deck and it doesn't "go off" and the opponent is infact given multiple oppertunities to interact with such a deck. Lastly just because the deck can get a god hand and win turn 3 doesnt mean that turn 3 was or is the norm, if the deck played out anything like mine does then turns 4-5 would be well more usual.
Besides there is no single card that could be banned to eliminate such a deck as it's the sum of its parts.(just as the other basic archtype decks I mentioned) Though I will say that both fireblast and kiln fiend tend to be all-stars in the deck.
Also to compare that or similar decks in that they have dedicated proven strategies to a 2 card combo that keeps at worst 52 cards free to do as you want is ridiculous.
I'm just going by my experiences playing it. I take issue with your claim that it's a variant on your deck: Your deck is a perfectly fair tuned elementals build, designed for a quick kill and proven in action, whereas mine is a shoehorned burn deck, specifically built to exploit the nature of the format and kill the opponent through burn damage multiplied by the majority of the creatures played. You were just looking to win in line with the rules, I was looking to break the format and gain unfair advantage from a strategy most decks can't cope with, in order to highlight the need to deal with it.
The combo in this case is in doubling the output of each zero- or one-mana burn spell: It's essentially a combo with massive redundancy for both key cards instead of tuition. I see nothing ridiculous in the comparison given the end result, namely a dead opponent as early as possible regardless of what they do, is much the same. The Kiln Fiends, Chandra's Spitfires and Fire Servants each served to double the output of the 18 noncreature burn spells the deck ran, with the deck rounded out by quasi-burn in the form of one turn creatures.
I think the deck really proved how warping it can be even though it lost in the finals vs a fairly tight white humans deck. To combat that deck requires dedicated hate or some amount of luck. I did find that it faltered vs my antelopes but that seemed a bit like a weird draw (mine great yours lousy.) RDW isn't inherently a combo deck but I agree the way you made it surely is. The damage multipliers get insane, particularly if the game goes past turn 3.
You're right you're deck was tuned in a much different way you asked that i comment without looking at the deck list before commenting and that's more or less what i did (since i had seen the deck at quick glance yesterday just before work and i seen you comment 10 hours later).
Personally I couldn't tell you which version is more susceptible to creature removal and first strike or pro red creatures.
But honestly I look at it this way you're not abusing the nature of the format nearly as much as you're abusing the current existing metagame, though i will admit that the lack of sideboards does make this a stronger strategy then it would/should/could be otherwise.
I'm still of the opinion though that you used your tribe to the fullest of it abilities and did exactly what they were designed to do.
Food for thought:
-3 Chain Lightning
-4 Lava Spike
-4 Fireblast
+4 Burst Lightning
+4 Punishing Flame
+1 Searing Blaze
+2 Soul's Fire or Fling
And the deck you have there is standard legal....
I had noticed how much of the deck was Std legal: This is an area Wizards have been pushing lately and to impressive effect. All the creatures are Std legal until the October rotation claims Ball Lightning and Hell's Thunder.
I take your point on my request, but as you said, you'd seen the deck at a quick glance. We differ on our perspectives: I'm concerned that the metagame really doesn't have the flexibility to handle this without becoming deck and antideck. We have a strategy that is stronger than it should be due to the constraints of the format, and it is in this regard that the similarity to the banned combos is clearest.
It's definitely a matter for debate if this is just very strong or too strong. We've made our stances clear, but which is best for the event as a whole?
Thou am i being too harsh in saying that as a standard legal deck that's not even tier 1 in standard. That maybe its more the meta that's a problem then the archtype its self?
Should people choose to play more dedicated discard,life gain, or counters you'd see that red deck of this nature would be very bad choices indeed.
As for best for the format I'm still completely of the opinion that we need to make this OUR format not the one that wizards used not even half a thought into a slapped together. Thus at this point i dont think it's decks such as this that are the problem more as its the fact we lack sideboards that is.
With sideboards added and properly used Decks such as this would go from tier 1 to possibly having to struggle to not get blown out after game 1.
Changing the format is not the answer, and can never truly be. Let's not forget why the PRE was founded. Look at this latest week (I suggest we relocate the debate there as this has scrolled off the front page) and note the number of attendees: Shard was able to rally quite a few at the last minute, including the eventual winner. You're essentially asking us to fabricate a new format out of whole cloth, one which no-one has yet built a deck for.
Flips did the rallying this week.
Yup. Sorry for the misattribution.
As mentioned it was Flip that rallied a lot of people last second. However i see little difference between adding to the banned list and adding sideboards as both can have profound effects on the format and both are changes to it. Also to say that changing a format to bring it to life is naive at best even wizards themselves change formats when they seee a glaring need for it (see extended as an example). Now keep in mind suggesting adding sideboard is nothing even remotely close to what they did but the point remains.
The basis and foundation of the tribal wars format is 1/3 creatures in your deck, adding a side board does not change that premise and also solves a lot of the problems the format faces. Adding 15 cards of answers to a side deck is hardly asking people to build completely new decks.
Besides this debate is exactly why we should hold this is an ALT event to see how it runs.
Haha we talked about both Soul's Fire and Fling and I guess they never were added because the deck was so strong to begin with.
Personally i think they'd just slow down the deck and dilute the overall intent of fast aggressive creatures, but i mentioned it simply for the sake of saying that the deck is near standard legal and if a standard legal can take down a tourney its not a matter of the format being a problem but what opposing players brought to the table.
what a surprise mono red eles...
I just noticed something about AJ_Impy's The Final Countdown deck its all four's apart from the swamp's which are 4+4=8. I've never seen a deck as perfect number wise before.
Not too surprising, given the 4 of a card limit, but running 4-ofs is something I have a tendency towards. In the case of the lands, I was going for a balance of black/white duals that don't come into play tapped, taking into account the need to run enough swamps to enable Tainted Field (In this case 16, between the basics, fetches and shrines). If I owned Scrubland, I'd have subbed out 4 swamps for it, leading to a perfect all-fours deck.