The option that you seem to fail to notice in game one of match 3 is the play of attacking with the elf for 2 instead of the Pridemage for 3 with him at 24. If you instead leave the Pridemage back to 2:1 him then he probably doesnt attack. That would have prevented you from taking 4 damage over the course of 2-turns.
Fun analysis again though. Some interesting and fun choices came in that finals game 1. Doesnt happen all that often.
Another observation is that having sideboard anti-artifact cards allowed you to blow put a seemingly good Esper deck. You suddently have 2 extra dark banishes...one of which draws you a card...obv very good. That right there is why some ppl are nervous about playing Esper. They hate the anti-artifact blowouts.
Finally, the comment from your poker playing friend is probably related to mana screw. In poker you can bluff and manuever even with bad hands. In Magic you just simply lose with zero options when you dont draw land or draw all land. Its a bitter opinion I have been known to share at times.
Odds/Ends really IS the best defensive card right now considering the fact that decks nowadays have more and more untargetable creatures as a part of the evolution in the format. With the quality of removal available in the format, it is already a rare situation that one can attack with more than two creatures at a time.
And believe me, the most fun thing is to watch your opponent sacrifice his pumped Stillmoon Cavalier PLUS his Oversoul of Dusk enchanted by a Shield of the Oversoul. Hilarious!
Or it is also tons of fun when the opponent "accidentally" casts Blightning and discards two cards afterwards!!!
One other sleeper card for the format is Double Negative as everybody plays tons of Cascade cards. I tried to fit it into my Cruel Control deck but finally decided to let it go for the time being. But its time surely will come.
Sorry, I was the anonymous -- I have a bad habit of not logging in on this site for some reason.
Yeah, Godot summed up my feelings perfectly. Mulligan exercises where there's an obvious right or wrong answer, regardless of playing or drawing first is one thing. Such as a 6x land, and Druid of the Anima. But more often than not you need the play/draw info to make a "correct" decision.
Excellent format analysis. I've had a fair bit of fun with Nucklavee/Cruel Ultimatum recurrent control in the format, even wrote about it back in May before ARB. Odds/Ends is a great card,and the holy grail with it is hitting your opponent's Ultimatum, drawing into a counter and stopping his. At the time I considered it principally a sideboard option, but with the evolution of the format maindeck may be the way to go.
I don't think you are doing anything wrong, the pictures I think are only meant for pictorial recognition. You can possibly zoom in your internet browser. Unfortunately, none of them are linked. I would suggest opening up mtgotraders.com or gatherer and typing in the relevant card names, and hopefully you will get a feel for them again.
I really like putting one or even both Darklit Gargoyles against that last deck, for the reasons you stated. You are obviously weak against flyers, and that guy sets up very favorable trades or acts as a mini wall against a hail of Thopter tokens. If things work out ok he can also be a beater for you, but that means getting your black splash out relatively early, something which won't happen every time.
Regarding Poker vs Magic: Could not agree more. Poker is a game with great depth and strategy, I play it a lot and should know. But Magic has a much greater opportunity for skill to be shown. You can take optimal strategies in Poker to play against better players, but in Magic you often can't. Another thing that is of critical note when using that comparison, is that Magic is almost exclusively played Heads-up, (1 on 1). Poker is often played with 6-10 players, which greatly changes the dynamic of the game. There are many times when you just don't have decisions to make, but in Magic you are *constantly* being put to the test.
R2G2, when you mulled to 5, I think I would have kept the opener. I like a T3 Rioters, and you have a good shot at getting your R for the dark temper too. It's not a great hand, but I keep it over a random 6 I think.
oh and i completely agree that you got k-scope nailed down pretty hard with your deck. finks, braids, oversoul, stillmoon, unmake - cards of champions - time to get your technical play and luck shined up to make t8 next time!
Anonymous is right, though. Every mulligan decisions is made with a known play/draw factor that can frequently change what is correct. If you don't include that info, then you are effectively asking two mulligan questions: do you mull this on the play, and do you mull this on the draw?
If you want to ask both of those questions, that's fine, but then you should explicitly answer both of those questions in your analysis after. You frequently cite the percent chance of drawing a given card by a given turn, so you are clearly assuming one or the other anyway--you may as well be clear about which you are presuming when you present the mulligan scenario.
Don't get me wrong, this is a fantastic article overall, and I'm big on mulligan scenarios. Many players think they have bad luck when in fact they just don't mulligan properly, and it's great to drive that home with quizzes. However, you either need to mark each scenario as play or draw up front, or you need to address both explicitly in your analysis.
It's a balancing act to make situations generic enough so that they lead to deeper thinking and specific enough so that they are worthwhile excercises.
Keeping a mulligan depends on many factors including playing or drawing, who you're playing against, what sideboard cards you've sided in, and if your opponent has mulliganed already. I know this last one is changing a bit with Magic 2010. Anyway, if I narrowed down the example to include this information, a lot of thought that could go into these examples is lost. Just the fact that you are thinking that you would do different things whether you are drawing or playing is a good sign that I shouldn't include the exact situation of the hand.
Answering a Mulligan puzzle is useful. Knowing what conditions can arise to change that answer is even more useful.
I plan to use more specific situations in the future, however I think the generic situations are useful as well.
I have a Grixis block deck that runs Swerve to hose Blightning and Double Negative to hose Cascade. It's not super competitive, but let me tell you, it is awfully satisfying to Swerve a Blightning back on its caster.
For someone who puts a lot of value in knowing when to mulligan and when to keep, you don't mention if you're playing or drawing first with these hands. I went through each example and my answer on several of them would have changed based on who was playing first.
Unless you specifically stated this and I missed it -- I apologize if so.
I did that so that people wouldn't see my answers before they even thought about whether or not they would take a mulligan on those hands. If there was a hide/show button feature, I would have preferred to use that instead.
In my opinion Sedraxis Specter is largely good against Jund playing Blightning. The only real strategy to fight Blightning are counterspells like Countersquall and Hindering Light, and you need to keep mana open for that, and often your opponent will just get a Blightning off of a Bloodbraid Elf or larger Cascade. In which case countering the Blightning seems less than ideal. Sedraxis Specter is like a counter-Blightning. You blightning me, I discard Sedraxis Specter and I can hit you back for a card and 3 damage. It evens out the disadvantage of being hit by a Blightning. Sure, I'd rather have a Wilt-Leaf Liege, but I can only do that Kaleidoscope.
First off, nice article. I only skimmed through it due to length (and the fact that I'm at work and I don't think my boss pays me to read magic articles lol) but I plan on giving it another rundown when I get home.
As for Paul, Sedraxis Specter IS that good IMO. The same splash principles don't really apply to it because the idea is to flip it with Bloodbraid. However, it is usually very castable in the deck due to the Ziggy's and Nobles. And yes, it is a HUGE target. But that is a good thing in this deck. You have to remember it's Unearth ability which works well as a surprise finish due to the large volume of creatures. And if they Path it, all the better. It helps Broodmate hit the table a turn sooner.
As for the economy of MTGO and the fact that we get our cards later whcih in turn means the prices have already peaked, I couldn't agree more. Not only that, but I believe trade is broken in MTGO. Most people are so bitter over being repeatedly ripped off by bots that it seems like everyone is always trying to get an angle on everyone else. I don't know about everyone else, but I find it very hard to find people who are willing to make even trades. Does anyone have a solution for this?
Rolling Thunder is probably the top pick in my mind (minus Reflecting Pool or Mox Diamond), Then again, I don't know all of the rares in Tempest and Stronghold.
Thank you for the comments and easy reference of picks.
I haven't seen it in action, but I do understand the power of buyback. Once a game goes long, the game is usually decided between who can get their buyback spell online first.
This was only my second draft in the format. Yes it was a poor draft, but that's the point to make everyone better. Canyon Wildcat, and Puppet Strings may have been better choices. They've been mentioned already. Gravedigger is good point. I wasn't sure about this pick, and am still not. Gravedigger gets much better with Disturbed Burials 1 and 2.
However, in my first draft, I noticed a very high concentration of x/1 ceatures, thus I valued the Fireslinger much higher than in other formats. Maybe too high. Yes, Mogg Bombers are bad, thanks for bringing that up. Thanks for the comments.
I think the earliest I would have gone into Blue would have been p1 p3 taking the wind drake. I can't justify taking the Hunter over a Dark Banishing. Spontaneous Combustion after first pick Banishing seems better to me than Time Ebb. But the Drake, Hunter, Fighting Drake would have been great.
Yeah, I mulligan fairly aggressively--which I think is correct--but I may have been too aggressive in R2G2.
Another Esper deck bites the dust (at least somewhat) due to boarded in artifact hate.
Godot, another supremely-crafted analysis. These are a real pleasure to read.
The option that you seem to fail to notice in game one of match 3 is the play of attacking with the elf for 2 instead of the Pridemage for 3 with him at 24. If you instead leave the Pridemage back to 2:1 him then he probably doesnt attack. That would have prevented you from taking 4 damage over the course of 2-turns.
Fun analysis again though. Some interesting and fun choices came in that finals game 1. Doesnt happen all that often.
Another observation is that having sideboard anti-artifact cards allowed you to blow put a seemingly good Esper deck. You suddently have 2 extra dark banishes...one of which draws you a card...obv very good. That right there is why some ppl are nervous about playing Esper. They hate the anti-artifact blowouts.
Finally, the comment from your poker playing friend is probably related to mana screw. In poker you can bluff and manuever even with bad hands. In Magic you just simply lose with zero options when you dont draw land or draw all land. Its a bitter opinion I have been known to share at times.
:)
-M
Thanks for the comments guys.
Odds/Ends really IS the best defensive card right now considering the fact that decks nowadays have more and more untargetable creatures as a part of the evolution in the format. With the quality of removal available in the format, it is already a rare situation that one can attack with more than two creatures at a time.
And believe me, the most fun thing is to watch your opponent sacrifice his pumped Stillmoon Cavalier PLUS his Oversoul of Dusk enchanted by a Shield of the Oversoul. Hilarious!
Or it is also tons of fun when the opponent "accidentally" casts Blightning and discards two cards afterwards!!!
One other sleeper card for the format is Double Negative as everybody plays tons of Cascade cards. I tried to fit it into my Cruel Control deck but finally decided to let it go for the time being. But its time surely will come.
LE
Sorry, I was the anonymous -- I have a bad habit of not logging in on this site for some reason.
Yeah, Godot summed up my feelings perfectly. Mulligan exercises where there's an obvious right or wrong answer, regardless of playing or drawing first is one thing. Such as a 6x land, and Druid of the Anima. But more often than not you need the play/draw info to make a "correct" decision.
Excellent format analysis. I've had a fair bit of fun with Nucklavee/Cruel Ultimatum recurrent control in the format, even wrote about it back in May before ARB. Odds/Ends is a great card,and the holy grail with it is hitting your opponent's Ultimatum, drawing into a counter and stopping his. At the time I considered it principally a sideboard option, but with the evolution of the format maindeck may be the way to go.
I don't think you are doing anything wrong, the pictures I think are only meant for pictorial recognition. You can possibly zoom in your internet browser. Unfortunately, none of them are linked. I would suggest opening up mtgotraders.com or gatherer and typing in the relevant card names, and hopefully you will get a feel for them again.
I really like putting one or even both Darklit Gargoyles against that last deck, for the reasons you stated. You are obviously weak against flyers, and that guy sets up very favorable trades or acts as a mini wall against a hail of Thopter tokens. If things work out ok he can also be a beater for you, but that means getting your black splash out relatively early, something which won't happen every time.
Regarding Poker vs Magic: Could not agree more. Poker is a game with great depth and strategy, I play it a lot and should know. But Magic has a much greater opportunity for skill to be shown. You can take optimal strategies in Poker to play against better players, but in Magic you often can't. Another thing that is of critical note when using that comparison, is that Magic is almost exclusively played Heads-up, (1 on 1). Poker is often played with 6-10 players, which greatly changes the dynamic of the game. There are many times when you just don't have decisions to make, but in Magic you are *constantly* being put to the test.
R2G2, when you mulled to 5, I think I would have kept the opener. I like a T3 Rioters, and you have a good shot at getting your R for the dark temper too. It's not a great hand, but I keep it over a random 6 I think.
Keep the great articles coming!
oh and i completely agree that you got k-scope nailed down pretty hard with your deck. finks, braids, oversoul, stillmoon, unmake - cards of champions - time to get your technical play and luck shined up to make t8 next time!
nice article. thanks for keeping on the ups and ups with kaleidoscope and standard w/van
Good article as always I've never tried vanguard, but I might have to give it a try.
Anonymous is right, though. Every mulligan decisions is made with a known play/draw factor that can frequently change what is correct. If you don't include that info, then you are effectively asking two mulligan questions: do you mull this on the play, and do you mull this on the draw?
If you want to ask both of those questions, that's fine, but then you should explicitly answer both of those questions in your analysis after. You frequently cite the percent chance of drawing a given card by a given turn, so you are clearly assuming one or the other anyway--you may as well be clear about which you are presuming when you present the mulligan scenario.
Don't get me wrong, this is a fantastic article overall, and I'm big on mulligan scenarios. Many players think they have bad luck when in fact they just don't mulligan properly, and it's great to drive that home with quizzes. However, you either need to mark each scenario as play or draw up front, or you need to address both explicitly in your analysis.
Keep it up!
It's a balancing act to make situations generic enough so that they lead to deeper thinking and specific enough so that they are worthwhile excercises.
Keeping a mulligan depends on many factors including playing or drawing, who you're playing against, what sideboard cards you've sided in, and if your opponent has mulliganed already. I know this last one is changing a bit with Magic 2010. Anyway, if I narrowed down the example to include this information, a lot of thought that could go into these examples is lost. Just the fact that you are thinking that you would do different things whether you are drawing or playing is a good sign that I shouldn't include the exact situation of the hand.
Answering a Mulligan puzzle is useful. Knowing what conditions can arise to change that answer is even more useful.
I plan to use more specific situations in the future, however I think the generic situations are useful as well.
I never mind intelligent feedback.
I have a Grixis block deck that runs Swerve to hose Blightning and Double Negative to hose Cascade. It's not super competitive, but let me tell you, it is awfully satisfying to Swerve a Blightning back on its caster.
Please take this as constructive criticism:
For someone who puts a lot of value in knowing when to mulligan and when to keep, you don't mention if you're playing or drawing first with these hands. I went through each example and my answer on several of them would have changed based on who was playing first.
Unless you specifically stated this and I missed it -- I apologize if so.
Hope you didn't mind my 2 cents
I did that so that people wouldn't see my answers before they even thought about whether or not they would take a mulligan on those hands. If there was a hide/show button feature, I would have preferred to use that instead.
In my opinion Sedraxis Specter is largely good against Jund playing Blightning. The only real strategy to fight Blightning are counterspells like Countersquall and Hindering Light, and you need to keep mana open for that, and often your opponent will just get a Blightning off of a Bloodbraid Elf or larger Cascade. In which case countering the Blightning seems less than ideal. Sedraxis Specter is like a counter-Blightning. You blightning me, I discard Sedraxis Specter and I can hit you back for a card and 3 damage. It evens out the disadvantage of being hit by a Blightning. Sure, I'd rather have a Wilt-Leaf Liege, but I can only do that Kaleidoscope.
First off, nice article. I only skimmed through it due to length (and the fact that I'm at work and I don't think my boss pays me to read magic articles lol) but I plan on giving it another rundown when I get home.
As for Paul, Sedraxis Specter IS that good IMO. The same splash principles don't really apply to it because the idea is to flip it with Bloodbraid. However, it is usually very castable in the deck due to the Ziggy's and Nobles. And yes, it is a HUGE target. But that is a good thing in this deck. You have to remember it's Unearth ability which works well as a surprise finish due to the large volume of creatures. And if they Path it, all the better. It helps Broodmate hit the table a turn sooner.
As for the economy of MTGO and the fact that we get our cards later whcih in turn means the prices have already peaked, I couldn't agree more. Not only that, but I believe trade is broken in MTGO. Most people are so bitter over being repeatedly ripped off by bots that it seems like everyone is always trying to get an angle on everyone else. I don't know about everyone else, but I find it very hard to find people who are willing to make even trades. Does anyone have a solution for this?
Rolling Thunder is probably the top pick in my mind (minus Reflecting Pool or Mox Diamond), Then again, I don't know all of the rares in Tempest and Stronghold.
Thank you for the comments and easy reference of picks.
AWESOME article. A reference. The methodology is as interesting as the example you took. Impatient to see the next article !
I haven't seen it in action, but I do understand the power of buyback. Once a game goes long, the game is usually decided between who can get their buyback spell online first.
This was only my second draft in the format. Yes it was a poor draft, but that's the point to make everyone better. Canyon Wildcat, and Puppet Strings may have been better choices. They've been mentioned already. Gravedigger is good point. I wasn't sure about this pick, and am still not. Gravedigger gets much better with Disturbed Burials 1 and 2.
However, in my first draft, I noticed a very high concentration of x/1 ceatures, thus I valued the Fireslinger much higher than in other formats. Maybe too high. Yes, Mogg Bombers are bad, thanks for bringing that up. Thanks for the comments.
I think the earliest I would have gone into Blue would have been p1 p3 taking the wind drake. I can't justify taking the Hunter over a Dark Banishing. Spontaneous Combustion after first pick Banishing seems better to me than Time Ebb. But the Drake, Hunter, Fighting Drake would have been great.