I'm also a fan of this angry writing style. It gives the article a good tone that anyone who has played Magic can connect with.
"Then he gets Goyf out. I have EE for two, but he Forces it, and rides it and another Goyf beat me to 10. MAN! That SUCKS."
This is a lot easier to connect with than something like:
"My opponent then chose to play a 2/3 Tarmogoyf. He passed, and I attempted to play Engineered Explosives, but he had a Force of Will. He played another 2/3 Tarmogoyf and attacked me until I had 10 units of life left."
Great article yet again Godot. Your draft for the most part was extremely focused, so for that I give massive props. I am still, however, surprised to see it work so well as you stated at the start of the article about Infest and Devour. Your opponents seemed to lack any removal whatsoever, or they simply didn't expect to see Devour coming at all. I think this is a huge window to look into how the ACR drafting meta has changed recently. Thanks again for the great write up!
In the current meta, belcher is probably the deck which has the best probabilities to win on turn 1 & 2. Belcher is usualy a bet which is resolved during the flip coin :)
If the burn match up is pretty cool for belcher player, in my experience, the fact that there is no counters makes this build hugely too sensitive in average ... even vs zoo. If ever you dont manage to have a turn 1 winning hand, an Orim, gaddock or a canonist on T2 and the game is almost over (these card should be played in zoo's SB) . If you are running vs blue, xantid/pyrob hate cards seem not enough to me to defeat chill, hydrob, chalice or a simple needle (a post SB warrens as Plan B is playable, and probably better).
Again belcher could be pretty strong, but it could be really frustrating to pilot also, and something is lacking into : either counters (why not pact?) or duress effect (which seems really difficult to put into without unmask available).
Chalice is just terrible for belcher if it's at 0 or at 1. 1 is much better overall. If you are playing blue it really doesn't matter though. it's so hard to go off against a blue deck without chalice, if blue has a chalice for 1 or 0, it just makes it a nightmare. Blecher is such a glass cannon, very powerful but rolls over alot. If the meta continues to be full of zoo belcher will be a contender. Only blue and black decks really interact with it at this point.
Okay Fertile Ground, you've had your fun pretending to be a land - go back to your place under the Other Spells section for the rest of the decks okay? I've fixed the bug that puts you in the land because you're an "Enchant Land".
Thanks Lou. Randel Flag pointed out that Chalice @ 1 is even more important than Chalice @ 0 vs Belcher. I feel like Chalice @ 0 is really important on Turn 1 to set up a defense, but after that Chalice @ 1 IS VERY important. Thanks for the feedback from him too.
When i read this article, i realize why classic is my favorite format and why control archetypes are by far the builds i prefer !
Awesome explainations, exciting games vs various opponents & decks. Plus, as i said out there, videos are a perfect add to all that by giving a visual & "live" support to your explainations.
Interesting and well written article. Always test your deck sideboarded, don't just assume that the obvious sideboard cards are going to do what you expect in a real situation.
Thank you for joining the discussion and for the detailed comments.
I played the Arcanis deck; it is an excellent deck and I think that you're the one who should be credited for it. Excellent build really.
My deck #5 is, as I also said in the article, the closest one to be a serious deck for/against the current meta. Now that Cascade Swans also appeared in the format, this will only mean that some form of hate decks/cards will become popular.
And that's actually what I tried with deck #5. After your comments I will definately make room for Rule of Law in the main deck. With Ethersworn Canonist they will be a great team and that deck then will have a better chance against Arcanis decks and Cascade Swans.
But I wouldn't underestimate Meddling Mage if I were you. It will slow down Arcanis until it draws one Path to Exile. It will slow down or even totally stop Cascade Swans (by naming Seismic Assault) until they figure out a way to deal with the creature. So it is not there to lock the game all by itself but rather it is there to buy me time... until I lock the game eventually with Ethersworn Canonist + Rule of Law.
And also I would never ever attack with the Canonist or Meddling Mage. That job is done by Sphinx Summoner and Sphinx of the Steel Wind. I know that a nice card called Condemn still exists in the format so I cannot risk losing my utility creatures.
The biggest problem is actually Reaper King as it is very fast and none of my creatures would do anything to slow them down, but against it I have to have my 4 components on table as soon as possible so that I can play in calm without looking at my life total and wait for my Sphinx of the Steel Wind.
Thank you again for the detailed comments. I definately agree to most of the things you said and most probably I will replace my Thoughtseize's in the main deck with Rule of Law. I think that that will make a difference.
I'm always glad to entertain. I try to utilize in moderation the frustration I sometimes feel in games as a means of entertaining my audience and communicating with them. Also, sometimes I'm just angry.
I love reading your drafts , we all make mistakes i belive luck was on your side on game 1.
you could easily lose game 1 , sometimes winning a draft and losing on game 1 is very close.
anyway congrats , good news for me since i will read on more drafts.
the whats the play is super cool, i hope some writers on SSG would do that also.
about the draft ,i would splash blue not White.
that would make me pick
creeper over Rakeclaw Gargantuan
Panorama over the Goblin Deathraiders
the 4/4 elemental over Paragon of the Amesha
Dreadwing over Hellkite Hatchling
Soul manipulation over the Crystallization ( i think Crystallization is better in general)
the drafts would look a bit different with this picks , but i find them better..
i think the turning point was creeper over Rakeclaw Gargantuan
Control (mostly - except for Ashling) died with the removel of the out of standard vanguards. There were a few control decks before that, but the format doesn't really like them since it is very very fast. Generally agro can be build with combos with their vanguard but control need the cards and since it is only std legal cards, control gets weak.
I think you miss understand Arcanis. You need to be able to survive them having each and every single card in their deck in hand at once. E.g. True Believer does nothing as it will not survive a path to exile and since they drew their deck finding one isnt that hard and Runed Halo does nothing if they have diversity instead of only 1 banefire (I suppose pito can bounce 2 with Primal Command + Recollect). After sideboard you will get hit with Gleeful sabotage and so on.
Here is a example game vs. your first/second deck:
You play some stuff and achive your imortallity turn 2-3 (I got no idea if this is the right number).
Arcanis goes off turn 3-5, find the 4 paths + recollect and remove your creatures and kill you. After sb they also got 4 gleeful sabotage so you got less chance in game two (since you will need >11(!) enchantments and artifacts in the first few turns).
Things which are good vs. Arcanis is
Ethersworn Canonist (this is a problem for the deck. Rule of Law (which is harder to destroy maindeck - except that the deck can run the 1 mana elf with destroy enchantment + Ranger of Eos) works too but isnt that good vs everything else so isnt played).
Meddling Mage (on Heritage Druid/Nettle Sentinel - that one isnt as good as the canonist, since the deck can just chump block + bounce until it finds a path. Heck they got enough creatures to beat you to death I suppose)
Ashling vanguard. Arcanis runs a ton of 1/1 and that isnt that good vs something that mows 1/1s down.
most everything else doesnt matter.
btw. I am pretty sure arcanis could beat Reaper king with all their cards (Pito would need to run Loyal Sentry (this card is evil vs non-flying agro), but hey). Futheremore I think Pito is running far to many lands (8 card start hand + mana eleves and a curve that as such ends at 4 with most lower doesnt need 23 lands).
Another mechanic that, at least half, if not all new magic players stumble with is the Assigning of Blockers Phase. Just hop over to the Gleemax Forums and look at all the posts about glitches in the new Duels of the Planeswalkers game for Xbox. Most of the posts are confusion with why they can't terror a blocker and then have the damage from their "unblocked" creature go through to the player. Does this mean that WotC should implement another new change? I say no.. I don't really care how hard it is for new players to understand the stack. If you can't comprehend it, maybe Magic isn't for you, I say. This is not to say that I'm giving up Magic or anything b/c of a little change. On the contrary, I believe it may give us a fresh look at things. However, I will stick with my previous statements as too rule changes. I don't think they should be made out of a need to fulfill the minorities wishes.
Attempting to explain stacked combat damage one way or another via flavor in an effort to justify the status quo or justify the change is the wrong way to approach it.
The bottom line, and the reason for the change, is that virtually all new players, when presented with the stacked-damage system, think it feels wrong. It doesn't matter why. It doesn't matter if you can create flavor to explain it. New players must be trained to go against their expectations and common sense to reach the point of understanding damage on the stack.
If your game forces new players to override their common sense in order to understand a mechanic, that mechanic ought to change unless it is vital to the game as is. Coming up with flavor to explain a mechanic that all new players find unintuitive won't change the fact that all new players will continue to find that mechanic unintuitive until it is changed.
Hi, based on your article I bought product to play in 2 daily MVW sealed events and i placed in the t8, and t1 in both events =) but now i have MVW packs, what do you suggest i do with them? =( i can sell them for really cheap or hold them in hopes that MTGO opens up MVW drafts?
what should i do?
you rock i took your ala block sealed advice too thanks!
I know that a large portion of players have reversed their initial distaste for the new combat step, mainly I think because they want to distance themselves from the "negative" whiners, and you can disagree with my statement all you want, but how is the new system any more "intuitive" than the old? Sure the stack is hard to explain, but you're telling me that in a fight between one person and two other people that the first person is going to deal all his damage to just one person and not to the second in every instance? That's just not how reality works. Bruce Lee would not focus only on the first opponent if attacked by two. Especially if part of a team, you often want to deal damage to multiple opponents. I know it's a point that will never be solved, but I am getting a bit tired of people who trumpet the new system, seemingly just so they won't be in the negative camp. It will help new people, but give the "it will improve the game" deal a rest; because it's simply not true.
edited out because of harh response to the intro, and in retrospect wasnt a nice thing. I will say that I however do not agree with your sentiment at all. Take a break if you dont enjoy it but dont blame it on the game
More, please.
I'm also a fan of this angry writing style. It gives the article a good tone that anyone who has played Magic can connect with.
"Then he gets Goyf out. I have EE for two, but he Forces it, and rides it and another Goyf beat me to 10. MAN! That SUCKS."
This is a lot easier to connect with than something like:
"My opponent then chose to play a 2/3 Tarmogoyf. He passed, and I attempted to play Engineered Explosives, but he had a Force of Will. He played another 2/3 Tarmogoyf and attacked me until I had 10 units of life left."
This list is an example of storm belcher, there are some variants also
Maindeck
1 Taiga
4 Elvish Spirit Shaman
4 Simian Spirit Shaman
4 Tinder Wall
4 Wild Cantor
3 Street Wraith
4 Burning Wish
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flames
4 Manamorphose
4 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
3 Seething Song
4 Demonic Consultation
4 Goblin Charbelcher
2 Empty the Warrens
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Mana Crypt
1 Imperial Seal
Sideboard
4 Pyroblast
3 Shattering Spree
1 Diminishing Returns
1 Cabal Therapy
1 Hull Breach
1 Simplify
1 Pyroclasm
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Grapeshot
where can I see the belcher list?
Everyone and their mother does draft walk-throughs; but your in-depth match commentary is what floats you to the top. Please keep posting these!
Great article yet again Godot. Your draft for the most part was extremely focused, so for that I give massive props. I am still, however, surprised to see it work so well as you stated at the start of the article about Infest and Devour. Your opponents seemed to lack any removal whatsoever, or they simply didn't expect to see Devour coming at all. I think this is a huge window to look into how the ACR drafting meta has changed recently. Thanks again for the great write up!
Horrendous draft, but great article and the hindsight insight is much appreciated.
great article, gives me hope that even i, with my 1500+ rating, can turn a bad draft around...hasn't happened yet, heh, but there's always next time.
In the current meta, belcher is probably the deck which has the best probabilities to win on turn 1 & 2. Belcher is usualy a bet which is resolved during the flip coin :)
If the burn match up is pretty cool for belcher player, in my experience, the fact that there is no counters makes this build hugely too sensitive in average ... even vs zoo. If ever you dont manage to have a turn 1 winning hand, an Orim, gaddock or a canonist on T2 and the game is almost over (these card should be played in zoo's SB) . If you are running vs blue, xantid/pyrob hate cards seem not enough to me to defeat chill, hydrob, chalice or a simple needle (a post SB warrens as Plan B is playable, and probably better).
Again belcher could be pretty strong, but it could be really frustrating to pilot also, and something is lacking into : either counters (why not pact?) or duress effect (which seems really difficult to put into without unmask available).
Chalice is just terrible for belcher if it's at 0 or at 1. 1 is much better overall. If you are playing blue it really doesn't matter though. it's so hard to go off against a blue deck without chalice, if blue has a chalice for 1 or 0, it just makes it a nightmare. Blecher is such a glass cannon, very powerful but rolls over alot. If the meta continues to be full of zoo belcher will be a contender. Only blue and black decks really interact with it at this point.
Thanks Lou. Randel Flag pointed out that Chalice @ 1 is even more important than Chalice @ 0 vs Belcher. I feel like Chalice @ 0 is really important on Turn 1 to set up a defense, but after that Chalice @ 1 IS VERY important. Thanks for the feedback from him too.
When i read this article, i realize why classic is my favorite format and why control archetypes are by far the builds i prefer !
Awesome explainations, exciting games vs various opponents & decks. Plus, as i said out there, videos are a perfect add to all that by giving a visual & "live" support to your explainations.
i sum up my thoughts :
GREAT ! :)
Superb write up again, thank you
Interesting and well written article. Always test your deck sideboarded, don't just assume that the obvious sideboard cards are going to do what you expect in a real situation.
Thank you for joining the discussion and for the detailed comments.
I played the Arcanis deck; it is an excellent deck and I think that you're the one who should be credited for it. Excellent build really.
My deck #5 is, as I also said in the article, the closest one to be a serious deck for/against the current meta. Now that Cascade Swans also appeared in the format, this will only mean that some form of hate decks/cards will become popular.
And that's actually what I tried with deck #5. After your comments I will definately make room for Rule of Law in the main deck. With Ethersworn Canonist they will be a great team and that deck then will have a better chance against Arcanis decks and Cascade Swans.
But I wouldn't underestimate Meddling Mage if I were you. It will slow down Arcanis until it draws one Path to Exile. It will slow down or even totally stop Cascade Swans (by naming Seismic Assault) until they figure out a way to deal with the creature. So it is not there to lock the game all by itself but rather it is there to buy me time... until I lock the game eventually with Ethersworn Canonist + Rule of Law.
And also I would never ever attack with the Canonist or Meddling Mage. That job is done by Sphinx Summoner and Sphinx of the Steel Wind. I know that a nice card called Condemn still exists in the format so I cannot risk losing my utility creatures.
The biggest problem is actually Reaper King as it is very fast and none of my creatures would do anything to slow them down, but against it I have to have my 4 components on table as soon as possible so that I can play in calm without looking at my life total and wait for my Sphinx of the Steel Wind.
Thank you again for the detailed comments. I definately agree to most of the things you said and most probably I will replace my Thoughtseize's in the main deck with Rule of Law. I think that that will make a difference.
LE
I'm always glad to entertain. I try to utilize in moderation the frustration I sometimes feel in games as a means of entertaining my audience and communicating with them. Also, sometimes I'm just angry.
please stop posting these. they hurt my heart :D
Your writing style is full of anger. This gives your piece much flavor unlike the other writers do not utilize this type of angst.
I love reading your drafts , we all make mistakes i belive luck was on your side on game 1.
you could easily lose game 1 , sometimes winning a draft and losing on game 1 is very close.
anyway congrats , good news for me since i will read on more drafts.
the whats the play is super cool, i hope some writers on SSG would do that also.
about the draft ,i would splash blue not White.
that would make me pick
creeper over Rakeclaw Gargantuan
Panorama over the Goblin Deathraiders
the 4/4 elemental over Paragon of the Amesha
Dreadwing over Hellkite Hatchling
Soul manipulation over the Crystallization ( i think Crystallization is better in general)
the drafts would look a bit different with this picks , but i find them better..
i think the turning point was creeper over Rakeclaw Gargantuan
Control (mostly - except for Ashling) died with the removel of the out of standard vanguards. There were a few control decks before that, but the format doesn't really like them since it is very very fast. Generally agro can be build with combos with their vanguard but control need the cards and since it is only std legal cards, control gets weak.
I think you miss understand Arcanis. You need to be able to survive them having each and every single card in their deck in hand at once. E.g. True Believer does nothing as it will not survive a path to exile and since they drew their deck finding one isnt that hard and Runed Halo does nothing if they have diversity instead of only 1 banefire (I suppose pito can bounce 2 with Primal Command + Recollect). After sideboard you will get hit with Gleeful sabotage and so on.
Here is a example game vs. your first/second deck:
You play some stuff and achive your imortallity turn 2-3 (I got no idea if this is the right number).
Arcanis goes off turn 3-5, find the 4 paths + recollect and remove your creatures and kill you. After sb they also got 4 gleeful sabotage so you got less chance in game two (since you will need >11(!) enchantments and artifacts in the first few turns).
Things which are good vs. Arcanis is
Ethersworn Canonist (this is a problem for the deck. Rule of Law (which is harder to destroy maindeck - except that the deck can run the 1 mana elf with destroy enchantment + Ranger of Eos) works too but isnt that good vs everything else so isnt played).
Meddling Mage (on Heritage Druid/Nettle Sentinel - that one isnt as good as the canonist, since the deck can just chump block + bounce until it finds a path. Heck they got enough creatures to beat you to death I suppose)
Ashling vanguard. Arcanis runs a ton of 1/1 and that isnt that good vs something that mows 1/1s down.
most everything else doesnt matter.
btw. I am pretty sure arcanis could beat Reaper king with all their cards (Pito would need to run Loyal Sentry (this card is evil vs non-flying agro), but hey). Futheremore I think Pito is running far to many lands (8 card start hand + mana eleves and a curve that as such ends at 4 with most lower doesnt need 23 lands).
Another mechanic that, at least half, if not all new magic players stumble with is the Assigning of Blockers Phase. Just hop over to the Gleemax Forums and look at all the posts about glitches in the new Duels of the Planeswalkers game for Xbox. Most of the posts are confusion with why they can't terror a blocker and then have the damage from their "unblocked" creature go through to the player. Does this mean that WotC should implement another new change? I say no.. I don't really care how hard it is for new players to understand the stack. If you can't comprehend it, maybe Magic isn't for you, I say. This is not to say that I'm giving up Magic or anything b/c of a little change. On the contrary, I believe it may give us a fresh look at things. However, I will stick with my previous statements as too rule changes. I don't think they should be made out of a need to fulfill the minorities wishes.
Attempting to explain stacked combat damage one way or another via flavor in an effort to justify the status quo or justify the change is the wrong way to approach it.
The bottom line, and the reason for the change, is that virtually all new players, when presented with the stacked-damage system, think it feels wrong. It doesn't matter why. It doesn't matter if you can create flavor to explain it. New players must be trained to go against their expectations and common sense to reach the point of understanding damage on the stack.
If your game forces new players to override their common sense in order to understand a mechanic, that mechanic ought to change unless it is vital to the game as is. Coming up with flavor to explain a mechanic that all new players find unintuitive won't change the fact that all new players will continue to find that mechanic unintuitive until it is changed.
Hi, based on your article I bought product to play in 2 daily MVW sealed events and i placed in the t8, and t1 in both events =) but now i have MVW packs, what do you suggest i do with them? =( i can sell them for really cheap or hold them in hopes that MTGO opens up MVW drafts?
what should i do?
you rock i took your ala block sealed advice too thanks!
I know that a large portion of players have reversed their initial distaste for the new combat step, mainly I think because they want to distance themselves from the "negative" whiners, and you can disagree with my statement all you want, but how is the new system any more "intuitive" than the old? Sure the stack is hard to explain, but you're telling me that in a fight between one person and two other people that the first person is going to deal all his damage to just one person and not to the second in every instance? That's just not how reality works. Bruce Lee would not focus only on the first opponent if attacked by two. Especially if part of a team, you often want to deal damage to multiple opponents. I know it's a point that will never be solved, but I am getting a bit tired of people who trumpet the new system, seemingly just so they won't be in the negative camp. It will help new people, but give the "it will improve the game" deal a rest; because it's simply not true.
edited out because of harh response to the intro, and in retrospect wasnt a nice thing. I will say that I however do not agree with your sentiment at all. Take a break if you dont enjoy it but dont blame it on the game