If you're writing an article discussing the merits of Wild Mongrel and citing a decklist to support your arguments, then you should probably know that the difference between Wild Mongrel and Wild Nacatl and which one of these that the decklist that your citing actually runs.
Do not hate on him for this. I went to deckcheck.net in search of other non UG mongrel decks, and apparently more people get Nacatl and Mongrel confused.
Here hoping you continue doing articles like this it was very good. I agree with others the level of detail was good, and the choices made admitting where you made mistakes was refreshing. My favorite part was what would you do A or B, and then further down the choice you made.
..., the way you won the 3 matches, but only the third opponent was a serious threat for you. But if he/she cast the Volcanic fallout on his/her turn, u are dead...
Really like your article, and i do the same analysis about picks (insulting my self in the process). No complains!
TopBossUltra kind of made the point I was going to make Fathom Seer > Gush at least you gain a 1/3 body at the loss of 2 land in play. If you can find a way to abusing putting land into play then Gush might work out as good, or better then Fathom Seer.
Motu your not gonna win, and while your defence is admirable I think that you need to give it up. The one saving grace that this article could have had was game play. But you seem to refuse to go any farhther then Gush+Mongrel is good enough. Not that i think your wrong or right, thats irrelevant. Its just that all your doing is expressing your oppoinion... nay your desire that the interaction is good. Move onto a different topic and let this one go unless the next article shows your attempt with it in a tournament where you go at least 3-3 there is no point on keeping this up.
Also agree that the game play analysis was very solid. Enjoy the details on the games and really liked how you ran through the thought process on deciding whether to use youre "save" cards on critters.
By my count you have 15 white, with white as the required color, versus 12 green cards with 2 of them being G/U (10 to 11 relative Green cards) and 12 blue cards with with 2 of them being G/U (again 10 to 11 relative Blue cards). You have two landcycling cards, one UW sacland, and one Borderpost.
Honestly...you get rather lucky with the mana...while the opponents get some significant mana issues. Im just saying this as a caution to ppl reading this and thinking the deck was drafted well and its a winning formula. Having a 3-color, split close to even, with few fixers and cascade cards that could have epic fails (re: Flurry of Wings or a Borderpost when you have 4 mana already) probably isnt going to win a lot of drafts.
However, on the Plus side...you keep to the theme very, very well. You are playing a weenie rush deck. Weenie rush decks love Unsummon and pump effects. They are essentially removal. Clogging the deck up with a fourth color to slightly up the quality of your spells or playing 5-6 casting cost guys is incorrect. Then the way you play those cards is how you won. So kudos on both points.
Well things go fast. I've changed std deck to something totaly different a very homebrewed WRB Lark and the win ratio has gone up. Won an 8man and it's waiting to prove itself/myself in the dailies.
I actually forgot to mention Trample. Imagine the art on Overrun and imagine customers coming like mad towards you and you have nowhere to hide and you know that you are going to get trampled down by them. That was actually the situation I was in :)).
i was drafting 4322 last night, cracked broodmate, passed thraix, and then opened and was passed 3 terminates, played 17 land, and screwed myself in games 2 and three....oy!
This article is fantastic, and I bet the community in general could learn a ton from a series like this. Seeing a draft by a good player from beginning to end is invaluable to someone learning I think, and when it is presented in such a clear and concise manner, it makes for great reading.
I prefer to see Swiss type queues, but will take whatever I can get. Again, seeing the deck choices come together in the build is great, and adding to that how it actually plays out in game is awesome.
You'll never see MUC running those. Skies will definitely run Cloud, and it might run Snap. Peregrine is bad. He doesn't promise that your land won't be tapped like Spire Golem does, and he comes out one turn later than Spire Golem can. Also, he's just not as big.
Rewind might see play though. It takes more mana to actually cast it, but if it resolves it was free. That can be great when your opponent is trying to throw a bunch of removal at your Golem.
Some people seem to mention that you are misquoting. I haven't been keeping up with all of this, but if someone actually said to you "drawing cards isn't strong in pauper" they should lose the right to run islands. That's assuming those exact words, with nothing redeeming attached. Ex. "Drawing cards isn't strong in Pauper if your life total is 0."
I don't believe a card is ever really inherently good or bad. It's all about the synergy. If there had never been a card that was beneficial to discard mongrel would be ok at best. The problem with your deck isn't that Mongrel and Gush aren't good it's that you have few threats, and the threats you do have are easy to answer. MUC is good because Spire Golem is somewhat difficult to deal with, but when a hand full of counter and bounce is in the picture he's near impossible to deal with. Your list doesn't really grant the Mongrel this sort of support. Perhaps if you made room for some cantrips, such as Snake Form, Repulse, and Exclude.
Also, for this list I think Fathom Seer is better than Gush. With only 12 creatures, you would probably find the extra body to be great.
I thought that the Bill Stark list was for Legacy when I saw it. It's been removed and been replaced by a deck that I feel is still relevant to the arguement.
Customer's with persist is very funny! I'm imagining them will all sorts of powers like. When Annoying Customer comes in to play destroy target Customer Service rep. Or when Clueless Customer comes into play tap all customer service reps. We should make Call Center: The Gathering.
Good article! (though I can't afford any of those cards ;( )
Here's the thing with Gush- it is currently too slow and to large of a tempo hit for the Pauper tournament scene. In the wake of MBC, Affinity emerged as the top deck for the last PE, followed relatively closely by Cloak Aggro. If you take the experience of the Tournament Practice room and the folks over at PDCmagic.com seriously (which I do), the big deck coming up this weekend will likely be Mono-Blue Skies. Against all of these decks, hindering your board position while not directly affecting your opponent's position is not good enough. This is why Daze is better than Gush in this situation- Daze can trade turns with your opponent OR be a soft counter to actually trade a turn. Gush does not do these things. Can it be played for value? Certainly, but right now it is far too slow.
Also, LOurs, if you're going to argue for Mongrel, please use examples from the format we're talking about.
-Alex
I agree, he made me rewrite, and I'd gladly rewrite again. I think making people rewrite is a good thing. But editors of this site's real strength is that they will publish opinions even if it's different.
But that still doesn't mean that an article won't and shouldn't be criticized after it's published. People should give criticism because it makes the author a stronger writer. Sure there are nice ways and not nice ways to do criticize. But it's the author that needs to develop the thick skin and say my words are in the hands of the public. Now I must learn from them, or disagree with them.
That's the key for the author if it's a matter of opinion, then understand that a move on. If it's something you can learn, go neat, I learned something today!
Fair enough, though I'd have to disagree with you on Gush. I'd say there's probably already a way to play it for significant advantage hidden away in the vast untapped resources of already released cards, it just hasn't been found yet. (So no, I don't really think that Wild Mongrel is that way, at least not on its own.)
Great article!!! One of the best I've read so far.
If you're writing an article discussing the merits of Wild Mongrel and citing a decklist to support your arguments, then you should probably know that the difference between Wild Mongrel and Wild Nacatl and which one of these that the decklist that your citing actually runs.
I'm just sayin'
Do not hate on him for this. I went to deckcheck.net in search of other non UG mongrel decks, and apparently more people get Nacatl and Mongrel confused.
Here hoping you continue doing articles like this it was very good. I agree with others the level of detail was good, and the choices made admitting where you made mistakes was refreshing. My favorite part was what would you do A or B, and then further down the choice you made.
The level of detail was perfect and presenting the different options with the 'what would you do?' was a nice touch. Great work, keep 'em coming.
skyshroud ranger is green.. hmm
..., the way you won the 3 matches, but only the third opponent was a serious threat for you. But if he/she cast the Volcanic fallout on his/her turn, u are dead...
Really like your article, and i do the same analysis about picks (insulting my self in the process). No complains!
TopBossUltra kind of made the point I was going to make Fathom Seer > Gush at least you gain a 1/3 body at the loss of 2 land in play. If you can find a way to abusing putting land into play then Gush might work out as good, or better then Fathom Seer.
Motu your not gonna win, and while your defence is admirable I think that you need to give it up. The one saving grace that this article could have had was game play. But you seem to refuse to go any farhther then Gush+Mongrel is good enough. Not that i think your wrong or right, thats irrelevant. Its just that all your doing is expressing your oppoinion... nay your desire that the interaction is good. Move onto a different topic and let this one go unless the next article shows your attempt with it in a tournament where you go at least 3-3 there is no point on keeping this up.
Also agree that the game play analysis was very solid. Enjoy the details on the games and really liked how you ran through the thought process on deciding whether to use youre "save" cards on critters.
By my count you have 15 white, with white as the required color, versus 12 green cards with 2 of them being G/U (10 to 11 relative Green cards) and 12 blue cards with with 2 of them being G/U (again 10 to 11 relative Blue cards). You have two landcycling cards, one UW sacland, and one Borderpost.
Honestly...you get rather lucky with the mana...while the opponents get some significant mana issues. Im just saying this as a caution to ppl reading this and thinking the deck was drafted well and its a winning formula. Having a 3-color, split close to even, with few fixers and cascade cards that could have epic fails (re: Flurry of Wings or a Borderpost when you have 4 mana already) probably isnt going to win a lot of drafts.
However, on the Plus side...you keep to the theme very, very well. You are playing a weenie rush deck. Weenie rush decks love Unsummon and pump effects. They are essentially removal. Clogging the deck up with a fourth color to slightly up the quality of your spells or playing 5-6 casting cost guys is incorrect. Then the way you play those cards is how you won. So kudos on both points.
-M
Well things go fast. I've changed std deck to something totaly different a very homebrewed WRB Lark and the win ratio has gone up. Won an 8man and it's waiting to prove itself/myself in the dailies.
Thanks for the comment.
I actually forgot to mention Trample. Imagine the art on Overrun and imagine customers coming like mad towards you and you have nowhere to hide and you know that you are going to get trampled down by them. That was actually the situation I was in :)).
LE
Thanks for reformating my picture to look like a squaty umpa-loompa. How can I change that?
So, when's the next contest?
some days you do get lucky indeed
i was drafting 4322 last night, cracked broodmate, passed thraix, and then opened and was passed 3 terminates, played 17 land, and screwed myself in games 2 and three....oy!
This article is fantastic, and I bet the community in general could learn a ton from a series like this. Seeing a draft by a good player from beginning to end is invaluable to someone learning I think, and when it is presented in such a clear and concise manner, it makes for great reading.
I prefer to see Swiss type queues, but will take whatever I can get. Again, seeing the deck choices come together in the build is great, and adding to that how it actually plays out in game is awesome.
Keep these coming!!
I really liked the article and all the play by play analysis. The pictures also definitely made it a much better read. Keep it up!
You'll never see MUC running those. Skies will definitely run Cloud, and it might run Snap. Peregrine is bad. He doesn't promise that your land won't be tapped like Spire Golem does, and he comes out one turn later than Spire Golem can. Also, he's just not as big.
Rewind might see play though. It takes more mana to actually cast it, but if it resolves it was free. That can be great when your opponent is trying to throw a bunch of removal at your Golem.
Some people seem to mention that you are misquoting. I haven't been keeping up with all of this, but if someone actually said to you "drawing cards isn't strong in pauper" they should lose the right to run islands. That's assuming those exact words, with nothing redeeming attached. Ex. "Drawing cards isn't strong in Pauper if your life total is 0."
I don't believe a card is ever really inherently good or bad. It's all about the synergy. If there had never been a card that was beneficial to discard mongrel would be ok at best. The problem with your deck isn't that Mongrel and Gush aren't good it's that you have few threats, and the threats you do have are easy to answer. MUC is good because Spire Golem is somewhat difficult to deal with, but when a hand full of counter and bounce is in the picture he's near impossible to deal with. Your list doesn't really grant the Mongrel this sort of support. Perhaps if you made room for some cantrips, such as Snake Form, Repulse, and Exclude.
Also, for this list I think Fathom Seer is better than Gush. With only 12 creatures, you would probably find the extra body to be great.
I thought that the Bill Stark list was for Legacy when I saw it. It's been removed and been replaced by a deck that I feel is still relevant to the arguement.
I'm sorry if I came off that rude... I just meant that it seemed awkward that you could outright win the popular vote and still come in 4th.
Again, I apologize if I came off as too harsh, because it honestly wasn't my intention.
You guys ran a great contest and apparently it was a bit more stressful than I guessed. Just keep up the great work running the site.
Customer's with persist is very funny! I'm imagining them will all sorts of powers like. When Annoying Customer comes in to play destroy target Customer Service rep. Or when Clueless Customer comes into play tap all customer service reps. We should make Call Center: The Gathering.
Good article! (though I can't afford any of those cards ;( )
Here's the thing with Gush- it is currently too slow and to large of a tempo hit for the Pauper tournament scene. In the wake of MBC, Affinity emerged as the top deck for the last PE, followed relatively closely by Cloak Aggro. If you take the experience of the Tournament Practice room and the folks over at PDCmagic.com seriously (which I do), the big deck coming up this weekend will likely be Mono-Blue Skies. Against all of these decks, hindering your board position while not directly affecting your opponent's position is not good enough. This is why Daze is better than Gush in this situation- Daze can trade turns with your opponent OR be a soft counter to actually trade a turn. Gush does not do these things. Can it be played for value? Certainly, but right now it is far too slow.
Also, LOurs, if you're going to argue for Mongrel, please use examples from the format we're talking about.
-Alex
I agree, he made me rewrite, and I'd gladly rewrite again. I think making people rewrite is a good thing. But editors of this site's real strength is that they will publish opinions even if it's different.
But that still doesn't mean that an article won't and shouldn't be criticized after it's published. People should give criticism because it makes the author a stronger writer. Sure there are nice ways and not nice ways to do criticize. But it's the author that needs to develop the thick skin and say my words are in the hands of the public. Now I must learn from them, or disagree with them.
That's the key for the author if it's a matter of opinion, then understand that a move on. If it's something you can learn, go neat, I learned something today!
Fair enough, though I'd have to disagree with you on Gush. I'd say there's probably already a way to play it for significant advantage hidden away in the vast untapped resources of already released cards, it just hasn't been found yet. (So no, I don't really think that Wild Mongrel is that way, at least not on its own.)