Bazaar of Baghdad

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2118 Godly


About Bazaar of Baghdad

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM trynetend
  • Website URL http://

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Fav YGO Deck Dredge
  • Location NJ

Recent Profile Visitors

1785 profile views
  1. Super Rejuv was secretly an interactive card because of all the hand traps the Dragon deck played. Why play a card that just does one thing like a Floodgate when you can play a card that both interacts with your opponent by drawing you into Maxx "C"s and Veilers while also giving you more options for your next turn? Yes, maybe playing more floodgates in your dragon deck will improve your dragon mirror against stronger players, I won't dispute that. But you know what would increase your win rate even further? Just playing fucking Evilswarm which can actually support all these random floodgate cards without gimping itself. Or playing Spellbook which has it's engine built around cards that prevent Dragon from playing. You can do all these things you're suggesting, but other decks filled those roles better. You're significantly overvaluing how good the non-Emptiness floodgates are. If you think an opening like Dracossack + Dimensional Fissure is an autowin board while your hand traps are all shut off by your own Dimensional Fissure you're crazy. Your Dimensional Fissure isn't even bricking their Maxx "C" from turn 1, since you actually have to make your board before activating your Fissure. If you're relying on multiple floods to setup these autowins then why are you even playing Dragon Ruler in the first place? You can say the decks should max out on Emptiness, but there's obvious diminishing returns on playing multiple copies of that card, especially in a deck that got to see as many cards as Dragon Ruler did.
  2. Blaster was only a good answer to Emptiness if they had the hard read on your backrow and used Blaster to pop your set before pitching for a Baby (and that's assuming you didn't set a bluff alongside the Emptiness to prevent this). It's not like they can chain Blaster to Emptiness, and if your Emptiness eats 4 of their cards and their Blaster for turn you're probably not losing that game with any reasonable combination of cards. It was the same idea with the Spellbook deck. Yeah, Blaster could always out your Jowgen and there was nothing you could do about it if they had it, but for one, that isn't a trivial thing to assemble, and second it's far from free to use Blaster to pop a card so a good portion of the time it didn't even matter that they managed to kill your Jowgen. I understand what you're trying to argue, but you're just wrong. You're severely under appreciating the opportunity cost you incur by main decking extra non-engine cards. Maindecking extra copies of MST looks reasonable until you realize you're playing extra cards in your deck maindeck that do basically nothing vs. Spellbook game 1, and are only reasonable against Dragon game 1 if they have one of their 0-2 copies of Emptiness, and you went second. That's one of the strengths of floodgates in formats like these, from an expected value perspective it doesn't make sense to play devoted answers to them because they're just bricks when the flood isn't in play. If people wanted to go crazy and maindeck a bunch of random floodgate cards they'd just play a deck that's designed to do that, rather than try to randomly jam them into Dragons, which needs a critical mass of engine cards to be good. Macro and 5 bricks doesn't do anything, but Emptiness and 5 bricks turn 1 is often good enough to buy you a couple turns to fix your hand. It's far from impossible to play through a Macro Cosmos and force your opponent to play through their own Macro. There are even games where answering their board and flipping Macro doesn't lock up a win, because they still get to play cards from their graveyard / pitch babies to rebuild a board. There are so many situations where Emptiness is so much better than Macro or Fissure in the Dragon mirror that it's hard to justify playing Macro just because Blaster can't pop it.
  3. While there are definitely older formats where we didn't respect the power of floodgates, but Dragon/Spellbook format was definitely not one of them. In the Dragon mirror, Emptiness was a significantly better card than either Macro or DFissure (and yes, was incredibly obnoxious) simply because you could easily turn them off yourself to push for lethal, and your opponent literally couldn't play if you had it up. Under Macro, it's still possible to have your board answered, especially if you didn't go first and they have a graveyard already, and if your shit gets answered under Macro now you're stuck playing under your own Macro Cosmos. There's a huge difference in cards that completely don't let them play even when they have a graveyard, like Emptiness, and cards that just make their plays weaker like Dimensional Fissure. Let's not pretend nobody played floodgates that format. Mind Drain and Dimensional Fissure were two of the most popular sideboard cards out of the Spellbook deck, Dragons commonly mained Emptiness and sided Horus/DNA Surgery, and every deck that wasn't one of those two mained some combination of EEV, Dimensional Fissure, Macro Cosmos, Ophion, Emptiness, or Zombie World. Spellbook was already the best game 1 deck in the format, and why the fuck would you sacrifice anything to main answers to sideboard cards like Tsukuyomi? That is what the side is for. And was one of the big reasons why Cursed Seal was such a good card in the Spellbook side, not only was it a blowout in the mirror, but it also went in against Dragon to answer Dark Hole / Last Day / MST / Storm in the post-board games. There's a huge amount of opportunity cost to playing non-engine cards in both the Spellbook and Dragon decks. Every card you want to add you have to cut something in exchange, and when every card in your deck is as powerful, or engine critical as those two decks, cards have to meet a very high bar to be playable.
  4. Yeah, CRV is totally different, which is why I specified if Drillroid were legal in goats, rather than if we were playing with CRV legal. Probably could've been more clear though.
  5. Not saying Drillroid is maindeckable by any means, but if it were legal in goat it would be one of the better answers for Zoo to Spies and defense Exarions. The only thing that beats over it post-board is Exarion, since 1600 def keeps it out of Tsuk range. Having 1600 atk so you can actually clock them with the card makes it somewhat playable. Is it great? Nah, but the answers Zoo has to a resolved Spy are so terrible that Drillroid is actually a consideration.
  6. Creator is used in the Monster Gate turbo deck that was kinda popularish 2-3 years ago. Snatch is not a staple in Zoo, MST isn't a staple in the Burn maindeck (and strictly speaking, neither is Duo,) etc. If you ignore rogue decks the word "staple" loses it's meaning very quickly when you consider there are 2 or 3 top tier decks in the format, all with standard stock lists available. Your point on Dustshoot vs. Dust Tornado is not true at all Zoo, for example, plays both. Goat plays Dust Tornado because interacting with backrow is important, and Dustshoot is totally off plan for a deck that wants to play a long game. You play Dustshoot when you want to end games fast, and you play Dust Tornado when you need to deal with backrow efficiently. Some decks are trying to do both things, others aren't.
  7. Almost every question here depends on what deck you're building. Jinzo is better for a deck trying to make big pushes, Vampire Lord is only playable when you're tutoring him with Pyramid Turtle, and Airknight is a light monster which matters a lot for the standard goat deck. Zaborg and Mobius both have their places, as does some more brewy stuff like DMoC, Sacred Phoenix, or The Creator. Exarion > Assailant = Abyss Soldier >= Gorilla. Exarion and Assailant don't die to Tsuk attacks, which is huge. The main reason to play Gorilla is the prevalence of Exarion. Reaper is pretty bad if you're playing with Exarion in the format, so it's usually not a consideration. Tsuk is also the card the goat deck is built around in a lot of ways, which makes it pretty easy to justify running a 2nd copy. Outside of that deck though, Tsuk isn't usually a consideration unless you're trying to abuse flip effects, or desperately need more outs to TER. When I boarded in Tsuk in Zoo, I was always also boarding in Dekoichis which boosted the ceiling of the deck, as well as gave me more outs to TER. Merchant being a light and level 1 is the reason people play it in the standard goat deck, but Dekoichi is the much more powerful standalone card if you don't care about that. Having attack points is way bigger than most people realize in goat. The only s/ts I'd call "staple" are Pot, Grace, Duo, Mirror, and Torrential. Everything else is a potential cut depending on what you're building. It all depends on what you're worried about. Book of Moon does a lot, it's one of the more versatile cards in the format, but if you're trying to beat your opponent down fast you probably don't want to be spending a card to just flip a monster down that you'll need to use an attack to get over. Bottomless doesn't answer Tsuk or TER, which makes it unplayable in the main deck imo. Both Dustshoot and Dust Tornado have their place, fill completely different roles and I'm not sure why you're asking which we prefer as the only thing similar about them is the string "Dust" in their names.
  8. Yeah, I'll be there.
  9. Control and Midrange can not play 1 drops if they want, but all the fast combo decks are going to just play 4 Missteps anyway because all the best removal in the format is 1 mana. It's hard to justify playing Jund without Bolts/discard, or a white deck without Paths, especially with Infect and Burn decks running around the format demanding fast interaction. But let's say you don't play Bolt/Path, do you not play Misstep either and just hope to blank opposing missteps entirely? That's reasonable, but I don't think the fast decks mind having some dead cards in their deck very much if you're both gimping your removal suite and not playing any fast interaction. 1 drops may not be as ubiquitous as they are in Legacy, but they're still some of the most important cards in the format, especially for fast unfair matchups. I think you're drastically overestimating how many 1 drops you can trim from a Jund, or Jeskai deck before they become unplayable in the face of Infect. I will always have a soft spot for Jace the Mana Sculptor. RIP
  10. Cup of Ace actually being good was the most depressing result I've ever gotten, but it's true. Also, you should be fine losing all of your Trade-Ins, right? Library generates enough cards where you can loop Dealings, doesn't it? Banishing Hand Destruction is similar, the end loop is with Gustkraken anyway so I'm pretty sure we're not relying on Hand Destruction piles for the loop. If you get a 2nd Library in play I'm pretty sure you can get away with no Salvages, but I might be wrong there. But yeah, in the end Desires is probably one of those things that leads to interesting puzzles, but is totally miserable to actually play in your deck for a tournament. If it's in your bottom 11 cards it's almost a brick, and you probably can't activate it reasonably until you've gone through 10+ cards.
  11. It depends on your ban philosophy obviously, but as someone who's been jamming dredge for the last 4 months almost non-stop, Dredge was definitely a problem in the format. If you look at the decks on mtgtop8 Dredge may only be taking up 8% of the metagame or whatever, but look at the main / side of every other deck in the format. Tron moved from red to white to play Path and side RIP while maining Relics. Burn is siding off-plan cards like Rav Trap, Tormod's Crypt and RIP in hopes of getting to play in game 2/3 vs. Gnaw to the Bone. Affinity is seeing less play / worse results than it basically ever has. Lantern and Ad Naus are 2-3% of the metagame each in part because they have an absurdly strong Dredge matchup. Skred won a fucking GP. The only decks that don't have to play a bunch of on hate in the sideboard are decks that can either ignore Dredge's plan (Lantern, Ad Naus) or can just kill Dredge on turn 3 consistently (Battle Rage / Become Immense decks) Now if you're of the opinion that all this is fine, and there's no issue with centralizing decks like this, fine. That's a totally reasonable opinion to have. I was against the Twin ban too, but I think there's a big difference between a turn 4 deck that the fair decks can reasonably interact with with regular removal spells, and Dredge. I don't know much (anything) about standard, but from what I've heard by the people who run a local I go to, standard attendance was down at every level of play, so Wizards felt they had to do something drastic. I guess you don't like Modern very much? There's a chance that this fixes things, but it's also just opening the floodgates on basically a new format. You can't really predict what effect all this stuff will have (Except Mistep. That card is just miserable.) It's totally changing the format, rather than making minor tweaks. They're already slowly removing cards from the ban list, we got back Ancestral Vision and Sword of the Meek last year, the year before we got Grave-Troll, 2014 yielded Bitterblossom and Wild Nactyl. We'll probably get one or two cards off the list this year too. If you unban powerful cards too much faster you're making huge changes regularly to what is supposed to be a fairly stable format.
  12. I don't disagree with you at all, the root of the issue is that it upsets a large portion of the player base, and Wizards doesn't really want to do that again after the community outcry from the Twin ban. It's the nature of a non-rotating format, it a deck has been legal the whole time it's a lot harder to just remove it from the format 5 years later after you have a solid base of players who are "affinity players." It's less about the overall health of the format, and more about keeping as many people happy as possible. Sometimes those are conflicting goals. Kinda, it's weird. I'd say Abzan Company/Evolution are more midrange decks with an incidental combo for when your opponent doesn't have any removal, or they greedily tap out. They can win simplified games with good card beatdown just fine, and don't mind trading card for card with the Junds of the world. Elves is definitely further on the far end of the combo spectrum, I mentioned it because it's one of the "various company" decks I was thinking about with my first post, forgetting the context I was replying to, my bad.
  13. Stony Silence goes in versus Tron / Lantern, Ancient Grudge goes in against Infect / Lantern, and in general more random brews are going to have Artifacts like Ensnaring Bridge you want to board artifact removal for than will be full-on graveyard combo decks. Affinity hate falls on a scale, depending on what matchups you're worried about. If you're particularly scared of Boggles for some reason, but aren't terrified of Affinity, you can shave some more devoted Affinity cards for Natural State, or Fracturing Gust and probably be fine. Stuff like Engineered Explosives, or Anger of the Gods are solid cards that are good against affinity and improve your matchup, but go in for plenty of matchups With Dredge you need devoted, powerful slots. You can't just board a few Relics or Angers and expect to get the matchup to parity. Unless you're playing a deck with maindeck hate to begin with like Skred, you probably need cards like Ravenous Trap, Leyline, or Rest in Peace in your board to make your matchup reasonable. The major issue there is that they're in the same format. They could've rolled a die as to which deck to hit and the die came up to keep Dredge around, or more likely, they feel Affinity is the more moderny deck, and decided to keep it around. Creature midrange decks, I wouldn't really call Jund/Abzan creature based, though that's definitely debatable. I was more referring to decks like Abzan Company, the Evolution decks people tried to play after Evolution came out, Elves, etc. You could argue the semantics of calling those decks midrange at all, but they're what I was intending to refer to. Possibly, but that's not the worst plan in the world. Banning Affinity is sorta like banning Miracles from Legacy, you could do it, it might even be a net positive for the format, but you wouldn't really be playing Legacy anymore.
  14. Seniority. But really, Dredge had both a much stronger counter-hate plan than Affinity, and way more oppressive to the metagame. The sideboard cards vs. Dredge are only good vs Dredge, unlike Affinity hate cards like Stony Silence, or Ancient Grudge. Your Ravenous Traps and Leyline of the Voids aren't very good against non-Dredge decks. Dredge also singlehandedly removed all the creature based midrange decks from the format, because they can never beat a Conflagrate. With Dredge gone (Well, not really, but in a world where Dredge is actually gone) stuff like the Evolution deck, and various Company decks are worth playing / brewing again. Calling Dredge just a strong aggro deck is a bit misleading, Conflagrate, Darkblast, and Narcomoeba have been the best control cards in Modern in the time since Reunion was printed, you're not (always) racing the aggro / combo matchups, you play the control role just fine. There's also something to say with not having too many of the hardcounterable decks in the format too, it leans the format a bit too far towards sideboard RPS. It was fine this season because Dredge was, for the most part, keeping Affinity in check, letting everyone else focus more on their Dredge matchup, but in principle I can see why the 2nd archetype that demands sideboard cards is a comparatively larger issue for the format than the first. I don't think I want to live in a world where the UR thing and Deaths Shadow deck are considered "fair." Is Infect also "fair"? Because they're basically all the same kind of deck, all-in creature combo decks with occasional turn 2, and consistent turn 3 kills. Probe being banned does a lot more than most people think towards preventing turn 4 violations, partially by removing Delve cards from Become Immense, but that's less of an issue than the information denial. Sure you'll still have people strapping on their helmet and going for the turn 3 kills into open mana, but those people are going to get destroyed by variance over a long tournament so who cares? It's so hard to justify an all-in push into an open White, or Red (or now, Black) mana when you don't have the information from Probe. Is it a perfect solution? Nah, but Probe is one of those cards that doesn't really belong in the game of Magic, and they don't want to shake the format up too hard after making a pretty major hit to the biggest deck of the format, and printing a set that has big modern implications.
  15. Yes, his post actually is that terrible. Nobody on this site would chime into an active discussion, "Yup, Person A figured it out, that's all there is to it. Thread's over. By the way. just play X, Y, or Z, since nothing else is playable." And if they did I'd 100% still be calling them out. I actually have no words for you thinking that his post warrants a counterargument. Obviously the 3 big decks of the format are worth playing, what the fuck does that add to the discussion? This thread is about trying to get Gishki to work again, to check to make sure nobody is missing anything. His post not only has nothing to do with the topic, he's trying to stop discussion of the topic altogether. In the context of this thread his post has no place, and the way he said it discourages discussion. If you can't see the issue with posts like that I don't know what to say to you. This is kinda cool, Are there any combo relevant rank 4s other than Daigusto Emeral? Or something you can play that cashes in Scales for cards somehow?