Care to give your reasoning?

I saw a list not too long ago (tho pre-restrictions) which ran 3 disks main IIRC, that got 2nd behind Ichorid.

What are people's thoughts about maindecking Disks instead of Rod?

It's a nice sweeper against Workshops and takes care of random problem permanents in other decks.

Too slow?  Too bad against combo?

I still disagree with a number of points you made here, and also on your assertion that my argument is based on "cherry picked scenarios and points of view", although I doubt it would be very productive to continue to argue things here.

Nonetheless, I thank you for taking the time to clarify your position.

Heh.  I hate to be direct as well, but I did, indeed, offer "actual criticism and commentary" which are "relevant to the deck and discussion of such".  I also have to ask if you actually read my posts.

If you'd like to respond to any of my specific points (which you seem reluctant to do) then please feel free to do so.


I thought it was pretty clear that I was arguing that Smokestack was better that Juggernaut precisely in the list provided.  I did make a few references to comparing the 2 cards on their individual merits, but I mentioned e.g. the reason that Stacks is better rests on the higher count of permanents in 5-color Stax as opposed to most other decks.


Nowhere did I imply you are trying to claim credit for a stolen deck.  If you will read my reply to desolutionist, you will see that I wrote:  "I do think that Angry Pheldagrif came to his list independently, as I remember it used to be very different.  But whatever.  I'm not going to get into a deck-naming debate."


That's one deck that I don't claim to have enough experience/knowledge with for me to state definitely that Stack is better than Jug (maybe you could explain your reasoning that Long.dec needs a fairly high life total to win).  I hardly think that somehow invalidates the rest of what I've said.  Instead of being condescending and dismissive (which you are), I invite you to respond to my specific points and refute them.



To summarize, since you don't seem to like reading my posts:

1)  I'm not claiming you stole your decklist.
2)  If you won't debate my points or explain your position, I have a hard time taking it too seriously.



Just to reiterate, while I think Smokestack is better than Jug (in this list, substitution of which would pretty much make it 5-color Stax, but the name doesn't really matter to me, I am simply talking about a well-known label for how the deck functions), I don't think it's better by a huge margin.  Just enough that, all things equal, I'd probably choose the Stack over Jug.  Hell, maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe the synergies with the rest of the deck make Jug better; I can accept that as possible.  If so, would you kindly show a sample game or scenario where this is made manifest?

I would imagine the eventual winner is decided in roughly the same time.


That really depends on the stage of the game and the board state.  I'd say for the early to early-mid stage of the game (the most important ones), no, you don't have more turns for Jug.


I notice you left off the rest of my quote...  Also the fact that I qualified that statement in one of my earlier replies.

That's not really fair to me, now is it? 

To answer your question:  I don't have a set number of cards that 2 decks must differ by before I will consider them 2 different decks.  It depends on the cards' importance and function in the deck, and whether the different card choices change the deck's play style to a substantial degree.  I do think that Angry Pheldagrif came to his list independently, as I remember it used to be very different.  But whatever.  I'm not going to get into a deck-naming debate.

I re-read your original post, and I don't see any description of how you would play it any differently than the original 5-color Stax.  I.e., you keep throwing out big threats until your opponent runs out of answers and is overwhelmed.  If a threat is countered, weld it back in.  Etc., etc.  Whether that threat is something that will gobble up their life total or gobble up their board position, how does it change how you play the deck on a fundamental level?


Long.dec may be an exception; I'm not experienced enough with it to have a solid opinion on it.  Does it absolutely need to get Bargain or Necro in play in order to win?  I don't think it used to, pre LED-restriction.


I have a fair amount of experience with it as well.


Smokestack's effect is almost symmetric; your opponent sacrifices first if you time the upkeep stack right (obvious, I know, but it bears stating).  This means that your opponent suffers the setback to his mana development for a turn while you still have access to all of yours, which compounds the asymmetry in development, as you have more opportunity to cast permanents.  The asymmetry in the number of permanents in 5-color Stax versus most other decks further exploits the symmetry of The Stack in your favor.

In the mirror or against another Workshop variant, Smokestack is generally not good unless you've got the combo with it, I agree with this statement.

The point about Long I addressed above.  It may be one deck where the life vs. board position argument goes in favor of Juggernaut.

I would content that against Welder it's not great but not necessarily bad if you get it early.  If you can play it early and sacrifice a few lands to the Stack you'll probably be able to set your opponent back enough that Welder won't wreck its effectiveness.  Since CS plays countermagic, they could counter something like a Thorn and swap that with Juggernaut or Smokestack, which wouldn't give an advantage to either.  Overall, I do concede that against CS Juggernaut is at least somewhat better.

But if you want to talk about the relative merits versus particular cards in decks likely to be prominent in the new metagame, why not talk about Oath?  Smokestack is much better than Juggernaut here.  Why not talk about Swords to Plowshares, a non Stax-specific staple in fish?


It's the slight asymmetry of who suffers from Stack first, and asymmetry of permanents vs. most decks, which makes you much, much more capable of taking the hit to your board position.


You may or may not have secured the win by the time the Smokestack dies (if the game goes this long), but you probably will have given yourself such a lead in development that you will be able to force down the win at some point.


Sorry, maybe I over-stated this for dramatic effect.  I don't always scoop, but I do often lose when 1st-turn Stack hits.  The logic comes from the asymmetries in who-sacs-first and deck composition that I mentioned above.


Your life total is irrelevant until you're at or below 0.  You can still function at 5 life as well as you could at 20 unless your deck relies on trading life for other resources.  It's harder to function (for most decks) with no permanents in play.


Assuming you went first:

Your opponent has maintained card parity in this scenario (1 card from Confidant, 1 artifact from T. Mage) if you only consider his cards, and has gotten card advantage when you consider your lost Juggernaut.  His mana base has not been hampered. Aside from that, he's at 5 less life than he would have been if not for the Juggernaut.

Now, consider what could easily happen with Smokestack:

During his first upkeep after playing the confidant, he has to decide whether to sac the confidant and keep his mana intact, or sac a mana on the assumption that the cards drawn will allow him to outlast the Stack.  If he kept a 3 mana opening draw (2 land + 1 mox), this is not an easy decision.  If he sacs the mana source and doesn't draw another, he can't even play the Trinket Mage this turn and very well may have just lost the game.  If he sacs the Confidant and plays the T. Mage (fetching out a Mox or the Lotus), his opponent ramps the Stack and plays 2-3 permanents.  He then must sac the T. Mag and a mana source, leaving him with 3 mana sources if he didn't draw another.  He'd better win this turn before the Stack leaves him with 1 permanent in play.


My point is that Juggernaut dies to common maindeck creature removal (StP in fish) which doesn't effect Smokestack.


But it doesn't ignore Smokestack.


I'd like to think that the more chances I have to go off unmolested, the better my chances of winning are.

I like this deck a lot, but I would have to echo the previous sentiment that it is pretty much 5-color Stax with Juggernauts instead of Smokestacks.  I don't think that vastly changes the overall functioning of the deck; tricks with circumventing Slaver locks aside (which was pretty cool, I'll admit), it sounds to me like you're pretty much trading a clock that takes away chunks of your opponent's board position for one that takes away chunks of his life total.  Both are 4cc artifacts that have to be dealt with quickly or they will end the game.

As I see it, the way it attacks the opponent's board position makes the Smokestack version slightly better.  I strongly disagree with the statement that the opponent doesn't have to deal with Smokestack.  The opponent has time to develop his board and use his mana to dig for answers against a Jug, or just outrace it, which is more difficult against the Stack.  Smokestack can even be ramped up to 2 (and in exceptional cases, 3) to accelerate its impact.  To make my point more concrete:  I will almost always scoop to an un-Fowed Smokestack on the first turn unless I have the mana and answer in hand, a reasonable way to tutor for it within the first 2 turns, or a very quick combo kill.  Against Juggernaut I don't need to worry about losing my basic ability to play the game.  I could double-block it with confidant + t. mage after my 2nd turn.  I could plow it, assuming my deck plays those.  I can tinker out Plat. and ignore it.  I can tutor & build up my resources undisrupted over a few turns, then combo out.

Again, don't get me wrong, I like the deck, but I'm not sold on the fundamental difference or superiority of the Juggernaut version.

Also, I agree that a Vamp really belongs in the deck.  I'd probably cut 1 Bazaar for it.