[Metagame-Discussion] Post World's: Possibilities

[Bronx]

With World's in our taillights, it is almost second nature for the universal metagame to make some changes. With Control Slaver's recent victory, there will almost indefinately be an upsurge of the archetype. Fish, the supposed "Deck to Beat" at gencon, was anticipated, and in turn capsized by the undertoe. With these matters at hand, I propose a few general questions that have kept me thinking, and with plenty of thought, I hope answers can be found.

(1)--Hypothetically, Drain Slaver may become the deck to watch in the next few months. I do not doubt that it will be commonly played. Its impact, however, is a larger question.  Could we see Oshawa and Food Chain Goblins come out of the closet? Will Slaver be big enough for the metagame to shift to its weakpoints?

(2)--A few weeks ago, Fish was the predominant deck in the format. World's sideboards were undoubtly fixed for the deck. But somehow, it lacked to deliver. Is it possible that with the rise of Control slaver and Workshop style decks, that Fish could fade?

(3)--Four Color Control, what was the leading control deck in type one, was almost absent from the high places at Gencon. Will Slaver take over to become the dominant control Deck in the format?

(4)--With the rise of Slaver and possible fall of Fish, will Tog make a reappearance?

     
     With so many questions in one thread, I ask that you specify which you  are responding to. I hope that this will stur up some brainstorming and give us a jump ahead towards the next few months.

--Brian

[Smmenen]

Don't forget, despite being massively hated out, a Fish deck STILL MADE top 8.

[wuaffiliate]

Also keep in mind there are a half dozen decks that could have won this event. Just because a deck didn't win, or t8 does not mean that it isn't a threat. All this means, is that people will finally show some respect for Control Slaver.

I honestly never see a point in these types of threads.

[Mixing Mike]

Didn't a Dragon deck take 9th?

Besides, I doubt Tog would come back if he had to play against a Mindslaver every 3-4 games per tourny.

[dicemanx]

I question whether this one top 8 is indicative of anything. One could argue that it's not so much the deck choice which gets you to the top 8, but instead it might depend on your playskill and whether the "stars are in alignment" for you. We could have just as easily seen 3 Dragon decks or all 3 mono-U decks in the top 8, and control Slaver might not have even made it had Shockwave not been given a game loss against Windfall or if two players hadn't drawn in the final round to allow Windfall to sneak in. Control Slaver is a great deck and it was piloted by a very strong player, but I don't think that it suddenly becomes the "deck to watch". It's but one of a large handful of decks with are very competitive in T1. And the top decks still include Fish and 4CC; again, a poor showing at one event doesn't negate the fact that they are powerful decks.

[Bronx]

@wuaffiliate - These Questions are hypothetical. I am not dismissing all decks except Control Slaver. I am simply brainstorming the possibilities of (1) Drain Slaver becoming a more dominant and widely-played deck and (2) the causes of that effect.

@Dicemanx - This is true. I feel it is a combination of both. Skill plays in very heavily, however deck choice can make or break you. I agree that we will most likely continue to see strength in 4CC and quite possibly Fish.

[The Atog Lord]

Could we see Oshawa and Food Chain Goblins come out of the closet?

The matchup of Control Slaver against FCG is very close to even, perhaps with the slight edge to FCG. On the other hand, despite advances to improve the matchup, I am never happy to see my opponent drop a first turn Forest. If Control Slaver does start to become very popular soon, I'm sure that some form of OStompy will be a good hate deck.

Is it possible that with the rise of Control slaver and Workshop style decks, that Fish could fade?

Fish is a fine deck to take into a field of Control Slaver. I remember not too far back, playing for a Lotus, when a Fish player cut through three Control Slaver players in the top eight, myself included.

With the rise of Slaver and possible fall of Fish, will Tog make a reappearance?

If Control Slaver becomes very popular, Tog will most likely remain a questionable choice. Tog is not amazing against Control Slaver.

Again, these questions assume that Control Slaver becomes a dominant ubiquitous deck in the format. Control Slaver has won Worlds, but that does not mean that a huge number of people will just pick up the deck. Rather, as I wrote in my Primer for the deck, I would be rather surprised if Control Slaver ever reached the level of popularity once enjoyed by Gro-a-Tog. Control Slaver is strong against decks that are worth a lot, but actually has some pretty bad matchups against a number of budget decks. While I haven't tried, I'm willing to bet that you could build a Sui deck that would beat Control Slaver consistently.

[wuaffiliate]

If control slaver does become widely played that is a good thing. It makes more byes because it is a difficult deck to play perfectly, and as we know there are many terrible players out there.

control slaver won because it was played by a very good player, with a very good build, with very good pairings.

[Milton]

My thoughts:

First, I wish I could have made it to GenCon.  This was the first GenCon I missed in 10 years.  It was just too late in the year.

Second, I don't read too much into the top results in the Worlds.  This year's championship will do far less in terms of altering my local metagame than did last year.

Last year Carl won with a great Tog build that was somewhat easy to play (but difficult to master).  Following the tournament, Tog was hyped, and it dominated the fall and winter events.  The most interesting story about last year's GenCon was not the deck that was coppied, but the decks that were ignored.  The Mask build that placed second was a terrific deck, but it didn't get much attention.  Rich's Dragon deck was awesome and very innovative, but it didn't get too much play.  It was all about Tog.

Why?  First, Tog is somewhat easy to play in a five proxy environment.  If you can find Mana Drains you can put a functional Tog deck together by proxying the rest.  It also was a forgiving deck and it was somewhat easy to play.  You didn't need to understand the complex rules interaction of Dragon to play Tog, for example.  Tog was just easier, and more brutal in the hands of an average player.

Now, look at GenCon 2004.  Control Slaver is more difficult to build in a five proxy environment.  It is far more difficult to play, requiring a ton of play skill and rules knowledge.  It is extremely tight, making it difficult to make local metagame changes.  Tog, on the other hand, was easily adaptable to local metagame changes.  It could go four color, or three.  It could pack wastelands.  It could even run Back to Basics and five or six basic lands.  Easy to play, easy to adapt, hard to hate and very forgiving.  Compare that to Control Slaver.  Easy to hate, hard to play, hard to adapt and not very forgiving.  Clearly I haven't seen the winning deck list, but to win with Control Slaver indicates to me a very, very skilled player.  If that player were in my local metagame, I would be very worried.  Instead, if players try to copy Control Slaver, I look at that as being good for me.

The biggest shift I plan on seeing in my local environment is an increase in Mono Blue.  It was a very good call.  It is somewhat easier to play than is Control Slaver, but it is still difficult and playing Mono Blue requires an in-depth knowledge of the metagame as a whole.  As such, I don't see mono blue making too many waves in my local tournaments.  I think our environment here in Minneapolis would be somewhat unforgiving to Mono Blue in the hands of an average player.

So, I like the results from GenCon.  Highly skilled players are winning with highly skill intensive decks!  That's the way it should be.

[whitepanther]

Tog could actually make a comeback and would likely do even better then it does at the moment if Fish were to take a large drop and no longer be everyone's favourite deck. Tog still makes more T8 appearances according to Pip's data (and JP) and could very well become a monster again with the meta at the slow pace that it is.

On another note, Smmene Blue is quite possibly the meta-deck of the year...

[Smmenen]

My thoughts:

First, I wish I could have made it to GenCon.  This was the first GenCon I missed in 10 years.  It was just too late in the year.

Second, I don't read too much into the top results in the Worlds.  This year's championship will do far less in terms of altering my local metagame than did last year.

Last year Carl won with a great Tog build that was somewhat easy to play (but difficult to master).  Following the tournament, Tog was hyped, and it dominated the fall and winter events.  The most interesting story about last year's GenCon was not the deck that was coppied, but the decks that were ignored.  The Mask build that placed second was a terrific deck, but it didn't get much attention.  Rich's Dragon deck was awesome and very innovative, but it didn't get too much play.  It was all about Tog.

Why?  First, Tog is somewhat easy to play in a five proxy environment.  If you can find Mana Drains you can put a functional Tog deck together by proxying the rest.  It also was a forgiving deck and it was somewhat easy to play.  You didn't need to understand the complex rules interaction of Dragon to play Tog, for example.  Tog was just easier, and more brutal in the hands of an average player.

Now, look at GenCon 2004.  Control Slaver is more difficult to build in a five proxy environment.  It is far more difficult to play, requiring a ton of play skill and rules knowledge.  It is extremely tight, making it difficult to make local metagame changes.  Tog, on the other hand, was easily adaptable to local metagame changes.  It could go four color, or three.  It could pack wastelands.  It could even run Back to Basics and five or six basic lands.  Easy to play, easy to adapt, hard to hate and very forgiving.  Compare that to Control Slaver.  Easy to hate, hard to play, hard to adapt and not very forgiving.  Clearly I haven't seen the winning deck list, but to win with Control Slaver indicates to me a very, very skilled player.  If that player were in my local metagame, I would be very worried.  Instead, if players try to copy Control Slaver, I look at that as being good for me.

The biggest shift I plan on seeing in my local environment is an increase in Mono Blue.  It was a very good call.  It is somewhat easier to play than is Control Slaver, but it is still difficult and playing Mono Blue requires an in-depth knowledge of the metagame as a whole.  As such, I don't see mono blue making too many waves in my local tournaments.  I think our environment here in Minneapolis would be somewhat unforgiving to Mono Blue in the hands of an average player.

So, I like the results from GenCon.  Highly skilled players are winning with highly skill intensive decks!  That's the way it should be.

I think another important distinction that must be kept in mind is this:
last year 25 people played keeper and sligh.  Before that event, it wasn't really possible to say "X is the metagame."  After that event, Vintage put on its pants and grew up.

I didn't see any sligh this year and I think the people who played those decks didn't show up (although I didn't see much of what was being played).  The point is that that top 8 from last year sort of was a turning point in type one.

[Anders Noer]

I don't think that Tog would do too well in a sea of Fish and Stax. Stax is still one of the top-decks and Workshops have a tendency to do well against Tog.

While Mono-U has gotten some well deserved attention, I don't think that it will start dominating the metagame.

The top decks are still (I think):
Stax
Fish
4c Control
(and apparently Dragon - which hasn't been bad, but seems to be playable again due to less hate? I haven't seen the latest lists, so I'm not sure why they did so well at GenCon).

After these come:
Slavery (both kinds)
Aggro Workshop builds
TPS - Italian style
Tog ?
Landstill ? (just as good as Mono-U in my book)
Other Fish-like Aggro control (WTF, new Madness etc.)

And further down we have:
O-Stompy of some sort
Belcher
FCG
Rector Tendrils
Parfait (not the same deck anymore, but something close)
Ravager builds
...

I've probably missed a few. But this is how I see the meta - before and after Gencon.

[Windfall]

First off, I'd like to thank you all for your props on my play skill.  It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside   .

To respond to Bronx, here are my thoughts -

1)  FCG was not the deck I feared at Worlds.  I was packing 3 Blue Blasts for that matchup because I knew that Goblin Welder was a huge card in the metagame and that I needed to be prepared for it.

As far as O-Stompy goes, there are new Mono Green decks surfacing that I think will do well in the future.  Hell, I'm working on one right now!

2)  Fish may or may not fade.  Before I tweaked my build, Fish was not the best matchup for me.  Workshop decks can beat it, and I think that's why the other finalists did so well.  Any deck with Mystical Tutor and Tinker can beat Fish, which is why it got housed at Worlds.  It still goes to say that any amazing player can do well with Fish - it's a harder deck to play than most realize.

3)  Control Slaver beats 4cControl on a regular basis, especially the builds with Duress, which I was playing.  I don't think 4cControl will ever die out, though, because it is an amazing metagame deck that can be tuned to beat almost anything.  With access to so many colors, any solution can and will be used in the future.

4)  The fall of Fish may make more people play Tog again, but the rise of Slaver will be just as bad if not worse for the Tog players.  I never lose to Hulk playing Control Slaver.  3 color Tog is a better deck for that matchup and it may even be better in the current metagame at large.

     ~Mark B.

[JuJu]

1) Maybe, No
2)No
3)No
4)No

This thread really has no point. If you would've known what the field was like or heard about any of the matchup stories. You would've known that most of what you claiming was due to bad luck.
Oshawa Stompy is back with Crucible Green, FCG might come back. Mainly cause it has good matchups vs everything except Workshops.
Fish Won't Fade. It's Been a good deck for the last 3 years. It's finally gotten the respect it deserves and it will remain a powerful deck.
All of the top 4cc Players were playing something else I hear. Klep, Zherbus, Kowal, Carl were either unattending or playing something completely different to what they usually play. 4cc will remain a strong deck, alot like it has in the last bajillion years.
If Tog makes a reappearance, it will be hated out once again. No one had to really run hate for it. Decks just got better and Tog didn't have anything new to bring to the deck. The decks time has gone. For the most part.

What you've really failed to see about this tourney is the amount of different Archetypes the tourney brought. The top 16 had 3 Dragon players, Some 4cc(Steve might know how many, or Pip). Even Mono-U showed up - Which I'm very happy to see come back - And lots of other decks made it into the top 16. The Field was diverse and there was no overpowering deck. Mark played his deck exceptionally but got into the top 8 because of sheer luck. Many of the Dragon players JUST missed top 8. The only thing that I saw come out of this tourney that couldn't have been realized earlier; was the overpowering amount of Crucibles. The meta has gone from Play with Crucible or play hate against Crucible. The only other option is play Mono color decks - Like Steve did.

Edit: Fixed my last sentence to make sense.

[Milton]

I didn't see any sligh this year and I think the people who played those decks didn't show up (although I didn't see much of what was being played). The point is that that top 8 from last year sort of was a turning point in type one.

Good call, but what does that mean for my local metagame, or anyone's for that matter?  We have a tendency to look at T1 in a wide scope.  I'm trying to narrow that scope to my local metagame.  I, and the average player out there, want to win the local power tournament and maybe have a good showing at a big event, like the SCG tournaments or Worlds.  Last years GenCon, and the rise of Tog, had a far reaching impact on my local metagame and on the bigger tournaments around the country.  I am speculating that Control Slaver won't have the impact that Tog did.  My arguments are twofold.  First, difficulty of play will restrict Control Slaver.  Second, how easily can the deck be proxied?  Control Slaver is difficult to build in a 5 proxy environment.  

Just look at Fish.  It is a dominant deck not just because it is easy to play, but because it is very easy to build in a 5 proxy environment.  I'm still far more concerned about Fish than I am about Control Slaver because everyone builds Fish.

[Raven Fire]

 (Fish) is a dominant deck not just because it is easy to play, but because it is very easy to build in a 5 proxy environment.

This is very true.  It is also why I feel that Smmemen-Blue will not become the "next Fish".  It's the decks that don't require a dozen or more $100+ cards that are ideal for the more common 5/7 Proxy events.  Also, if more people tool their decks to handle an expected onslaught of Workshops, wouldn't Fish benefit from the lessened attention?

[Methuselahn]

I believe Blue decks will have an impact in the local metas.   Each to their own degree.  Because Smmenen placed in the Top8 at Worlds and wrote a primer on the deck, people will test the deck.  When they do, they will notice how much it destroys Trini/Crucible decks, even pre-board.  I wouldn't be surprised if a skilled Mono Blue player who can wade through non-Shop decks to the top tables will have a good shot at winning tournies because those other Shop decks hose just about everything else.  If I lived in Italy, I would probably play Mono Blue.  Also, FCG- especially with ESGs, can wreck Crucible toting Shop decks.

Alot of this is trivial as others have mentioned because it really comes down to metagaming.  I think it is quite difficult to evaluate what your local metagame will be like after new tech is shown.  Doubly so when proxies are allowed.

Milton: Be careful, there are good CS players in Minneapolis.  I distinctly remember one I@n Degraff (who t8 in Fri/gencon this year, and championship last year) rip through 4 fully powered, skilled 4cC players at the last Shinders Lotus tourny.  An anomoly, maybe.  but still.

[Komatteru]

Also, if more people tool their decks to handle an expected onslaught of Workshops, wouldn't Fish benefit from the lessened attention?

Workshop decks have a tendancy to wreck Fish.  If a shop deck goes first turn Workshop, mox, large artifact man, the Fish player is going to have a problem.  Hell, even if the fish player goes first, and is met with by Gemstone Mine -> Ancestral, Pearl, Sol Ring, Monolith, Tangle Wire, even holding a Null Rod that will be active next turn isn't going to save him.  I speak from experience on that one.  We saw at the first SCG that Fish did well despite a large presence of Shop decks, but experienced Shop players should have a favorable matchup against average Fish players.

2) Fish may or may not fade. Before I tweaked my build, Fish was not the best matchup for me. Workshop decks can beat it, and I think that's why the other finalists did so well. Any deck with Mystical Tutor and Tinker can beat Fish, which is why it got housed at Worlds. It still goes to say that any amazing player can do well with Fish - it's a harder deck to play than most realize.

Although the World Champion probably doesn't need backup, I'll confirm that Mystical Tutor is indeed the card that breaks Fish's back, having defeated Mark before the addition of Mystical Tutor and then losing to Mystical Tutor -> Tinker about 6 times in row after its addition the week before Gencon.  It's kinda amazing how people really don't seem to latch onto how huge the statement 'You can't lose the game and your opponents can't win the game' really is, to quote Mark himself.  It's even more amazing against a deck whose only answer is to block with a Conclave and lavamancer the Plat away...

[Dante]

I question whether this one top 8 is indicative of anything. One could argue that it's not so much the deck choice which gets you to the top 8, but instead it might depend on your playskill and whether the "stars are in alignment" for you. We could have just as easily seen 3 Dragon decks or all 3 mono-U decks in the top 8, and control Slaver might not have even made it had Shockwave not been given a game loss against Windfall or if two players hadn't drawn in the final round to allow Windfall to sneak in. Control Slaver is a great deck and it was piloted by a very strong player, but I don't think that it suddenly becomes the "deck to watch". It's but one of a large handful of decks with are very competitive in T1. And the top decks still include Fish and 4CC; again, a poor showing at one event doesn't negate the fact that they are powerful decks.

My general take on "the metagame", which seems to coincide with what Peter thinks, is that there are a handful of decks which have the potential to win and it's really the matchups and playskill that mattered - for myself, if the matchup with Smemmen had been pushed off one round, I'd have made top 8 instead of 9th and if the Death Long player I played in round 4 hadn't made a mistake in game 3, he very well might have top 8'd.  From my experiences there, playing a top deck was only the start and playing well throughout all the rounds was crucial.

Bill