Evolution: New deck already obsolete? The Man Show

[TheWhiteDragon]

I have heard lots of discussion about The Man Show on various threads.  I have also heard many "clones" or changes to the deck.  The deck had been played in primal incarnations for about 3 years, winning local shop tourneys, but only hit the big scene at SCG.  I guess it got people's attention.  A suprising thing is that people are trying to take this deck and alter it drastically already.
The main purpose for this thread is to start a discussion on the evolutions of this deck and decks similar to it.  What are the key components?  What are potential game-breaking cards?  What changes have worked and which haven't?  How are testing results?
As its maker I can tell you the many minicombos in it and what are the keys to winning with it, but I would like several other views on what works, what doesn't, and what needs to change.  As my friend Azhrei once said, "nothing is created in a vacuum except sucking."  To avoid this, I want to pool opinions to see that the deck is on the right track of evolution.

[Ric_Flair]

I voted No only because I think that the deck is too skill intensive for people to netdeck.  It looks like it requires a lot of skill and experience to play correctly.

[MuzzonoAmi]

I voted yes. I agree with Ric that it takes skill and experience to play to its fullest potential, but from the bit of tinkering I've done, the deck isn't so compilcated that an above-average player wouldn't be able to do well with it with a bit of practice. This will probably limit it's presence in tournaments, but it will make it a deck that everyone tests against because it will often be in the Top 8, even with only 2 or 3 decks represented at the whole tournament.

[Dante]

Trinisphere and CoW/wasteland mini-combo is quite strong.  I think strong, experienced TnT players can pick this deck up since TnT had a lot of similar decisions (fat vs survival ~ fat vs. chains, fat vs tangle wire/bloodmoon ~ fat vs trinisphere/Cow+waste), although older TnT decks didn't have quite the disruption level of trinisphere/CoW (which generally meant fat was the first choice there).

After doing some random goldfishing with it, it's very resilient to mulligans just like TnT was, where many times even going down to 4 or 5, you're still going 'shop, mox, juggernaut (or something similar), and putting the pressure on (whereas 7/10 has much larger creatures 6 and 8 casting cost and 3 non-shop mana for Thirst, so mulling down lower really hurts) since most threats cost 4 and disruption cost 3 artifact mana or 1B.

Bill

[Wollblad]

I wote no because the deck has an inhereted inconsistency that is concealed by some fatties. If you are lucky, a fat creature might pose a threat, but it won't in general. Your meta game over there seems to have huge problems taking care of large creatures, but only slight changes are needed to render Su-Chi & C.O. more or less useless and that exactly what will happen if people start playing decks like this.

[Smmenen]

Your question is phrased in terms of two extremes.  Reality is more subtle than that.  Will the Man Show or something akin to it be playable?  Certainly.  The metagame choices made will continue through gencon.  Will it die, no.  But your question really suggests one of two extremes when neither is entirely accurate.

[Hi-Val]

I wote no because the deck has an inhereted inconsistency that is concealed by some fatties. If you are lucky, a fat creature might pose a threat, but it won't in general. Your meta game over there seems to have huge problems taking care of large creatures, but only slight changes are needed to render Su-Chi & C.O. more or less useless and that exactly what will happen if people start playing decks like this.

I agree with just about everything here. I liked the deck, as artifact fat is a lot of fun to play. However, I couldn't get past the (lack of) draw in the deck. When playing against any decks with Welders, you have to find that one Trike or Dupe or you will never get an attack phase, ever. Worse, your Su-Chis may Fireblast you every turn.

I think that on a corrollary, TNT should be ripe for a comeback. I think that if TMS adopted Survival of the Fittest, or maybe TNT took Chains over Pillar, you'd come up with something a bit more consistent. I am of the opinion that all decks in T1 now need some form of draw, and this deck needs SOTF.

The main inconsistency I find with all workshop decks it that they RELY on a first-turn workshop to go off. If that doesn't show up for a few turns (especially without drawing), then the deck will sputter out and die. Sure, you've got Crucible, and that's mighty powerful. When Fish drops theirs and a Null Rod and makes sure that you never hit 3 mana, ever, things get messy.

Large artifact men will do well in this metagame dominated by Fish. At the risk of sounding sadly cliche though, this looks like a metagame deck. It has enough hosers in the form of fat men to overcome a lot of Fish. That is, until a Control Slaver player drains some fat and robs every turn away from you.

[Fishhead]

Dante...TnT players can pick this deck up since TnT had a lot of similar decisions...

This is an interesting observation.  I test drove The Man Show this weekend; I went in unconvinced about a couple aspects (1. low, low mana count compared to TNT or wMUD; 2. off color singletons) and walked out with a bit more respect for the deck.  With TNT falling from fashion a lot of decks aren't prepared to face a stream of fast 5/3s and 4/4s.  And Chains is a vigorous hosing for all sorts of draw effects.   Which reminds me:

Hi-Val I am of the opinion that all decks in T1 now need some form of draw, and this deck needs SOTF.

The point of running 3 Chains is that no one gets to draw.  You can't run draw without changing your gameplan here.  

Random observation:

One thing that I particularly did not like was the Razormane.  It may be great if you are playing 'Togs all day (though (2):Regen makes me a decent case for the other Masticore) but having to wait until the draw to ping is a huge disadvantage against Welder-based decks.  So if you list out the creatures you are likely to face these days and decide which (Razormane or Classic Masticore) is better against them I'd lean towards the Classic.  Sure, the mana for Classic is really hard to get in this sort of deck, but at least you can probably kill a Welder before it kills you.

Perhaps TheWhiteDragon can comment on his theories about the Razormane.

[Matt]

The point of running 3 Chains is that no one gets to draw.  You can't run draw without changing your gameplan here.  

Not if your draw engine doesn't say "draw" on it, which Survival doesn't.

[rvs]

Survival is hardly a Draw Engine. It's a tutor engine.

The funny thing is that the best creature in t1 (tm) (= Goblin Welder) changes the rules for it a little

[Purple Hat]

Survival is hardly a Draw Engine. It's a tutor engine.

With Squee it's definately a card advantage engine, and I agree with Hi-Val.  This deck is Begging for it.  I think the right deck here is probably a synthesis of TNT and TMS.  A Chains-TNT if you will.  We could maintain the strengths of TNT while at the same time picking up some of the great synergys and hosers from TMS.  I think that such a deck would be strictly better then either TNT or TMS.

Hale

[Fishhead]

The changes would have to be pretty drastic to fit in SotF.  

First up, there are only 2 Welders in the deck.  Adding SotF implies you want to go to 4 so that you can use the synergies of throwing Artifact Fat into the 'yard and welding it back.  You are really changing the function of the Welder in the deck if you do this.  (See TheWhiteDragons comments about what the Welder is for.)  Then you need the 4 Survivals and at least one Squee.  So thats a 7 card core change and you aren't going to be Tutoring up utility creatures as much because you only have a handful of expensive ones (Razormane, Duplicant, Karn).

Beyond that, there is the mana-base, which is several cards short of the well-tested 28 TnT mana-sources.  Do you change that, do you leave it or do you split the difference and run 26?

Anyway, my point is that TMS is not TNT though they both share a core of cards.  Adding Survivals isnt a bad idea, but I suspect that if you want to do that, it's better to approach it from the TNT end of the equation.  What ~4 cards from TMS would you want to bring to TNT?  (My first thought was always to add 3 Crucibles to a 4 Wasteland version of TNT.)

[Azhrei]

I say yes, because Virginia is U.S. Vintage.

LOL @ mini-combos. Your mini-combo is a ton of mana and LD in your opening hand EVERY DAMN GAME.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

The problem with adding survivals to make it more TNT-like is that the deck begins to rely on the engine.  In playtesting TNT, I found the survival-welder engine to be amazing, but very difficult to get online.  TNT can apply pressure with fat, but can often stall out if it's threats are countered or removed.(as long as the welder(s) is/are taken care of)

TMS is very different from TNT in the fact that it doesn't rely on any particular engine and uses tools like chains, burning wish, stp , etc.  In many TMS discussions I have seens people making suggestions to remove 1 ofs and 2 ofs to improve consistency, but those are the very tools that define the deck.  I think that if good players invest effort into TMS it could be a force in the metagame.(espescially if fish is a large presence)