If given the choice between "Threat" or "Defense"

[Norm4eva]

Let's say Deck A, aka Threat X, shapes the metagame.  It is the premier deck in a given format which beckons to be answered; if you have no tech against Threat X, you lose.  Done.

Then let's assume there exists Deck B, or Defense Y.  Defense Y consistently ruins Threat X; it is built to answer this deck and it does so with a high success rate.

There's a big tourney tomorrow.  You've built both decks, and obviously may only take one.  Which do you bring?


I should have made this a poll but I don't quite know how, since I'm a damn fool with about 6 empty cans of High Life next to me.  What can I say, my wife says it's good for the allergies.

[Grand Inquisitor]

First,

High Life...my wife says it's good for the allergies

Keep'r

Threat X or Defense Y...Which do you bring?

Sometimes it depends, but generally X, almost definitely always X.  Because:

1) Sometimes you don't get a turn 1 to play Y...even against "control"
2) FoW has increasingly gotten better as an offensive tool
3) In T1, when in doubt, play broken cards and cast your spells

[i_set_fire]

Depends on how good deck B, defense Y is against the rest of the meta.  If it scoops to everything but deck A then it's probably not the deck to be playing. 

Also, take into consideration which deck you are more comfortable playing.  If deck A kicks ass but you suck at it, then it won't be kicking anyone's ass but yours.

[Evenpence]

If there are only those two decks in said metagame, the hate deck is clearly the deck to play.  You need a deck C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and LMNOP to be accurate.  Because that's not really happening here, let's just as you assume that deck A is the best deck in the metagame, there are then tons of suboptimal choices that people play just because of bad reasons.

Then, you have deck B which is Deck A's nemesis.  Most people would bring deck A because it's heads and tails better than the rest of the format.

Clearly, in this case, bringing deck B is still the better choice because you're going to hit deck A more often than not.  Your best bet is to kill some cards from deck B for the deck B vs. deck B matchup, and devote your sideboard to a few anti-hate cards that deck A might bring in against you, and devote most of your sideboard for general answers to the rest of the format, focusing on the mirror match.

Boom.  Score one for the Nature Force.

[CorwinB]

If Deck B is really narrow and rolls over to the rest of the field (or to a sufficiently played Tier 2 deck), then Deck A tweaked for the mirror could still end the best choice. Recently Standard had a similar situation : Jund was everywhere, winning everything, and decks built on hating Jund in order to develop a decent matchup against it (earlier revisions of UWR control) had horrible matchups versus Vampires.

So if Deck B is solid enough that it has a decent matchup against the rest of the field, then I would play it. If Deck A is the only deck Deck B can beat, then Deck A tweaked for the mirror and with some anti-Deck B tech would be the safer choice.

[vassago]

Deck A for sure.

Better answer: Just play oath.   

[Cyberpunker]

Threat Deck always. Them having to worry about you >>>>You have to worry about them.

[TheShop]

I have almost always and will take up the defense from now on.  I can't provide a reason other than this:

My favorite football game last year was watching Nebraska kick the ass of the lauded Texas offense all day long.  Colt was on the ground nearly 100% of the game under a huge pile of Nebraska jerseys.  We lost the game...all defense and no offense leads to this at times.  But consider the task at hand.  Every overwhelming offense breeds pomp and publicity.(ie USC before getting stomped
by Texas D in the national championship a few years back).  The agressor always gets the glory- I guess I am addicted to the struggle of beating the proud and bringing them back to reality.

[Rico Suave]

You take whichever deck gives you the best chance to win the event.

[TheBrassMan]

A classic and interesting question in regards to how it's worded.  As other people have mentioned, the rest of the metagame is important here.  Realistically speaking Threat X is going to have a better matchup against the field, but it's pretty unlikely Defense Y is worthless against the field on its own.  In this hypothetical situation, if Defense Y really just beats Threat X, and isn't losing some huge amount of ground against the rest of the field, Defense Y just makes sense.  That's just plain old rock paper scissors without the scissors, easy and straightforward game theory.

But historically, I've almost never played Defense Y over Threat X, and the amount of times I won with Defense Y were even smaller.  Theres a big hole, which is the fact that Defense Y doesn't really beat Threat X all of the time.  Even the best matchups in vintage never break 70% or so (with the possible exception Ichorid vs Deck With No Sideboard).  Far more important though is whether or not Defense Y even exists, given the definition provided.

Many, many times throughout vintage history, and I'm sure magic history, decks have been designed specifically to hate on another deck.  Many, many of these decks never even had a 50-50 matchup against the deck they were trying to beat, nevermind an extremely favorable one.  It's important to recognize this, as analyzing this "Threat X" vs "Defense Y" could be really misleading.  There are a number of reasons misjudgement here can happnen; As a modern example, you could identify Time Vault as "Threat X" and build a deck loaded with Null Rods and Shatters, and lose game after game to most Tezzeret decks that have no problem winning with Tinker, Tendrils, or Jace. 

The takeaway:  Defense Y is better, but be *really* careful that you've actually identified Defense Y, and not just "built a hate deck".  And of course, don't forget Scissors.

[arctic79]

Great question with so many potential answers. 
First, how much of the metagame is Deck X.
2nd how comfortable is Player A with deck X & deck Y because personal play styles are a huge factor in how well a player performs with a deck.
3rd why not play Deck Z (where Z will never = Oath) and come out of left field and no one is expecting it.

I will always choose Deck Z, although I admit I would crash and burn most spectacularly.

[BruiZar]

I think playing the Defensive deck is better when isolating the issue. The 2 most typical threat decks are storm and dredge. Spheres beat storm and graveyard removal beats dredge.

These deck have a lot of troubles and should lose against their defensive counters. The problem however, is that the defensive decks typically run a very low number of hate cards which make the matchups inconsistent. If I were to play 4 T.Crypt 4 Rav Trap 4 Relic of Progenitus and 4 wasteland + 1 Strip Mine and maybe even more, I am pretty sure I would win 90% of the games I played against Dredge. If I only run 2 relics and 2 traps, I can get unlucky by not drawing into the hate at the right time.