Duck RUG: Winning way more than 50% of the time!

[AmbivalentDuck]

Just in case someone is watching my weekly results and decides to take RUG to Gencon, I've made a few minor changes to my list.  In addition, I think the RUG list Demars posted has...um...issues with the decks that will make up the top brackets of a tourney.

Here's what I'd play at Gencon if I was trying to generate the smallest negative expected value possible:
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Tarmogoyf
3 Snapcaster Mage
3 Trygon Predator
1 Edric, Spymaster of Trest
1 Vendilion Clique

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Island
1 Forest
3 Volcanic Island
3 Tropical Island
3 Scalding Tarn
3 Misty Rainforest
3 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine

2 Spell Pierce
2 Mental Misstep
4 Force of Will
1 Steel Sabotage
2 Nature's Claim
4 Lightning Bolt

1 Ponder
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Brainstorm
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor

SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 2 Tormod's Crypt
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Red Elemental Blast
SB: 2 Ingot Chewer
SB: 3 Forked Bolt
SB: 1 Mountain

The non-obvious points for folks used to more traditional control shells:
1. Nature's Claim >> Ancient Grudge.  You already have a solid brown matchup, so these slots are better spent addressing Oath. The maindeck basic Forest that this permits also boosts the brown matchup by making Goyfs and Trygons that much easier to cast.
2. Forked Bolt >>>>>>>> Grim Lavamancer. The card makes Guli very very angry in testing. So much so that he uses phrases like "silver bullet." Why give him a turn to deal with your board rape?  Also, Pyroclasm is lucky to take more than two of his critters despite being much harder to cast under his mana denial.
3. Edric is a wincon against almost every deck, but 3 mana is a lot and he's legendary.  Anyone with a decent critter count who omits a singleton Edric is simply wrong.
4. 0x Flusterstorm. This is not a friendly environment for non-Oath combo.  While it's valid to swap them in over Pierces, I'd rather be able to counter Oath and brown cards.  Very few decks now win using Tendrils and instead try to establish a superior board position (even if they do it by drawing 7 cards a turn).
5. Jace vs more countermagic is a subtle consideration based on how long you expect to see games last. If Jace is 2UU for two Brainstorms, you shouldn't be running him.  My playstyle is ultra-light-touch control where I try to be minimalist in my use of control elements. Ie. I only need to disrupt you enough that I win first.  In that vein, I value Jace as a BSC answer who provides late filtering.
6. Vendilion vs Snappies. They're both 3 cmc general answers with Flash.  I'd argue that they do almost exactly the same thing and the only question is whether you prefer playing proactive or reactive answers. I chose my 3-1 balance based on the legendary status of Vendillion and the diminishing returns from multiple Snappies.  The first Snappy gets the best card in my grave.  The second Snappy gets...whatever it gets. Similarly, there's not much removal for Cliques, so the second one I draw is likely to sit in my hand being useless. I think the first Snappy is better than the first Clique, however.
7. Steel Sabotage vs maindeck grave hate is a surprisingly subtle point.  They both do splash damage against common strategies, but mostly address unlikely scenarios. A singleton Ooze can be very cute in this slot.

[boggyb]

Great, thanks for the post. Could you comment a bit on the question of Gush? Have you tried it much, what were your findings, and what would you swap out here for it if you thought it appropriate? Same goes for Preordain -- thanks.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Preordain was cut for more threat density.  Gush only helped when I was already winning.  Consider that most of your mid and late game costs 3-4 mana.

[Klep]

In addition, I think the RUG list Demars posted has...um...issues with the decks that will make up the top brackets of a tourney.

Care to elaborate?

[Guli]

RUG is like a sharp knife, it sticks you early on penetrating your soft buttery stomach. At first you don't really realize it, but while the game progresses the pain increases and when you start fighting back, you also feel it is all too late, but what to do? You fight on, then you die.

[Blue Lotus]

I've always felt guli is in the constant throes of a psychopathic episode. And this confirms my findings.

Did this have to be said?  Does this add to the conversation?  Verbal warning - Prospero

[AmbivalentDuck]

In addition, I think the RUG list Demars posted has...um...issues with the decks that will make up the top brackets of a tourney.

Care to elaborate?

1. It's entirely reliant on 4x FoW and 3x Trygon to fight Oath g1.
2. It has a low critter count and leans on a false silver bullet (Lavamancer), leading to issues with the critter mirror.
3. Maindeck Mountain instead of Forest harms g1 vs brown.
4. 0x Strip effect greatly decreases efficacy against dredge and Cavern of Souls.

[Guli]

I've always felt guli is in the constant throes of a psychopathic episode. And this confirms my findings.

Did this have to be said?  Does this add to the conversation?  Verbal warning - Prospero

Well my post wasn't really contributing either. I am not sure but I believe it was the first time I posted something irrelevant like that.

I truly believe in the RUG aggro control though, it is on fire and spicey. Can't really eat that can we? As a beatdown player, the match up never feels at ease. Delver's outrace you, your bears get burned alive and then they get burned alive again with Snaps. There is this constant and intense pressure and suffering.

When playing blue drain/tv-key/tinker/ywill, you can actually apply your plan. When playing Duck, his cheap spells get through and ruin my board or tempo. But I do believe this issue can be solved and then the match up will drastically change in my favor! Because RUG is not really equiped to handle big swarms of bears. It usually is all in and 'just on time' wins. But they are WINS. So that is a real problem. Right now, I would take RUG instead of GWB Cavern to a big event. Cause the human deck is not ready and has some issues left that need to be solved.

[A.-1.]

Grim Lavamancer: Why give him a turn to deal with your board rape?
Similarly, there's not much removal for Cliques, so the second one I draw is likely to sit in my hand being useless.

I maybe jumping to conclusions here, but are you saying that Lavamancer isn't as good as some people think it is because it A) is a creature in a removal-heavy format and B) takes a turn to do anything? But multiple Cliques are bad because this actually is not a removal-heavy format?

Anyone with a decent critter count who omits a singleton Edric is simply wrong.

All of the recent Fish lists inspired/piloted by Mike Noble that have made top 8s without Edric would disagree.

Steel Sabotage vs maindeck grave hate is a surprisingly subtle point.  They both do splash damage against common strategies, but mostly address unlikely scenarios. A singleton Ooze can be very cute in this slot.

Unlikely scenarios? Ooze deals with many common strategies beyond Dredge (Crucible in Landstill and Prison-style Shops, Snapcaster, Lavamancer, Welder in Strix control, Tarmo, and Yawg Will come to mind). I believe that Ooze deserves more credit than it is given. Which is why I like a 2/2 split of Tarmo and Ooze because the former is never reliably a 3/4. Sometimes Tarmo can be that big beater you want that takes down Lodestones, but I've found that too often he's just a dumb Squire or a 2/3 with no way of consistently getting a Sorcery into the bin.

[quicksilvervii]

 In addition, I think the RUG list Demars posted has...um...issues with the decks that will make up the top brackets of a tourney.

For the record, I have had NO problem getting into the finals every time I played this at an event.

I only lost one round before cut in two tournaments combined, and went on to beat them in top 8.

My only losses in the last two events I played in were the one mentioned above, and the two in back to back finals.

That being said, I don't think the maindeck Forest/Land issue is nearly as big of a factor against brown as changing the CC from 1-2 to 3-4.

I prefer the smaller CC list.

[Prospero]

I've always felt guli is in the constant throes of a psychopathic episode. And this confirms my findings.

Did this have to be said?  Does this add to the conversation?  Verbal warning - Prospero

Well my post wasn't really contributing either. I am not sure but I believe it was the first time I posted something irrelevant like that.

I truly believe in the RUG aggro control though, it is on fire and spicey. Can't really eat that can we? As a beatdown player, the match up never feels at ease. Delver's outrace you, your bears get burned alive and then they get burned alive again with Snaps. There is this constant and intense pressure and suffering.

When playing blue drain/tv-key/tinker/ywill, you can actually apply your plan. When playing Duck, his cheap spells get through and ruin my board or tempo. But I do believe this issue can be solved and then the match up will drastically change in my favor! Because RUG is not really equiped to handle big swarms of bears. It usually is all in and 'just on time' wins. But they are WINS. So that is a real problem. Right now, I would take RUG instead of GWB Cavern to a big event. Cause the human deck is not ready and has some issues left that need to be solved.

Regardless of whether or not anyone contributed, here are a couple of basic tenets that, I think, we need to operate on:

1.  TMD should be a place that is conducive to sharing ideas.

2.  Comments that can easily be misinterpreted detract from efforts to build or strategize.

If I'm a player looking to improve my game, or looking to see how others think about a build, I shouldn't have to wade through innuendo or inside jokes in order to come to a point.  Regardless of whether or not Blue Lotus' point was meant to be lighthearted, it can be read in a really mean fashion.  I don't believe that he meant it this way, but why should I have to consider multiple interpretations of something when we can just be clear in our words and thoughts?

Let's try to leave comments that can be easily misconstrued aside as we look to build on the deck specifically discussed in this thread.  No more snarky comments, no more backseat modding, or appropriate action will be taken.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Grim Lavamancer: Why give him a turn to deal with your board rape?
Similarly, there's not much removal for Cliques, so the second one I draw is likely to sit in my hand being useless.

I maybe jumping to conclusions here, but are you saying that Lavamancer isn't as good as some people think it is because it A) is a creature in a removal-heavy format and B) takes a turn to do anything? But multiple Cliques are bad because this actually is not a removal-heavy format?

Lavamancer comes in from the sideboard while Clique is maindeck.  The amount of removal each should expect to face differs as Lavamancer comes in  only to fight a removal war.

Anyone with a decent critter count who omits a singleton Edric is simply wrong.

All of the recent Fish lists inspired/piloted by Mike Noble that have made top 8s without Edric would disagree.

Steve once published an excellent article where he noted the absence of Mana Crypt from many well-performing brown builds.  We can all agree that this is an erroneous omission despite the performance of the builds.  Good performance does not imply that there is no room for improvement, even major improvement.

Steel Sabotage vs maindeck grave hate is a surprisingly subtle point.  They both do splash damage against common strategies, but mostly address unlikely scenarios. A singleton Ooze can be very cute in this slot.

Unlikely scenarios? Ooze deals with many common strategies beyond Dredge (Crucible in Landstill and Prison-style Shops, Snapcaster, Lavamancer, Welder in Strix control, Tarmo, and Yawg Will come to mind). I believe that Ooze deserves more credit than it is given. Which is why I like a 2/2 split of Tarmo and Ooze because the former is never reliably a 3/4. Sometimes Tarmo can be that big beater you want that takes down Lodestones, but I've found that too often he's just a dumb Squire or a 2/3 with no way of consistently getting a Sorcery into the bin.

Yes.  Blowing out Dredge off a turn 1 Ooze is an unlikely scenario.  Steel Sabotage and Ooze are both Vintage-worthy cards, but their inclusion here would be to have outs to turn 1 BSC and dredge game 1.  I think the hard counter against Shops is better than the advantage in the critter mirror, but it's a minor consideration compared to the question of whether I expect to see more Tinkers and Shops OR more critters and dredge.

[AmbivalentDuck]

For the record, I have had NO problem getting into the finals every time I played this at an event.

Again, room for improvement does not imply that it isn't performing well in the first place.

That being said, I don't think the maindeck Forest/Land issue is nearly as big of a factor against brown as changing the CC from 1-2 to 3-4.

I prefer the smaller CC list.

That was my thought while designing this list.  Nature's Claim hits before things get out of control and you're buried under the weight of their board.

[A.-1.]

Let me preface by saying that I have never piloted RUG in a tournament, and all of my observations are strictly from testing and watching others play the deck. I'm not saying your deck is inferior, and I'm definitely not saying that DeMars deck is better. I'm just very curious as to your thought process that has lead you to this point.

Grim Lavamancer: Why give him a turn to deal with your board rape?
Similarly, there's not much removal for Cliques, so the second one I draw is likely to sit in my hand being useless.

I maybe jumping to conclusions here, but are you saying that Lavamancer isn't as good as some people think it is because it A) is a creature in a removal-heavy format and B) takes a turn to do anything? But multiple Cliques are bad because this actually is not a removal-heavy format?

Lavamancer comes in from the sideboard while Clique is maindeck.  The amount of removal each should expect to face differs as Lavamancer comes in  only to fight a removal war.

I apologize for the confusion on my end. While you compared Forked Bolt and Lavamancer directly, I should have realized you were referring to your sideboard. I had Lavamancer as a maindeck card in my mind.

Anyone with a decent critter count who omits a singleton Edric is simply wrong.

All of the recent Fish lists inspired/piloted by Mike Noble that have made top 8s without Edric would disagree.

Steve once published an excellent article where he noted the absence of Mana Crypt from many well-performing brown builds.  We can all agree that this is an erroneous omission despite the performance of the builds.  Good performance does not imply that there is no room for improvement, even major improvement.

*slight tangent from RUG* I don't read any of Steve's articles. From that example, I don't think we all can agree that Mana Crypt is an auto-include. The last several times I played Espresso and if I were to play it in the future, I would not include Mana Crypt in my list. From my limited success with Espresso sans Mana Crypt in the past (back-to-back top 4s in 6 round tournies), I would argue that my build was better off without Crypt. In testing and tournament play, I was much happier with the Crypt's replacement mana source. /tangent

I wouldn't disagree that successful decks might have room for improvement(s). I just don't understand how you can unequivocally make a statement about Edric like that. Aren't your results based entirely on your weekly online tournaments? I would have no problem with a similar statement that was less absolute. Something like, "In my testing, any deck with a decent critter count should run Edric because..."

Steel Sabotage vs maindeck grave hate is a surprisingly subtle point.  They both do splash damage against common strategies, but mostly address unlikely scenarios. A singleton Ooze can be very cute in this slot.

Unlikely scenarios? Ooze deals with many common strategies beyond Dredge (Crucible in Landstill and Prison-style Shops, Snapcaster, Lavamancer, Welder in Strix control, Tarmo, and Yawg Will come to mind). I believe that Ooze deserves more credit than it is given. Which is why I like a 2/2 split of Tarmo and Ooze because the former is never reliably a 3/4. Sometimes Tarmo can be that big beater you want that takes down Lodestones, but I've found that too often he's just a dumb Squire or a 2/3 with no way of consistently getting a Sorcery into the bin.

Yes.  Blowing out Dredge off a turn 1 Ooze is an unlikely scenario.  Steel Sabotage and Ooze are both Vintage-worthy cards, but their inclusion here would be to have outs to turn 1 BSC and dredge game 1.  I think the hard counter against Shops is better than the advantage in the critter mirror, but it's a minor consideration compared to the question of whether I expect to see more Tinkers and Shops OR more critters and dredge.

Granted, turn one Ooze beating Dredge is unlikely (I've only seen it twice in a tournament), but it does allow a Fish or aggro deck a shot at stealing game one. Something that is normally not possibly with this type of deck unless you're also running maindeck Cage or the like. I don't think Tinker into BSC is an issue today or at least nowhere near where it was when some people were calling for the the banning of BSC. I guess Sabotage is decent when the Shops pilot doesn't already have Chalice at one out. Against your Grudge-less build though, CotV at one seems like an absolute house. With CotV at one being such a common play, I'm skeptical that Sabotage is a hard counter as often as you'd like it to be. Whereas, Ooze is almost never dead in any matchup and is a house in others.

[AmbivalentDuck]

I wouldn't disagree that successful decks might have room for improvement(s). I just don't understand how you can unequivocally make a statement about Edric like that. Aren't your results based entirely on your weekly online tournaments? I would have no problem with a similar statement that was less absolute. Something like, "In my testing, any deck with a decent critter count should run Edric because..."

It's hard to describe what Edric does without you having seen it in action.  It's not as cleanly game-ending as Jace or Yawg Will, instead it's more like the start of an avalanche.  The probably of winning down the road starkly increases, but the probability of winning in the next turn or two is unaffected.

[A.-1.]

That helps give me a slightly clearer picture of Edric. I can't remember ever seeing the card played in a tournament setting, and I don't have own the cards to play Fish/aggro. Perhaps I'll give Edric a try on Cockatrice to see for myself.

[Samoht]

...and I'm definitely not saying that DeMars deck is better...

Whoa there, back the truck up. It's Hejduk's deck. Let's not falsely attribute lists/cards to DeMars, he does that enough on his own.

As far as Crypt, A-1 is correct. Espresso Stax does not want to lose games to rolls on a Mana Crypt. Steve is an authority on blue that the format needs to respect - when he talks about blue strategies. He is by no means an authority on Workshop decks or strategies, so his articles and comments about non-blue things carry little weight with me.

I think Noble's list would do well with an inclusion of Edric, but that's not automatically true either. He could have a good reason for not running it or advising others to run it. I'd ask for his input as he is the one really pushing that archetype to success.

[A.-1.]

That's my bad again. I don't read DeMars' articles either. I didn't realize the list Duck was referring to in the original post was actually Mike's. I should have figured it out from Mike's earlier post.

I know Mike, Noble this time, has a list of potential creatures for Noble Fish (a partial list is in the Noble Fish thread). That list isn't comprehensive, which is probably why Edric isn't on there, but I'm sure it's on his radar somewhere. Recent builds are packed with a ton of 4-ofs though, so I'm not sure where Edric fits exactly.

[msg67183]

Just curious, since I want to try and play Espresso Stax, what is replacing Mana Crypt? Reason I ask is because I have always thought Mana Crypt was an auto include in all Shops lists.

[quicksilvervii]

...and I'm definitely not saying that DeMars deck is better...

Whoa there, back the truck up. It's Hejduk's deck. Let's not falsely attribute lists/cards to DeMars, he does that enough on his own.

In the interest of fair credit, this was Soly's idea with minimal tweaking of my own.

[Samoht]

...and I'm definitely not saying that DeMars deck is better...

Whoa there, back the truck up. It's Hejduk's deck. Let's not falsely attribute lists/cards to DeMars, he does that enough on his own.

In the interest of fair credit, this was Soly's idea with minimal tweaking of my own.

I accept that much, though the list in question was linked from your results.

[Ufactor]

Talrand, even with minor testing, seems like a card that causes blow outs on his own.  What role, if any, does Talrand, Sky Summoner play in RUG-Delver?  Does his inclusion fundamentally change how the deck works?

[AmbivalentDuck]

Talrand, even with minor testing, seems like a card that causes blow outs on his own.  What role, if any, does Talrand, Sky Summoner play in RUG-Delver?  Does his inclusion fundamentally change how the deck works?

He competes with Jace, but leaves you even more susceptible to Pyroclasm.  I'd argue that you need resilience and answers, not late game wincons.

Also, if you're flooding the board with Drakes, who cares that you had a 3/2 on turn 1?