Salvagers.dec: How we made a bad deck a bit better.

[bebe]

Just to clarify - I'm not naysaying the concept , just the deck as it stands. You are quite correct that many of the decks that have become successfull began with builds that were far from optimal.  The deck indeed might evolve into something that is consistently competitive in a field of competent players with good decks.

I applaud any effort to innovate so we agree that constructive crtiticism is in order. Read VGB's post carefully. I agree with it almost entirely. I have played Dragon decks designed in conjumction with Dicemanx that did have main deck alternatives to a Dragon win and also as VGB stated have played Dragon or Force from my hand for the win.

Gamble just does not cut it in Type 1. Tinker/Jar is too strong to ignore in a deck that wants Spellbomb in the grave and Lotus in play the same turn. Tinker also allows you a back up plan. Your mathematics do not compute as the key is cc and flexibility. Tinker has more flexibility in a deck where you can abuse the graveyard.

The current frame work is just not good enough. There are too many counters, not enough good draw and suboptimal tutors. I could see changing about twelve cards in the deck as a start. I'm not going to suggest precise changes as i would need to play and the test extensively and I spent last night and will spend the next week on my newest budget deck which has fallen under critcism that I have listened to and made adjustments for.

[AngryPheldagrif]

You still seem to be mystified as to why people don't think your deck will ever be good. Let me see if I can shed some light on that subject...

*stuff about my testing*

Would you prefer I instead posted my records against each deck in testing? As percentages and such generally result in excessive flaming, I instead evaluated each match not based on who wins, but how you should play to win. If you read each part carefully, rather than skimming, you'd see that I point out strengths, weaknesses, and general points of interest for each match. Is 2-land Belcher an autoloss? No. It's just highly dependent on getting immediate control of the situation, just like how 4cControl, Hulk, and just about every other deck packing 4 Forces of Will and a crapload of pitchables does.

. . .because every single person other than you (and the surreal LotusHead) has identified serious flaws in your deck:

Really? I wasn't aware that "Rector > yur p.o.s" counted as 'identifying serious flaws in my deck'. And furthermore, 'identifying serious flaws in my deck' is rarely accompanied by some good old 'identifying cards and strategies to fix or alleviate flaws in my deck'. I do believe one of the founding pillars of making a constructive post is 'If you have nothing to add, don't post.'

but Spellbomb is hardly a finisher and a crappy cycler to boot.

Spot removal for manlands, Welders, etc. is tech I hear

Gamble is bad in this deck. If you can't see that, then you are playtesting in a vacuum. Of any deck to date, WGD is the best suited to abuse Gamble, yet it doesn't. Once you start analyzing why WGD doesn't play Gamble, you'll see why this deck shouldn't.

1) Gamble. Too situational. It is virtually common sense that if you are winning games with this card, then you are playing against bad decks.

I will just give you a friendly heads up that you have in no way explained why it is a bad card in your post.

2) Draw Sevens with Counterspells Neutral . Playing 8 counters + Duress and including draw sevens is just hokey

Draw-7s are on their way out. I'm not so dense that I'm going to ignore a valid point when I see it.

3) You advocate a control strategy that dies to random hate - which control is supposed to resist by running basics and other maindeck tech such as CARD ADVANTAGE. All you have is Cunning Wish to deal with the fact that Null Rod kills you, Trinisphere+Sphere of Resistance kill you, Coffin Purge kills you, Blood Moon kills you - the list goes on for miles.

Um, those hardly count as 'random hate', and a lot of decks die to things like that. What the hell does Draw-7 do against a Trinisphere? Answer, they Force it or lose. Most versions don't even play the Hurkyl's Recall/Chain of Vapor anymore. And I've already explained why graveyard hate is not an auto-loss.

The only way control decks stay in control is by having answers to their opponent's threats, and it's painfully obvious this deck runs out of gas fairly quickly.

Really, and I don't suppose that you've noticed the 14 answers that I'm playing as well as the multitude of draw and tutors? I'm painfully aware that the card drawing is not as high as Keeper, but thats not the point. This deck only sits in for the 'long haul' until it finds it convinient to go infinite and win.

To put it simply, you need to address every one of Bebe's points - stop picking and choosing your battles, because therein you expose your weaknesses.

You may have missed the part of the post about how 'these are things most combo decks have problems with'. I only quoted the ones that I disagreed with.

Conclusion, we need a brand new 'positivity forum', where people post lists and others try to improve them, instead of carefully explaining (see- not explaining at all) why some other deck is better.

-Dan

PS: If you aren't going to make a suggestion for improvement, STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY THREAD. Por favor, senor.

[VGB]

Really? I wasn't aware that "Rector > yur p.o.s" counted as 'identifying serious flaws in my deck'. And furthermore, 'identifying serious flaws in my deck' is rarely accompanied by some good old 'identifying cards and strategies to fix or alleviate flaws in my deck'. I do believe one of the founding pillars of making a constructive post is 'If you have nothing to add, don't post.'

I consider my arguments to be some of the most constructive in this thread, because nowhere do I state that you should abandon the deck, but rather I am helping to identify glaring weakness in your build.  It is not my job to build or test your deck for you.  When you have sufficiently convinced me of the viability of this deck, then maybe that will change, but until then, you are going to have to face attacks on your logic.  Don't take it personally - the people of TMD aren't stupid, and don't want to waste their time and energy frivolously.  Posting on a thread is infinitely quicker and easier than slapping together a pile of cardboard or looking up scrubs on App.

Spot removal for manlands, Welders, etc. is tech I hear

Then you've traded 1 for 1 - serious tech indeed.  Fire/Ice does the same thing for the same cost, can at least potentially take out 2 dorks, and pitches to FoW, etc.

Of course Pyrite Spellbomb is the perfect enabler for the combo-kill - but saying it is a strong card outside the combo is fallacious.

I will just give you a friendly heads up that you have in no way explained why it (Gamble) is a bad card in your post.

Read my prior posts, which I seriously doubt you did, from the tone of this comment.  I explain succinctly enough.  I also invite you to act as your own Devil's Advocate and try to realize its weaknesses as a logical exercise, which is the mark of a truly great deckbuilder.  A person loses credibility when they can't say anything bad about their own card choices - it makes them appear senselessly stubborn.

Draw-7s are on their way out. I'm not so dense that I'm going to ignore a valid point when I see it.

Well, now for my turn to be the D.A.  A stray D7 can sometimes save you from a losing situation by bringing you back into the game when you were previously depleted, and the randomness of the new hand (made less so with Brainstorm sometimes) can often unbalance the game in your favor.  Whether D7's are included in a control configuration such as this may end up being a meta consideration, rather than just an automatic inclusion/exclusion from an optimal build standpoint.

Um, those hardly count as 'random hate', and a lot of decks die to things like that. What the hell does Draw-7 do against a Trinisphere? Answer, they Force it or lose. Most versions don't even play the Hurkyl's Recall/Chain of Vapor anymore. And I've already explained why graveyard hate is not an auto-loss.

Indeed hate is not random - it is ubiquitous.

Really, and I don't suppose that you've noticed the 14 answers that I'm playing as well as the multitude of draw and tutors? I'm painfully aware that the card drawing is not as high as 4cControl, but thats not the point. This deck only sits in for the 'long haul' until it finds it convinient to go infinite and win.

Draw = card advantage.  Note that Brainstorm is card quality advantage, but not necessarily card advantage.  Increasing your grip is how control stays in control, otherwise those FoW's will leave you straggling behind your opponent, because you are trading him 2 for 1.

You may have missed the part of the post about how 'these are things most combo decks have problems with'. I only quoted the ones that I disagreed with.

All you seem to do is disagree - where is an updated list?  Where can we see the results of your latest playtesting?  What are some weaknesses you have found?  What new "tech" have you found, that works better than previous builds?  What matchups improve?

Conclusion, we need a brand new 'positivity forum', where people post lists and others try to improve them, instead of carefully explaining (see- not explaining at all) why some other deck is better.

It takes some serious bait to catch the big fish in TMD: why should you be shown more preference than anyone else who posts an unproven deck?

My advice for you is to start reading people's posts, and showing a little interest in what they have to say, rather than just whining all the time about how people aren't taking the time to playtest for you.  There are no free lunches on TMD.

[AngryPheldagrif]

Look, I guess I've been under the impression that people would like to know about specific matches without giving percentages, as is the usual primer policy. You guys want results? Fine. But don't bitch about it.

Everything we tested against was fully powered, with lists pulled directly from the current optimal lists. I didn't bother including tie games and other inconsequencial information. If for some reason I left out something vital, by all means tell me. This is only a partial list so far, because I really want to get to bed. I'll add the rest of the results later.

Dragon
Total # of games: 13
Wins by Salvager: 9
Conclusion: Salvager just wails the crap out of Dragon. Dragon could pretty much never pull off the early wins under threat of severe countering. Even the Xantid Swarms were too little too late and more often than not were just bait for a tutored up Spellbomb. Salvagers rarely had a problem going off.
*note* All of Dragons wins were post-board. In all our matches, Salvagers would take game 1 and then the 2 decks would either split games 2 and 3 or Salvagers would win. Dragon managed to pull of a single 2-1 match win.

2-land Belcher
Total # of games: 6
Wins by Salvager: 3
Conclusion: An even split. Sometimes they won, sometimes I did. The 2 matches were 2-1 and 1-2. More dependent on good draws than much else. Forces were the key, of course, but just having counters in general was the only reason I survived.
*note* Of the 3 games I won, 2 opened with a Force and a blue card and the other (in which I went first) had a Sapphire, land, and Mana Drain. Of the 3 I lost, I had a Force in one and a broken hand in another, but lost to redundant combo. A point of interest was that, had I not had a combo, they would have twice won on turn 1 and the other 4 times on turn 2. All three of the games I lost were on turn 2.

FCG
Total # of games: 5
Wins by Salvager: 4
Conclusion: I don't even want to go into this. I pretty much just fucked them over by hacking out their vital pieces with counters, then letting the infinite fun stuff well outrace their Goblin beatdown.
*note* The one game I lost had me mulligan a questionable hand into an even worse one, then proceed into mana screw while I took Lackey hits on turns 2 and 3 for a pair of extra Piledrivers.

Stax (Mono-brown)
Total # of games: 3
Wins by Salvager: 2
Conclusion: Out of this bit of testing, I was able to squeeze through a pair of victories in a trio of tight games. It mostly came down to me being able to hold off the auto-win cards (Trinisphere and Sphere of Resistance) and then Mana Draining into a kill situation with Lotus in hand.
*note* All 3 games were long and drawn out. Mainly came down to topdecking, in which I drew a ton of tutors and such while he got more control pieces that didn't help. The game he won saw him keep an opening hand of Workshop, Trini, Trini and topdecked another one after I Forced and Wished those 2 away.

Stax (With Welder)
Total # of games: 2
Wins by Salvager: 0
Conclusion: Both games were fairly close, but the deck is simply geared up with too many 'you lose' cards in the maindeck. I'd be just barely keeping up with his Stacks and Wires, and then he'd slip through a Welder and I'd usually have to scoop once he saw a Sphere.
*note* This is indeed probably the worst matchup possible for this deck.

7/10 Split
Total # of games: 5
Wins by Salvager: 2
Conclusion: It pretty much went:
Game 1 = Titan, you lose.
Game 2 = Drain it, Wish for Disenchant, combo out.
Game 3 = Titan, you lose.
Game 4 = Force, Force, Cunning Wish, Drain, win.
Game 5 = Titan, float mana to Wish for Disenchant, set Chalice for 2, lose.
*note* We never did get a chance to finish off the second match. It pretty much came down to keeping Welders off the board until I could Drain into a huge combo turn, Cunning Wishing for a removal spell if necessary.



I've got the rest of the results somewhere, I'll find them later. Goodnight.
-Dan

PS: Expect some of the worse results to be coming up later. 4cControl really wailed on this thing. And Fish was really annoying.

[Matt]

PS: If you aren't going to make a suggestion for improvement, STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY THREAD. Por favor, senor.

If you aren't going to listen when people talk sense to you, stay off these forums.[/color]