[discussion] so like, is null rod even any good any more?

[mrieff]

That deck just isn't very good.  It has a mediocre level of power in comparison to every other deck.  With Null Rod losing attention, it just ceases to be as bad.

You're dead on here. The deck is, if nothing else, horribly inconsistent, even relative to [other] Workshop decks, and just plain weak when it tries to be consistent. mrrieff has had alot of success with the deck, but it doesn't resemble the type 2 derivatives that I think you're thinking of to matter in this discussion, and even that deck is weaker than TMS or Stacker in alot of cases.

I think that there is room for improvement with regard to T1 modular decks, as they haven't been explored to the full extent. Null Rod is the main reason for that.

Having that said, I think that Modular decks can be a competitive deckchoice when the amount of Null Rods decrease. I have indeed had very solid results in highly-powered metagames with versions I think are not optimal yet, although improving each time. When the T1 community will take the decktype more serious and will help to improve the deck, a lot more is possible than its current status. The reduction in Null rods is required to warrant that attention however, as it is the bane of this deck.

More on topic: The dicsussion whether the reduced amount of Null Rods is correct from a theoretical perspective, is interesting. However, fact is that currently there is an actual trend of playing less and less of them. (leaving aside the question whether that should be the case). Maybe we should also discuss more the impact that fact has on the metagame. And maybe I should return to my beloved Ravagers soon

[ELD]

I feel that Null Rod is really only playable vs control slaver.  When I play tog, I'm usually glad to use deed to remove their entire team, and the null rod.  Vs control slaver it is still only sometimes good.  I try and think about it like this.  When I'm contemplating how good a card is, I ask myself how much I'd give up in CA in order to begin the game with the card on the stack or in play.  

To explain, lets look at another example, Moat vs Tog.  From a control standpoint, would you be willing to start with 5 cards in hand, to begin the game with moat in play vs tog.  Figure this is similar to turn one land lotus moat.  Of course, this would not be worth it.  Tog will out draw you easily, and remove moat when it's ready to win.

The differance with null rod however, is it stops control slaver from truely abusing it's card drawing.  While they will draw extra moxes, they will not be able to use them as effectively.  They cannot accelerate the deck without either removing the null rod, or welding fat into play.  

Even with Null rod being better than average hate, I still feel it is a losing card.  I feel, that if a fish player mulls to 6, and draws a null rod, I'm going to win when I'm playing control slaver.  The chances of them having a balanced hand have become much worse.  They now need to draw a perfect blend of card draw, creatures, land and counters to be in the game.  

My theory on hate has always been based on CA.  I feel that a card that does not impact the game state is -1 CA.  (I feel casting river boa vs a combo deck is -1 CA as well, but that's another story)  If null rod doesn't affect any cards I play during the match, then it is actually hurting my opponent.  They have a wasted card, that would have been better as a threat, counter, or anything else of value.  The problem with pro active cards, like null rod, moat, and dampening matrix, is they can be "played around" to the point where they are hurting the player who is counting on them to carry them to victory.  Same with so many cards in type 1.  Good players play around them.  I can't tell you how many times I've fought out of Null Rod and Dampening Matrix with Control Slaver.  Nearly every match at the double lotus tourney earlier this year I had to deal with one or the other.  It always hurt my opponent more than me.  

The true problem is that these "hate" cards are always about control.  The root of all control is based in CA.  If you play a card and lose -1 CA because it doesn't do anything that matters, you are walking away from the very heart of control.  Trading 1 for 1 only works when you're out drawing your opponent, and it's a lot harder to do when playing with pro active hate that doesn't draw you any cards.