It would help if some of your numbers were correct evenpence...
This would immediatly negate any % it had going for it almost instantly making some other deck a better choice (this is only true if everybody switched like pence states)
I'm talking about if it had good game against EVERYONE, Lunar, like, even decks designed to beat it, which means that it would stay at a constant 55%. Let's say someone designed a super amazing Isochron Scepter deck which somehow could not be beaten in any particular way. A good example of this might be if every card was unrestricted and unbanned in type 1. Obviously, a Mind's-Desire Storm based combo deck centering around Contract from Below/Tolarian Academy would emerge victorious in every single match. You'd only have the mirror to worry about [And even you bringing in 15 cards against it couldn't stop it]. Luckily, we have Banned and Restricted lists for a reason. My only point was that if there WAS a deck that had good game against everything, everyone would play it. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I really dont know that this is a true statement. Where is your evidence of this, and dont say your testing on MWS[Talking about Oath beating Stax].
Out of all of the sentences I posted, I think this one is the most community-agreeable, actually. I think it's pretty renoun that Oath wins against Stax. I'm not saying they win every game, Lunar. Like I said, I went 8-2 against a GOOD Oath player the other day on MWS. I got Chalice for 2 out constantly, coupled with insane lock pieces. The two games that he did win, he got 3 forces and 2 mana leaks (with a mana leak removed). My deck was just insane in those 10 games.
I know JDizzle loves hearing belcher get called one of the big archetypes in the format...did you maybe forget about Dragon?
I completely forgot about Dragon because I almost never play it, both on MWS and in real life (I actually have yet to play it IRL). As for Belcher, not only have I played against more Belcher than I have Dragon (alot more on MWS, and tons more IRL), but you can't deny JD this - his win percentage is absurd.
But you're right, Dragon is certainly a huge archetype.
Not really, most of the players on MWS are terrible...
It's true. I'm not going to argue that. Oath, however, should still beat Stax, no matter who's playing it.
that one is partly true..ill give you that...however ive seen Stax rip FCG a new one on more than one occasion...
Sure. I play against FCG all the time, and win about 20% of the time (that's probably high, too). When I get three-ball, crucible-strip lock, it's pretty hard for them to break out of it. That's about the only time I win though, heh.
Like I said, there are oddities in the numbers that I've provided.
That and the deck just really isnt THAT great...Im really not sure that it outright beats slaver either...in fact id be happy if I was CS in a big tourney getting to see FCG over a number of other options.
The point of me putting up match analysis for FCG is that to show that the deck isn't THAT great. Even though it demolishes the best deck in the format (Stax), it doesn't win tournaments because it can't win against everyone. Combo just destroys it.
If any of the facts were right on then im sure it might have helped...
I had already said, and I quote:
Now, there are a good bit of arguments in that last paragraph. Stax doesn't always beat storm combo outright, and fish that is tuned to beat Stax certainly can. No one's gonna argue about Oath beating Stax, and CS vs. Stax is more winnable certainly than Oath. Most people will tell you that Stax has a slight advantage over Gifts, and Ubastax has a good marginal advantage over Gifts, however, it can still go either way depending on the builds, etc. Belcher depends on the archetype of Stax. JD will tell you that 5c is a almost a walkover, but Ubastax can be a severe problem (Null Rod).
I said that you could pick some arguments in the last paragraph that I had given. This thread isn't supposed to be for arguments about who beats who. The whole post was to say that I disagree with the assessment that there are decks out there that are good against "any" deck. My main point was that Stax loses to Slaver and Oath, which are high contenders in Vintage right now, probably no.2 and 3. Because Stax loses to those decks, and it is the most dominant deck in the format, surely it has to have something else going for it.
The whole reason for me saying that Stax isn't designed to only beat other good Vintage decks is simply this: If you were to have a no-proxy tournament, where unpowered players would buy in at $5 each, Stax would still own, because it's not that Stax wins because it's tuned to beat other Vintage decks, but it's designed to beat the Vintage format.
Anyway, thanks for the post.
