What decks can "transform"?

[Pitlord]

I read the article on the vintage forums about transformational sideboards, and have played a couple transitional sideboards, and still play one, but what decks can succeed a lot when they use this plan? I know of / play the following tranformations:

Cereberial Assassin --> Dragon
Gifts <---> Control Slaver
Stax <---> Workshop aggro (it actually worked pretty well...)
Control Slaver --> Oath
TPS ---> Oath
Oath <---> Gifts

What other decks are around that could benifite from a suprise factor? Are there any other popular transformations out there that people play? How well do all of these transformations work, and what matches would you and would you not transform for?

I currently play a burning slaver list with a burning/cunning sideboard, and then a transformation into gifts, adding more gifts, mana leaks, DSC, and belcher. It works pretty well, and absolutely helps a ton against oath, but would I be better off with plain hate? I would like to know the opinions of some more experienced people and what they think about transforming decks.

[Evenpence]

I can agree to the Stax-Workshop Aggro sideboard.  I've tried it a few times, with Juggs/Karn/Trisk in the SB, and it works out masterfully.  It doesn't necessarily IMPROVE any matchups, per se, but it does add in the surprise factor, especially against even-matchups, like Gifts (which I'm only calling even because the Gifts players seem to think so) etc.

Slaver actually gets a ton better with the Workshop Aggro plan.  I haven't tested it enough, though, but when I have it's actually worked out really well.

My SB for Workshop Aggro (I played Ubastax) was the following:

1 Karn, Silver Golem
1 Sundering Titan
2 Triskelion
2 Duplicant
4 Juggernaut
4 Fiery Temper
1 I forget

You don't need the Viashino Heretics because Workshop Aggro rocks Stax.  I got SLAUGHTERED by Oath in this tournament, however.  Like I said, the only matchups I think this improves is Slaver and Stax, and sometimes even-matchups when you know A) what they're boarding and B) absolutely know they won't expect it.

[pyr0ma5ta]

Gifts has a much better transformation plan to Oath than Oath does to Gifts.  Slaver has a really terrible time transforming to Oath.

[Harlequin]

One Key thing to understand about transformational sideboard, is that the two decks cannot be hated out by the same card.  This is why something like CA to Dragon worked for about 2 months.  If your opponent is playing CA when you go to game two your sideing in your graveyard hate, and your large creature removal.  Now, ut oh there playing dragon .... well your gravetyard hate and your creature hate is actually still good.  CA -> dragon ride on the back of playstyle.  Here is another deck that I Think was the best example of a transformational sideboard ever.  It was an extended deck right before tempest cycled out. 

The deck started as Togg (so intuitions, AKs, Brainstorm... it was extended, so the card pool was limited).   So you go to your board, you side in graveyard hate, and creature hate,  Cutting any remnace of maindeck artifact hate.  Now game two.  He comes outa the gate with severace belcher!  Not only was I actually surprised, but now I was totally improperly sideboarded.  One deck uses draw / graveyard power, the other uses activated artifacts and a single sorcery.  We end up going to game three and he goes for his sideboard... I think, good hes switching back, I better go for mine too.  Then he takes all 15 cards from his sideboard and shuffles them into his deck and then finds 15 cards to take out.  Well played, now even for game 3 I'm still left guessing what I need to have in my deck.

Tendrils to Oath works on the same pricipals.  Tendrils hate would be cards that prohibit many spells a turn,  Oath needs to resolve a single 1G enchant to win... and it is likely you sided out your creature hate.

when designing a transformational deck, basically try and find two decks where the Core is completely different with different ways to hate on them ... but where the supporting cards in the deck (color and what not) are the same.

[Evenpence]

Harlequin is spot-on.  Transformational sideboards are huge.  The object of a well-built transformational SB is to win Game 2.

If you go to Game 3, because you didn't win Game 1 (not winning game 2 is not an option with a transformational SB), you should shuffle in all 15 cards (you don't necessarily have to before) and pick one.

If you're going up AGAINST a transformational SB, the best things to do are the following:

1)  DO NOT GUESS.  Pick SB cards that are good against both archetypes, if at all possible.
2)  Pick the SB card that is best against your opponent's general deck, not against specific cards.

For instance, if I were playing Gifts with a transforming sideboard into Oath, I would definitely want Pyroblast in there, because it is good against both, as both are blue-based.  Duplicant is not such a good option, as while it's good to keep SOME duplicants in there, it's not necessary for me to have 4.  Same thing with Maze.  Jester's Cap, on the other hand, is very good, because it can simply straight up win against Gifts, or Oath.

If you're the transformational SB player, and you know your opponent is following my strategy, you know he will most likely have sub-optimal cards in his deck to combat one of your strategies, so you should probably go for the one you are most comfortable with.  Against Ubastax, you should probably go with Oath, for instance, as Oath is naturally stronger against my deck than Gifts is.

EDIT:  Personally, I feel sideboarding to be my strongest playing skill, and I LOVE transformational sideboards.  People don't use them enough, and generally think they are sub-par, as they don't improve enough specifically.  I personally feel that it is a great surprise strategy, and will get you through the swiss better than a regular SB, but you will have problems in the Top 8 because of your surprise factor being lost (good players have good sources).

Using a transformational sideboard, you must calculate the opponent's sideboard very well, and must seek to force him to have dead cards.  If I know my opponent is siding in 4x Darkblast and 4x Lava Dart against me, I'm going to side out Welders and Shamans, simply because that will give him dead cards.  The benefits of me keeping Welders and Shamans in my deck are next to nothing compared to the ability to give him 8 dead cards.  Essentially, Chalice does just that - makes cards dead.  Using your Sideboard to give your opponent dead cards is HUGE.

Also, if you're using a regular sideboard, making your opponent think you have things in your SB when you don't is huge.  Often times, I will SB a random 1-of of something that hurts my opponent really badly, like Jester's Caps, for instance, because by showing them the card that I'm SBing in "on accident" or something like that, will give them the illusion that I'm SBing in multiple copies of said card, forcing them to play in a way they normally wouldn't.

For instance, if it looked like I was siding in 4x Shattering Spree and 4x Viashino Heretic against 5c Stax, they would keep more artifacts back and not walk right into destruction, while I might have only sided in 1 copy of each, or 1 Shattering Spree and 3 Viashino Heretics.  Them keeping back locks serves me very well.  Also, faking them out like you have a SB card in your hand is huge as well, because you can tap the mana for a SB card, and then take it back because of low REL, and get away with it, again, making them think that you have a SB card that you don't.  Or, you can just take mana burn at a high REL (which is far more ballsy, and often times a much better bluff).

This works the same way for tapping red for welder, then taking it back, or mulling over your cards for an extended period of time when you're holding two lands and a lock piece that needs to be uncountered.

I almost got away with casting chalice @ 3 against Gifts when he thought I had another chalice in my hand.  I only had 4 more mana open, so he had to decide between that one or the other one.  I faked a gross play error, and wanted him to let the Chalice @ 3 resolve, as I had two lands in my hand.  Luckily, my friend Mike is actually a good player, and drained the Chalice @ 3 after realizing that I would NEVER make such a gross play error.

[dicemanx]

If you're going up AGAINST a transformational SB, the best things to do are the following:

1)  DO NOT GUESS.  Pick SB cards that are good against both archetypes, if at all possible.
2)  Pick the SB card that is best against your opponent's general deck, not against specific cards.

For instance, if I were playing Gifts with a transforming sideboard into Oath, I would definitely want Pyroblast in there, because it is good against both, as both are blue-based.  Duplicant is not such a good option, as while it's good to keep SOME duplicants in there, it's not necessary for me to have 4.  Same thing with Maze.  Jester's Cap, on the other hand, is very good, because it can simply straight up win against Gifts, or Oath.

Bad advice in my opinion, unless there is some ulterior motive in giving it.

This advice highlighs *exactly* why certain SB strategies are so effective - if I'm transforming into Oath and have little in the way of Oath answers to contend with in game 2 for example, then I'd expect an edge in the match up. Of course, my oppponent is in a quandry, because if I find that he SBs heavily against one strategy, I won't bother with it game 2. However, I actually disagree with this advice for this reason - the transformational SB player has the advantage of unpredictability, and yet this advice offers to counter this via predictable SBing. This presents little challenge in deciding how to SB with a transformational strategy - if your opponent won't heavily board against that SB strategy, then there's nothing stopping you from always boarding in that plan and reaping the benefits of an improved match-up. Instead, I would suggest that you also keep your SBing chaotic and unpredictable - go ahead and SB all your Mazes and Dupes game 2 in one match, but change your approach game 3 or next match. This way you keep the transformational SB player guessing, and you don't let your predictability get exploited.


Interestingly enough, I believe that the Oath SB in Gifts is objectively *weaker* than a more traditional SB featuring reactive disruption spells. Before I actually shifted onto the Oath SB, I was using another transformational SB - 3x Time Vault and 3x Flame Fusillade, making finals in two local events. I conditioned some of my opponents to bring answers to Vault game 2 (Pithing Needle, artifact removal). I then switched to the Oath plan, and reaped the benefits next event when I was adding Oaths game 2 and they were adding Needles. Now that my opponents know my SB strategies, I can return to a regular SB again at whim, and reap the benefits in game 2 by having my opponent's hands choked with StPs, Bouncers, Ray of Revelations, Duplicants, or have Mages hitting play naming Oath. 

In order to fully exploit transformational SBs, a player must consider the following, once he is recognized as using such a strategy:

1. Be prepared to rotate the SB from event to event, if the player base doesn't change very much. This will strengthen your SB strategy in future events, because players might very well end up bringing in almost completely dead cards against you out of fear of a certain SB plan.

2. Be prepared *not* to SB into your transformational cards, even if it improves a match-up. For instance, while boarding Oaths against UbaStax might improve Gift's chances, you're far better off not bothering if you sense your opponent will panic and bring in a lot of Duplicants and Mazes of Ith. Of course, you can only consider this if your transformational plan becomes well known. Of course this might backfire if they don't SB according to your plan, but you still generate an ancillary benefit - opponents will recognize that you don't always bring in the transformational SB and you'll reap the benefits of your "bluff" in future games. Of course it goes without saying that regardless of how you choose to SB, you must always shuffle in all 15 cards and then remove 15 cards from your deck during SBing.

3. When selecting a transformational SB plan, you should pick a plan that would improve pre-board match-ups, but one that doesn't share vulnerabilities with your main deck plan - Harlequin mentioned this already, but I repeat it here for the sake of completion.

[Draven]

I played a Gifts (DSC + Tendrils) with a Oath sideboard for a while, but I switched back. Believe it or not, those two decks are actually hurt by the same cards. Obviously the REBs hurt, but those hurt any blue based decks. But also STP nad GY hate hurt both gifts and Oath. I hate seeing first turn Crypt with either of those decks.

I have found since switching back to a more tradition SB, the surprise factor is gone, but I have much better tools to win any given match up.

[Pitlord]

Thanks for the insight guys. I especially evenpence's aggro shop board. That is awesome sauce, and will have to be tested. I also understand that oath gifts might not be that good... I was never quite sold on that, but now I feel confident. Now, I have one more question though...

How should you sideboard with a transformational board, if you know your opponent is playing one as well? Should you be able to guess what they transform to, and switch to whatever has the better match, or just keep whichever list is more solid? How important is suprise when it's suprise vs. suprise?

[Evenpence]

This advice highlighs *exactly* why certain SB strategies are so effective - if I'm transforming into Oath and have little in the way of Oath answers to contend with in game 2 for example, then I'd expect an edge in the match up. Of course, my oppponent is in a quandry, because if I find that he SBs heavily against one strategy, I won't bother with it game 2. However, I actually disagree with this advice for this reason - the transformational SB player has the advantage of unpredictability, and yet this advice offers to counter this via predictable SBing. This presents little challenge in deciding how to SB with a transformational strategy - if your opponent won't heavily board against that SB strategy, then there's nothing stopping you from always boarding in that plan and reaping the benefits of an improved match-up. Instead, I would suggest that you also keep your SBing chaotic and unpredictable - go ahead and SB all your Mazes and Dupes game 2 in one match, but change your approach game 3 or next match. This way you keep the transformational SB player guessing, and you don't let your predictability get exploited.

Obviously if you expect your opponent to do something, you should SB accordingly.  If you have no idea what he's going to do, you should board as I've told you.  It's really a poker-skill.  A guy from where I'm at runs Gifts-Oath, and I can read him perfectly.  I've never SBed wrong against this guy, even though I've sided in or out all my cards that are important in the Oath matchup.  You should never do the same thing every time, because that gives the transformational SBer a HUGE edge.  The top 8 is big too, because you can make your opponent think that you have no idea what he's playing, and side in all kinds of hate for his transformational SB.

I really don't think we disagree, I think you might have just understood my reason for telling people as a generic, basic rule, don't dominate your deck with SB cards that may become useless (I.E., dead cards).  Dead cards are the most horrible cards in the world when facing a transformational deck, and you don't want either, one way or the other.

Playing Ubastax, I naturally fear Oath more than I fear Gifts, and if I am completely baffled, but I want to have a better chance, I'll side in a bigger number of Duplicants/Mazes, although not all of them.  This makes it that I can still theoretically win the Gifts Match.  Siding out all my duplicants/mazes/wires makes it so that I can't win the Oath Match.  It's just that simple, and you know that.

[dicemanx]

Obviously if you expect your opponent to do something, you should SB accordingly.  If you have no idea what he's going to do, you should board as I've told you.

That is exactly what I'm disagreeing with. I don't think one should board according to what you've outlined.

[Clown of Tresserhorn]

5c Stax ---> Oath

It's pretty amazing. You don't auto scoop to random kataki beats vs. Fish, and FCG doesn't look so bad post-board. I'd even consider bringing it in vs. slaver, as they have very little outs (they probably board out duplicant + shit for rack and ruins, etc.). It also makes their mox monkeys dead cards.

You also catch peeps by surprise. Imagine 5c stax vs. uba stax. They board out tangle wires/chalices/whatever for viashino heretics/rack and ruins/fiery tempers, while you have 4 oath, multiple tutors, MD Sensei's Tops, and 2 big beats. Savage.

Ofcourse, you have to evaluate the marginal costs of boarding in oaths and boarding out welders in each matchup.

[benthetenor]

5c Stax ---> Oath

It's pretty amazing. You don't auto scoop to random kataki beats vs. Fish, and FCG doesn't look so bad post-board. I'd even consider bringing it in vs. slaver, as they have very little outs (they probably board out duplicant + shit for rack and ruins, etc.). It also makes their mox monkeys dead cards.

You also catch peeps by surprise. Imagine 5c stax vs. uba stax. They board out tangle wires/chalices/whatever for viashino heretics/rack and ruins/fiery tempers, while you have 4 oath, multiple tutors, MD Sensei's Tops, and 2 big beats. Savage.

Ofcourse, you have to evaluate the marginal costs of boarding in oaths and boarding out welders in each matchup.

That is by a wide margin the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! It would certainly blow me away. What's the board look like for a drastic transformation like that? Do you run the Forbidden Orchards main, sided, or do you just transform against aggro decks?

[Clown of Tresserhorn]

My last board looked like:

4 Oath
2 Dudes

2 Choke/oxidize
3 REB
2 Ray of Revelation
2 Swords to Plowshares

My maindeck ran 3 Welders/2 Shaman and Maindeck Sensei's Divining Top. Ofcourse, this was like circa GenCon 2005. The basic principle was that your maindeck wrecks control, but you had issues with random shit like FCG and HateFish. The oath plan wasn't terrible against the mirror, as everyone at the time was into the heretic/welder trip. Like, the mirrors I played would be long and drawn out and basically come down to whoever resolved and kept an active heretic/welder. Oath seemed like a perfect foil. And, as I said earlier, it's not bad vs. an unprepared slaver player.

Basically, where you had 5 slots as 3 heretics/2 other cards against the mirror/randomness, I added oath/2 creatures. I only did limited testing, so i can't say with certainty if this is a good plan. I'm just saying, stax could theortically have a transformational board.

The maindeck doesn't change at all. My maindeck was based on Kevin' 5c Stax list, which basically ran with the principle that you needed a solid 2cc threat (oath, postboard), and that you ran a balanced manabase that made the most of Workshop without absolutely relying on it. The deck had just as many ways of casting turn 1 oath as it's control counter-part, and it had just as many tutors.

-Bob

[einlanzer625]

this lead me to think, what about a deck like dragon, into a storm combo deck

like, side out dragons, whatever your kill creature is, and the animates, for Tendrils, a few more draw spells (brainstorms for me, since i dont run em) and some more draw or rituals

itd be something like this:

-4 dragon
-2 dance
-2 necromancy
-3 animate dead
-1 kumano

and the board in would be
+1 or 2 Tendrils
+4 draw spell (brainstorm in my case) maybe even remands, since GWS seems to be so keen on them, they could also be quickens
+2 rebuild/hurkyl's recall
+1 tinker
+2 tutors of some kind (i run vampiric, demonic in my maindeck, so it could be like, mystical and seal or 2 grims, or whatever)
+1 draw7, preferably twister or jar since youre running tinker
(if you dont bring in the second tendrils, feel free to season to taste here)

and the last three cards would be something like tormod's crypt, or shattering spree, or something like that.

just a thought.

[Evenpence]

Einlanzer, that sounds like a great idea, but unfortunately, you'd be catching alot of hate from people that expect to hate on Dragon.  My advice would be to do something like Gifts --->  TPS.  Not exactly sure what that would look like, but you wouldn't have to devote your entire sideboard to transforming.

[einlanzer625]

Einlanzer, that sounds like a great idea, but unfortunately, you'd be catching alot of hate from people that expect to hate on Dragon.  My advice would be to do something like Gifts --->  TPS.  Not exactly sure what that would look like, but you wouldn't have to devote your entire sideboard to transforming.

dont both decks get hated out pretty well by that annoying 0CC artifact "tormod's crypt?"

actually..that card seems to be a decent catchall in the format, since it shuts down like..everything.

id probably need to find room for pithing needle or stifles to stop it.  Hey, i have a list for this if you wanna see it mr Evenpence, feel free to pm me for it.

[pyr0ma5ta]

Holy jesus, 5c Stax->Oath?!?  Please show me how this works.  A transformation this drastic would blow me away.

[LotusHead]

Oath-Salvagers With SlapJack Transformational Sideboard by Jeff Neilson

4 Oath of Druids
4 Forbidden Orchards
1 Gaea?s Blessing
2 Auriok Salvagers
1 Darksteel Colosus
1 Tinker
a bunch of other cards.

Sideboard
5 wish targets
2 Auriok Salvagers
4 Trinket Mages
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Tundra
1 Chalice of the Void
1 Engineered Explosives

This build won me a mox, and transformed out of Oath and into "SlapJack" (Think Bomberman minus the Meddling Mages).  I was able to hate out the "Oath Hate Plan" and go for the beatdown.  Even siding in Chalice versus storm.

basically, my deck transformed into a different Salvager deck. Awesome. it also lets me side out Oath of Druids in the Mirror and force opponents to mulligan due to useless cards (Claws of Gix, Naturalize, etc). Fun times.

[BigMac]

Most important things have allready been said. Here are some simple pointers for a transformational sideboard.

- Make sure your transformational strategy is not susceptible to the same hate as your original deck.

- Do not side just to side, make sure it will give you an advantage.

- Specially when your strategy is well known, always when boarding put all 15 sideboard cards in your deck, shuffle and remove 15 cards to your sideboard.

- As surprise is your friend, make sure you do not get predictable.

- Know that the deck two strategies will always be somewhat less than a straight out deck with one of the two strategies. Do not try to win that strategy battle, know how you can beat such a deck.

I have played my transformational deck for over a year getting me great results even after people knew what i was playing. I kept innovating and lost a few of my own pointers out of sight, this resulted into devastation as it started to go from bad to worse. My innovations went over the top as i started to think i could do anything and it still would go well. So do not get cocky, stay focused and keep having respect for opponents.