TheManaDrain.com
March 31, 2020, 03:59:06 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Correct play vs. Long.dec  (Read 2805 times)
PucktheCat
Guest
« on: November 04, 2003, 09:27:32 am »

I wanted some opinions on in-game decisions while facing Long.  For all of the following assume a deck like the one Smmenen ran in KC (because 4 overload is what makes the choices interesting).  All the games are post-sb so you can assume the Overloads will be in the deck.

1.  You have two mana on the board and nothing to play except a Chalice.  Long has no artifacts on the table and a full hand.  You have no Force (or other countermagic) in hand.  Chalice for 1 or 0?

2.  As #1 except you have a Force + blue card to back up the Chalice.

3.  As #1 except Long has a Mox Ruby and a LED on the board.

4.  You mulligan twice to find some hate.  Your five-card hand is Chalice, 2 Land, 2 Creature.  You are playing.  Do you play Chalice for 0 or wait and play it for 1?  (remember that Long is less explosive with 4 overload in the deck, does that affect your decision?)

5.  How about if you had a Force?

6.  If you were drawing first?

7.  On second turn you play a Meddling Mage.  You have no support of any kind.  What do you name?

8.  On second turn you have a Null Rod and a Meddling Mage in hand.  Do you play the Mage naming Overload this turn or the Rod?  You have no Force.

What do people who have faced decisions like this think?  Long players, how much do you fear the Chalice for 1?  What would you least like to have Meddling Maged?

Leo\n\n

Logged
wuaffiliate
Guest
« Reply #1 on: November 04, 2003, 10:16:52 am »

1.  chalice for 0, its to stall the game basically.

2.  same

3.  do the same, they still need to answer it. if they wish for justice/arti kill then its still stalling on your part.

4.  i would still set it at one, its just there to stall into more draw or hate basically.

5.  same

6.  same

7.  wish, it leaves them with their maindeck cov if they run one.

8.  name overlord and then play rod

these are very situational and very dependant on what deck you are playing. i dont think this thread can really form any real conclusions. the only way to know what play is to know your deck really. these questions are very general.\n\n

Logged
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2003, 11:07:53 am »

On the contrary, I think this exactly the kind of thinking that wins games and is most productive.  Against Long you MUST make maximum use of your opening hand to disrupt them or you won’t get to SEE any of the other cards in your deck.  Therefore decisions like those above approximate real game decisions quite accurately.

When you are playing against Long.dec you MUST play as if your opening hand is all you will ever see and you MUST play your cards to maximize the disruption of their strategy.

Take Meddling Mage.  If you have nothing to disrupt Long other than this card (the rest of your hand is land, library manipulation, draw, weenies, whatever) what do you name to ensure that the draw/search/creatures have time to do their job?  There is a RIGHT and WRONG answer to this question.  Only one choice has the greatest probability of keeping Long from going off.   I think it is Burning Wish, but I am not sure.

Again, take Chalice.  You say to know your deck but IT DOESN”T MATTER!!!!!  There is only one play that delays Long the MOST effectively.  That is the correct play.  Since Long doesn’t disrupt you (except via overload) you should simply assume that the rest of your deck will somehow kill him with enough time, but it doesn’t matter how – a top decked Force of Will or a top-decked Phyrexian Negator or a top-decked Smokestack will all probably do the trick.  The key is to give them time to do so, and only one Chalice number accomplishes that most effectively in any given circumstance.

Leo
Logged
Smmenen
Guest
« Reply #3 on: November 04, 2003, 11:33:35 am »

I think Leo brings up a valuable point.  I think the lesson is that dropping it for zero isn't automatic, but warrant some consideration even if you end up deciding that dropping it for zero is the right decision.  If your opponents know what you know, what do you know?

Steve
Logged
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2003, 11:52:07 am »

I'll tip my hand here and say that I think if you KNOW that your opponent is packing Overload you might very well be better off going for Chalice for 1.  Four Overload plus tutors is a LOT.  I tested about 20 games since the tournament in KC with Fish (which obviously includes Null Rod in addition to Chalice from the side) vs. Long with Overload.  Dropping Chalice for zero post-sb usually did nothing except draw an Overload.  Dropping Chalice for 1 leaves Long in a better position to try to go off (it is basically left with mana, 4 Burning Wish, and some draw-7s)  but, I think, a worse postion overall because it will have to Wish for removal.

This is particularly true of decks that have backup hate for the artifact mana like Null Rod.

I am still curious what a Mage would name to slow down Long.  Would it be Wish or Ritual?  Or something else?

Leo
Logged
Jacob Orlove
Official Time Traveller of TMD
Administrator
Basic User
*****
Posts: 8074


When am I?


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2003, 01:40:21 pm »

Quote
Quote I am still curious what a Mage would name to slow down Long.  Would it be Wish or Ritual?  Or something else?
If you can drop the mage early enough (and there isn't a chalice in play), then naming LED might be the right call, especially game 1.

If your hand has Sphere of Resistance, and you know they're running 4x Overload or 4x Crumble, Chalice for 1 looks a lot better.
Logged

Team Meandeck: O Lord,
Guard my tongue from evil and my lips from speaking guile.
To those who slander me, let me give no heed.
May my soul be humble and forgiving to all.
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #6 on: November 04, 2003, 01:43:33 pm »

I thought about LED but I figured Ritual was more dangerous in most situations.  Am I wrong on this?  I know the deck abuses the hell out of LED but even so . . .

Quote
Quote If your hand has Sphere of Resistance, and you know they're running 4x Overload or 4x Crumble, Chalice for 1 looks a lot better.

Sphere or Null Rod definatly simplifies things, I agree, but I am really torn on hands without one of the above.  It is pretty hard for Long to win in the first few turns without Ritual, Brainstorm, 1 cc artifacts, Duress, 1cc Tutors, etc.  I would say it is much more likely that they would have a 4-of in their hand (crumble/overload) than that they can win without 1cc spells in a reasonable amount of time.  Does that seem true?

Obviously neither one is a hard lock by any means, I just want to know which one is hard-er.

Leo\n\n

Logged
Jacob Orlove
Official Time Traveller of TMD
Administrator
Basic User
*****
Posts: 8074


When am I?


View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: November 04, 2003, 02:52:00 pm »

Duress is unlikely to matter, unless you need to protect additional disruption that's in your hand. For the purpose of this discussion, we should really look at tutors versus mana.

We can consider stopping LED to be roughly equivalent to stopping Ritual. That means that Chalice for 1 will stop Brainstorm, Sphere and 1cc tutors, whereas Chalice for 0 will stop Moxen, Petal, Academy (heh), and Lotus. Long can go off either way, but both are quite disruptive.

If they have a broken hand, Chalice for 0 may be necessary to stop 4 mana sources and a draw seven from happening turn 1. On the other hand, Chalice for 1 can turn a slower draw into a dead one.
Logged

Team Meandeck: O Lord,
Guard my tongue from evil and my lips from speaking guile.
To those who slander me, let me give no heed.
May my soul be humble and forgiving to all.
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2003, 03:25:07 pm »

I think that analysis is right on.  They are both very disruptive on their own.  Since you have no way of knowing whether they have the broken Moxen + Twister hand or a Brainstorm, Tutor hand you have to make the decision based on what you do know.  Post-sb I think that in many situations you would do better to play the Chalice for 1.  The number of situations for which this is true increases steadily depending on the number of anti-long cards you pack.  If you have another kind of hate (or even non-hate answers like Force of Will) in your deck Chalice at 1 both delays to get let you draw it and protects it when you do find it (from duress and overload, or even swarm).

Food for thought at any rate.  I think Smmenen is right on that the most important thing to do is THINK.  Long can be beaten by a good deck with a balanced sb that includes Chalice, but it isn't automatic - you still have to play carefully.

Leo
Logged
wuaffiliate
Guest
« Reply #9 on: November 04, 2003, 03:44:22 pm »

ive not needed chalice to compete with long in tourney play so far...rods, crypt, stifle and pitches were enough to win me games.

and any answers to this thread's questions will be wrong because the match is too situational, it depends on too many factors to make any solid correct answer.
Logged
Maxx Matt
Guest
« Reply #10 on: November 04, 2003, 04:46:08 pm »

I totally agree with wuaffiliate.

The feeling that having up to 4 CotV in the maindeck let you necessary have a good matchup is wrong.

I win and lost against GOOD StormBasedCombo guided by VERY GOOD player so much times with so much different situation that I can't feel free to state a summary of moves that let you simply say "I win".

But this isn't a bad thing. Finally we have a Combo Deck that doesn't scoop to a single card or to a simplestrategy.
It is beatiful.
It is really interesting and exciting to play against combo with my new Mirrosin Tools and his new tech. Exciting and impredictable!

The only thing that I noticed  playing is that all the smart combo players all around here began to consider themselves finally threatened by something.

So all the stupid one dies either by CotV for 1 OR CotV for 0 OR a single FoW well placed OR a single Null Rod.

All the others packed one or two or three multifunctional solutions to their maindeck or side.

Chain of Vapor cc1
H.Recall cc2
R&R cc3
or the other that Smmemen suggested from his report.

In all the situations that PuckTheCat have proposed any smart combo player ( with a well equipped build ) would have found a solution if the ONLY interaction during the match would have consisted of the resolution of that single Spell .

But the perspective of resolving a spell and considering the game end or in our hands, isn't so near to the reality.

From the perspective of a Control player I would never see Bargain and Necro in play. So I would stupidly prefer CotV for 1.

From a perspective of an aggressive player with some weapon in hand, I would prefer a CotV for 0.

Only if after a CotV or a Meddling Mage the NON COMBO player has really GameBreaking SPELLS to cast then the game could be considered finished. If he stalls without nothing to do, waiting the actions of the combo player and not predicting his moves,  even for a single turn, then IN THAT TURN the smart  combo player would have the possibility to escape from his critical situation and go to town in the next turn.

For gamebreaking I consider most of all:

Mind Twist, Y.Will, Wasteland ( even if it is not a spell ) ( for a comtrol player )
Pillar, Blood Moon, Sphere ( for the aggro player )

To win, most of the time, you have to strech a bit the game and then break it with a single but definite shot. Going over and over with a single game isn't possible or the time on it will equiparate the chances of winning .
These are the evidence of my test against long.dec.\n\n

Logged
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #11 on: November 04, 2003, 05:34:25 pm »

Quote
Quote  ive not needed chalice to compete with long in tourney play so far...rods, crypt, stifle and pitches were enough to win me games.

Quote where I said you needed Chalice to compete with Long.  I said if you had Chalice you could compete, but I never said if you didn’t have it you couldn’t compete.

Quote
Quote and any answers to this thread's questions will be wrong because the match is too situational, it depends on too many factors to make any solid correct answer.

This is just wrongheaded.  In any magic game you make decisions based on limited information.  The correct play can be determined based on that information.  Even if it turns out later that the ‘wrong’ play wins you the game it is still wrong because you make the decision based on what you know.

Are you telling me that in a tournament match if you drew a five card hand – Land, Land, Chalice, Creature, Creature – and you knew you were playing a Long deck with Overloads you would reach over the table, shake your opponent’s hand and say “Sorry, I can’t decide what to play Chalice for.  If I knew what I was going to draw and what you had in your hand I could play, but as it is, I scoop.  Good match?”

It may be that the correct play is decided by your deck – notice how clearly Jacob and I were able to identify which cards might affect our plays in this situation – but that doesn’t make the question unanswerable.

Quote
Quote The feeling that having up to 4 CotV in the maindeck let you necessary have a good matchup is wrong.

I win and lost against GOOD StormBasedCombo guided by VERY GOOD player so much times with so much different situation that I can't feel free to state a summary of moves that let you simply say "I win".

Actually, I think you are reading wuaffiliate wrong.  He clearly says that he has had good results without Chalice.  You seem to be saying one can’t even have good results WITH Chalice.  I agree with you though, that simply playing with 4 Chalice won’t guarantee the win, which is why I am trying to encourage players to think about how to play with the cards they run rather than just mindlessly drop Chalice for 0.  Obviously not every deck will run Chalice, nor should every deck, but those that do should play them intelligently.

Quote
Quote  I all the situation that PuckTheCat have proposed any smart combo player ( with a well equipped build ) would have found a solution if the ONLY interaction during the match would have consisted of the resolution of a single Spell.

I agree.  Many of the above hands are fairly grim for our heroic defender.  I am asking what course of action gives you the GREATEST chance of winning, not which is an autowin, or anything like that.

Here is a game situation:

You are playing WW with Null Rod, Chalice and Wasteland as your only mana denial.  Your opponent is playing Long.dec as described above.  You play first.

You: 20 life, White Knight, Savannah Lion, Plains, Plains, Chalice of the Void.  Nothing in play
Opponent: 20 life, 7 cards in hand.  Nothing in play.

What do you do?  This is as much information as you would have in a real game, probably more.

What is so hard to follow here?  In actual games you do this all the time!  You take your crappy hand and try to make the best of it based on what you have!

Leo
Logged
Jacob Orlove
Official Time Traveller of TMD
Administrator
Basic User
*****
Posts: 8074


When am I?


View Profile Email
« Reply #12 on: November 04, 2003, 05:43:56 pm »

Quote from: PucktheCat+Nov. 04 2003,17:34
Quote (PucktheCat @ Nov. 04 2003,17:34)Here is a game situation:

You are playing WW with Null Rod, Chalice and Wasteland as your only mana denial.  Your opponent is playing Long.dec as described above.  You play first.

You: 20 life, White Knight, Savannah Lion, Plains, Plains, Chalice of the Void.  Nothing in play
Opponent: 20 life, 7 cards in hand.  Nothing in play.

What do you do?  This is as much information as you would have in a real game, probably more.

What is so hard to follow here?  In actual games you do this all the time!  You take your crappy hand and try to make the best of it based on what you have!

Leo
The play here seems to be Chalice for 0 and Lions on turn 1. That way, if you draw additional disruption (Rod, Chalice, or Waste), you can play it immediately on turn 2. Otherwise, you can drop the knight. While it seems unlikely that you'll win, this looks like the best course of action here. Waiting a turn to play chalice not only lets them play all their 0cc stuff turn 1, but it also leaves room for a Duress on you. And, since your only real chance is to draw more disruption, you need to make your plays based on the assumption that you will draw said disruption. If you don't, you'll lose anyway, but if you do, then you need to set yourself up to take maximum advantage.
Logged

Team Meandeck: O Lord,
Guard my tongue from evil and my lips from speaking guile.
To those who slander me, let me give no heed.
May my soul be humble and forgiving to all.
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #13 on: November 04, 2003, 05:48:10 pm »

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is how you do it people.

Leo\n\n

Logged
Matt The Great
Guest
« Reply #14 on: November 04, 2003, 05:50:06 pm »

Actually, in that hand there's really only one option: plains, lion, Chalice for 0, go. But you're right that you do need to analyze hands.
Logged
wuaffiliate
Guest
« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2003, 06:00:43 pm »

Quote
Quote This is just wrongheaded.  In any magic game you make decisions based on limited information.

that is very off topic and had nothing to do with what i was trying to get at. you gave much less info when asking your questions than anyone would have in practice. atleast when you are playing you have some idea of what they are playing and you have a very good idea of what you are playing. you basically just threw out one of those duelist puzzles with less info...
Logged
Maxx Matt
Guest
« Reply #16 on: November 05, 2003, 05:08:54 am »

Even with this strong hand, the WW player will lose on turn X.
The only  hand that can let a WW to survive enough to win that come in my hand should be this:

2 Waste, Lotus, 2 Cotv, Land, Lion.
And only if the creatures drawn in the next turns have 2cc...


In your example, as MtG stated, notother play can be possible, rather than playing CotV for zero and resolve the lion.


Quote
Quote
You seem to be saying one can’t even have good results WITH Chalice.  I agree with you though, that simply playing with 4 Chalice won’t guarantee the win, which is why I am trying to encourage players to think about how to play with the cards they run rather than just mindlessly drop Chalice for 0.  Obviously not every deck will run Chalice, nor should every deck, but those that do should play them intelligently.


Sorry for being so cryptic. I mean that, With multiple CotV AND a good strategy to support the consequent stretch of the game, then you should have really good results.
To be clearer, i'm referring to a strategy as Post Mirrodin Keeper, Stax or TnT could support to win.


You are completel right: if anyone play CotV hoping on the autowin,that player  must lose 9 game of 10.


----------------
On a side note. In tourney, if I could always be sure to have FoW in hand, in combo matchup, I'll choose to let him go first. One card net have always done the difference when I play in test with my teamates. I have probably won every match, playing with ChaliceKeeper, with a single FoW in my hand and the combo player that goes first.

Can I be true or only Lucky and/or hitten by bad paralogisms without real evidence?

Any similar evidence?
----------------
Logged
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #17 on: November 05, 2003, 09:30:59 am »

Quote from: wuaffiliate+Nov. 04 2003,17:00
Quote (wuaffiliate @ Nov. 04 2003,17:00)
Quote
Quote This is just wrongheaded.  In any magic game you make decisions based on limited information.

that is very off topic and had nothing to do with what i was trying to get at. you gave much less info when asking your questions than anyone would have in practice. atleast when you are playing you have some idea of what they are playing and you have a very good idea of what you are playing. you basically just threw out one of those duelist puzzles with less info...
I stand by my original post.  Regardless of what you are playing there is a play that will most effectively delay Long's win.  I agree that other cards in your deck might change your play, but that doesn't change the fact that some plays are more effective ON THEIR OWN than others.

Compare this with a process like Goldfish testing.  Goldfish testing makes all kinds of unwarrented assumptions about your opponent.  It is nonetheless useful to understand your decks behavior in a vacuum because you can make decisions based on your deck's anticipated performance.  Similarly the questions I presented make some assumptions about your deck - that it won't be hosed itself by Chalice for 1 and that its primary goal with the Chalice is to delay Long's win for as long as possible.  Will this be the case every time you cast Chalice?  No.  Will this number give information you can use to unravel extremely complex game situations?  Yes.

Back to the topic at hand.

Does anyone think that the WW example would change if you were drawing first, and Long dropped Mox Ruby, Mox Jet, LED and said go?  You can be fairly sure they don't have a duress in that situation.

@ Maxx Matt:  I am not sure I agree that WW couldn't win with that god-hand.  Think about it - Smmenen's version of Long runs ONLY Burning Wish for removal in the 2cc, and you are going to kill their first two land.  That means that in order to escape that psuedo-lock Long needs to draw 4 (of its 10) land, a Burning Wish AND enough combo components to go off before it is killed.  All that without their Brainstorms or cheap tutoring.  Seems fairly unlikely to me.

My finding is a bit different than yours, although my testing has been mostly with Fish.  I find that I pretty much always win games where I have a Force and either a Null Rod or a Chalice.  I have been testing with Long going first for the last 10 games I did (I will switch to Fish going first soon) and I find that Force isn't always enough.

Leo
Logged
wuaffiliate
Guest
« Reply #18 on: November 05, 2003, 12:35:39 pm »

duress really doesnt too much vs fish, there is so much available hate that the deck does extremely well. i perfer rods over chalice simply because they are better vs the field than chalice is. i find running chalice in fish is a wasted slot since you have so much available hate that has more of a swiss army knife effect than chalice does.

i dont really think the WW example matters much does it? noone actually plays it to win games do they?\n\n

Logged
Matt The Great
Guest
« Reply #19 on: November 05, 2003, 02:53:00 pm »

Actually, to further clarify: I would play Plains, and toss the Lions out quickly, hammingit up - like I really, really wanted it to resolve. Hopefully this would bait my opponent into trying to FoW it just to make me mad. There's a lot more to playing well than just what order the cards go in - how long a pause you put between things can drastically alter the psychology of the match. This is something I'd like to see explored more.
Logged
Grand Inquisitor
Guest
« Reply #20 on: November 05, 2003, 03:28:50 pm »

Quote
Quote Actually, to further clarify: I would play Plains, and toss the Lions out quickly, hammingit up - like I really, really wanted it to resolve. Hopefully this would bait my opponent into trying to FoW it just to make me mad. There's a lot more to playing well than just what order the cards go in - how long a pause you put between things can drastically alter the psychology of the match. This is something I'd like to see explored more

I agree, MtG, that this is an under-used technique in magic, however, I don't think your example is appropriate.  You'd have to be a rather un-confident long player to worry about forcing a first turn savannah lion.
Logged
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #21 on: November 05, 2003, 03:33:19 pm »

Not to mention playing a substantially different version of Long than Smmenens, which runs Duress but no Force.

Overall, your point is well taken, however.

Leo\n\n

Logged
Matt The Great
Guest
« Reply #22 on: November 05, 2003, 06:35:52 pm »

Oh, sure, I doubt they'd force it. But you might be playing some netdecking twerp who doesn't know what they're doing, and better safe than sorry. It's not like you expended a lot of effort in that ploy.
Logged
MuzzonoAmi
Guest
« Reply #23 on: November 08, 2003, 01:14:39 pm »

Another sitiuation with Chalice:

City of Traitors, Mountain, Chalice, Sphere of Resistance, Myr Enforcer, Goblin Welder, Gorilla Shaman

Opening hand, playing first. You do not know if your opponent is playing the 1cc artofact removal.

Here, I'd probably go with City, Chalice for 1, go, in the hopes that shutting them out of their non-Wishable artifact removal would be enough to buy the turn to play Shaman and Sphere turn 2. Would anyone agree with this? Or would you open with the Sphere to minimize their available turn 1 plays (possibly opening the door for removal) then play Chalice next turn at 0 or 1?
Logged
Matt The Great
Guest
« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2003, 11:42:02 pm »

I'd play it: Chalice for 0, City, Sphere. Assuming Sphere resolves: next turn tap City, play mountain (sac City), tap mountain, Goblin Welder, burn for 1. If you've got Chalice=0 in play you don't need Shaman.\n\n

Logged
Fishhead
Guest
« Reply #25 on: November 09, 2003, 05:08:59 am »

Quote
Quote Here, I'd probably go with City, Chalice for 1, go, in the hopes that shutting them out of their non-Wishable artifact removal would be enough to buy the turn to play Shaman and Sphere turn 2. Would anyone agree with this?

Well, I certainly wouldn't plan to play the Shaman after I played Chalice for 1.  Wink  

Chalice for zero + Sphere on turn 1 might be the plan.  I'm not excited about the long-term game after that - Welder, losing City of Traitors on turn 2? - but Chalice+Sphere should crimp Long severely while still allowing you to play out your hand.
Logged
PucktheCat
Guest
« Reply #26 on: November 10, 2003, 04:24:37 pm »

Seems to me the play there is Chalice for 0, Welder.  Next turn Shaman, Sphere.

This is pretty brutal on poor Long.  The Welder makes the 1cc removal look pretty silly.  Even Duress would get hosed by active Welder.

You should be able to keep either Chalice for 0 or Sphere on the table indefinatly if they don't remove the Welder - your goal should be to have the Sphere and the Gorilla Shaman exploit their synergy all the way to the endzone.

As a bonus, playing the mountain first means you actually have mana available in case you draw something worth casting.

Leo\n\n

Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.067 seconds with 20 queries.