Suicide Black Primer (Part 2 of 2)

[Legend]

Part V: Playing Suicide Black


A. The Decks You Will Need to Beat & How to Play Against Them


        The following matchup analyses will be based specifically on Legend Black rather than a more abstract concept of ‘Suicide Black’ since by this point in the discussion it is time for focus, rather than broad strokes.  Even more specifically, I will be primarily concerned with sideboarding based off the framework of the base Legend Black version from the previous section, although I will certainly offer commentary and hints that will show you the way should you be playing a build more like the other two possibilities I offered for different environments.


        GROUP 1: BLUE-BASED CONTROL DECKS

        KEEPER

        Not only will you need to beat Keeper to win high-level Type I tournaments, where Keeper is generally the deck of choice for a majority of the top players, but you will need to know what to expect out of their sideboards. I will therefore spend more space on this matchup than any other.  I cannot make it any clearer than this: this is the most important matchup that you will face when playing Legend Black or any other Suicide Black deck.  In most Type I tournaments, you will have to overcome at least one Keeper deck in a critical moment of the tournament in order to win.  In this matchup, you are going to be facing a real fight in the second and third games because of Keeper’s typically nasty anti-Suicide sideboard.  Given this fact, the first game becomes even more imperative than in most matchups.  Fortunately, game one is tilted considerably in your favor, as Keeper’s maindeck creature defenses will generally be: one The Abyss, one Balance, zero-two Swords to Plowshares, one Diabolic Edict, and one Fire/Ice, in addition to the obvious two Morphlings and countermagic.  This is not too bad a gauntlet to overcome, and I would say that Suicide has a clear advantage in game one.  However, in games two and three, I would assign a slight edge to Keeper.

        Note that in the Keeper matchup, you will perhaps make the most use of the branch concept, because they have numerous higher-casting cost spells that you will need to choke off, including The Abyss, Morphling, and some of their card-drawing spells.

        Expect the following cards to be sided in against you in some combination: one Ensnaring Bridge, one-two Swords to Plowshares, one-two Circle of Protection: Black, one-two Compost, one-two Teferi’s Response, sometimes a Moat, sometimes an extra The Abyss, and sometimes a Pyroclasm or two.  No Keeper deck sides in ALL of these cards, but all side in at least some of them.

        Ensnaring Bridge is in my opinion the most effective anti-Suicide card, and by far the most frustrating. The only way to actually remove this card is with a Powder Keg set at three. Short of that, you either have to cherry pick it with some handkill, hope to mana-screw them so their hand fills up, or hope that they choke on countermagic, the only cards in the their decks that they will not be able to unload effectively.  Remember, if their hand is starting to fill up to the point that your creatures can attack again, DO NOT Hymn to Tourach them, even if you think they have something dangerous in their hand.  If they have something bad, well then you are out of luck, because you have to take the chance that their hand is filling up with counters.  As a result of Ensnaring Bridge joining the Keeper brigade, you have to side in Powder Kegs if you are not maindecking them, which means goodbye to Null Rod games two and three. Of course, this is only if you suspect or know that they are using the Bridge.

        Extra Swords to Plowshares are not particularly intimidating, just expect a little more spot removal.  Teferi’s Response can cost you the game, you just have to do your best with handkill to set up the landkill and hope not to get nailed.  Circle of Protection: Black is a dangerous card that you need to be aware of, but if you think that only one Circle of Protection: Black is coming in, you do not necessarily need to side in Dystopia, because you will be left with only two targets for the Dystopia (Circle of Protection: Black and Sylvan Library). Your best bet is to side in a couple of Masticores for colorless damage (therefore taking out the Null Rods and bringing in Powder Kegs) and hope that your speed, handkill, and landkill will be enough to deal with a Circle of Protection: Black.  You will also gain the side benefit of having an creature immune to The Abyss.  However, if for some reason they are siding in multiple Circle of Protection: Blacks, then Dystopia is probably necessary. You can side in one or two Dystopias for a minimal commitment, as you can always Demonic Tutor for one as well.

        Compost is a major problem, and like Circle of Protection: Black is threatening as a one of, and as a two of, demanding of Dystopia.  If Compost comes out early and is unchecked, you are in serious trouble.  If Circle of Protection: Black and Compost are being used, you will need all the Dystopias you can find.  Moat, on the other hand, is a card that you will see sided in against you much more rarely than any of the cards I have already discussed. The reason for this being that Moat just isn't that great despite its ability to almost completely shut down Suicide.  Moat, with its 2WW casting cost, will be extremely difficult for Keeper to cast given the mana disruption they will be facing, a fact that Keeper players readily concede.  Certainly a card to be aware of, and perhaps worthy of Dystopia attention if it is being sided in with other hosers such as Circle of Protection: Black or Compost.  Otherwise, do not be overly concerned about Moat.  Pyroclasm is a card I have seen used against Suicide Black rarely.  However, it can be good against early Phyrexian Negators, Nantuko Shades, and Hypnotic Specters.  Just be aware of this card when thinking about Keeper's sideboarding options.

         By the way, you may have looked over the decklist and wondered what cards to side out against Keeper? Well, cards to side out are of course Null Rods (when called for), as I have mentioned, and then Flesh Reavers, being that they are fourth on your creature depth chart.  The maindeck is so tight that Flesh Reaver has to be the choice.

        Now, a word on The Abyss.  There is no question that this is pretty much an “if it hits play you lose” card.  But you would be surprised to learn that in my extensive experience playing this deck in tournaments against Keeper, I can count the amount of times this has happened on less than one hand.  It is not easy for Keeper to reach four mana against Suicide Black in time to cast The Abyss.  Remember, DO NOT WORRY about what your opponent will do, make THEM WORRY about what you will be doing.  You are the aggressive deck, they are the control deck, and if they can fight you off, find their one The Abyss, and cast it, well then hat’s off to them.

        An even more obvious example of not worrying about what your opponent CAN do is with regards to their Morphlings. Yes, a Morphling in play would be bad for you, but at a casting cost of 3UU, you should be mainly concerned with "branching" it off, just like the rest of their deck.  The Abyss, at a more castable 3B is nevertheless a card that falls under the same category.  Branch it off with your disruption. Finally, this is not a great solution, but every now and then The Abyss will hit and you will still win if you can race it, having enough creatures on the board and a little head start.

        Here are some tips on playing against Keeper. It is generally good advice to lead with Duress on the first turn before doing anything.  If you are going first and have Dark Ritual + Hypnotic Specter, for example, but also Duress in hand, Duress them first, then go for the Hypnotic Specter next turn. You cannot afford to take a chance on letting them keep a card such as Ancestral Recall, or the Swords to Plowshares that will let them stop your Hypnotic Specter. Leading with Duress is also the wise choice since you want to know right away whether or not they have the dreaded Misdirection in their hand to turn a Sinkhole, or even worse, a Hymn to Tourach on you.  Leading with Duress also benefits you in not falling victim to a Teferi’s Response.  Always lead with Duress.  Secondly, given the choice between a first turn Hypnotic Specter or a first turn Phyrexian Negator, go for the first turn Hypnotic Specter in this matchup.  Phyrexian Negator will put them on a faster clock, but the sooner you start to wreck their hand, the better your chances of winning will be.  The branch effect that you will enjoy from the first turn Hypnotic Specter will provide you with greater benefits than the extra damage of the Phyrexian Negator.

        If you are going first, and for some reason you have no first turn play, but have a second turn Hymn to Tourach or Sinkhole, this is not ideal, but keep it.  However, if you are going second, and have this same kind of hand, you may want to mulligan for a faster start. You cannot really afford to allow them to have two turns without attacking their resources, and you will still get the full seven cards anyway.  Something broken will usually happen if you do not interfere with them, or they will just happily set up their Mana Drain + Card That Is Bad For You play. Very rarely will you defeat Keeper with creatures only, you will need at least a little disruption backing the assault up.

        Given the choice between casting a creature or casting disruption in the early game, go with the disruption. Obviously, you will usually be able to do both, but casting a threat after a wave of disruption will usually mean victory.  Play Nantuko Shade last when given the opportunity, since you want to expose it to removal only after your other creatures have tested the waters.  Nantuko Shade is the hammer of this deck, and operates better after a few turns of mana have been allowed to accumulate anyway.

       Finally, always beware of Balance. This irritating card is one Keeper's best tricks against you in game one, given its ridiculously low casting cost of 1W, and it is of course always a threat in the subsequent games. Obviously, a resolved Balance does not automatically mean that you will lose (much less so than with The Abyss), but it can allow Keeper to win games that, by all rights, they really did not "deserve" to win. Fortunately, I would say that much of the time a Balance will merely bring the game back to an even state, and Suicide with its cheaper threats will still have a small window of time with which to regain the momentum.

        Unfortunately, Balance is much more effective against Suicide than it is against other aggressive decks such as Sligh and Stompy.  Against Stompy for example, there will have to be a tradeoff for the dramatic effect of sweeping away all of it's creatures: Stompy will most likely have an empty hand, and the Keeper player will probably have to share this condition after the Balance. However, since a Suicide deck attacks Keeper's land and hand, a Balance will often not only sweep away a couple of creatures, but will more often than not cause the Suicide player to discard much of whatever hand he has left, and sacrifice some of his land. Essentially, there is nowhere to hide from a Balance - even creatures that have been held back might have to be discarded if a Balance is cast. Another annoying fact about Balance is that it is not overly difficult for a Keeper deck to find, given their use of Demonic Tutor, Mystical Tutor, and sometimes Vampiric Tutor. The Mystical Tutor option is really good for the Keeper player, since it will hide the Balance safely in his deck until the next turn.

       What then, should be done about Balance? Well, to be perfectly honest, not all that much. Just use COMMON SENSE.
This is my best advice because there are only two other ways to play around Balance - to pick it out of their hand early, or to deny them their white mana - both viable options, but not always available to you. You will only truly lose a game because of Balance very, very rarely, as I cannot even remember a "Balance" loss that I have suffered anytime in the recent past. You will usually have an excellent chance of recovering from the Balance anyway, and once you put Keeper in topdeck mode, they will have to do exactly that- topdeck. The only reason I bring it up is just so you will not do anything really stupid in regards to Balance. It will simply be a judgment call that you will just have to make based on the board position.



   ACCELERATED BLUE (LEGEND BLUE VARIANTS &
             OPHIDIAN VERSIONS)

   Accelerated Blue (Accelerated Mono-Blue) decks are a little less prevalent than they used to be before Fact or Fiction’s restriction on January 1, 2002. My own take on Accelerated Blue, Legend Blue, was the most successful variant of the deck, and defined the archetype and Type I in general last summer and on into the fall.  Legend Blue with its four Morphlings, four Back to Basics, and loads of countermagic was not supported by any early point removal or global lockdowns, and consequently never had a great matchup against Suicide Black.  When I was on the other side of the matchup, Null Rod was a nightmare, and at that time, it was worth it to maindeck three or four Null Rods because of the prevalence of Accelerated Blue.  Null Rod not only shut down my artifact mana, but also my only source of maindeck removal, Powder Keg.  I would say that last year, Suicide Black had a large overall edge in this matchup.  It was the only deck that could consistently beat Legend Blue or other Accelerated Blue, and as a result Fact or Fiction was rightfully restricted.

         Accelerated Blue has gone from being the most broken non-combo deck in the history of Type I to being merely a great deck. It is still a fairly common deck that you will often encounter in quality Type I fields.  Many Accelerated Blue decks now use Ophidian to fill the void left by Fact or Fiction's departure. I do not favor this approach for a variety of reasons, but nevertheless what this means is that there are two versions of Accelerated Blue out there at the moment - those with Ophidians (far more common) and those that still play more like Legend Blue, filling the gap left by the departed Fact or Fictions with Braingeyser, Stroke of Genius, and Merchant Scroll.  The way you play against either branch of Accelerated Blue will be pretty much the same.

        You will have nothing to sideboard against Accelerated Blue besides Null Rods and/or Phyrexian Negators if you were not maindecking them for some reason.  But the matchup is still squarely in Suicide’s favor both in game one and in the back two games. They will have tons of countermagic, but a simple first turn Hypnotic Specter or Phyrexian Negator can be game, as they will have no way to deal with such a threat besides a Powder Keg set at three, a really early Morphling, or a Force of Will.  The first two options are not easy for them to pull off, the third one is much more realistic.  Null Rod is still a disaster for them, and Ophidians are weak against you.  All your creatures can block Ophidian, and it will simply not be effective at all against you.

        One card that was not around last year that will now make a huge impact will be Nantuko Shade, which, if it resolves, will simply devour an Accelerated Blue deck. By the time you have five Swamps in play, he will already be too large for a Morphling to deal with effectively.  

        You can expect the following sideboard cards in most situations: Control Magic and/or Psionic Blast.  Many players favor Control Magic, but in reality Psionic Blast is the better choice, as it can all but kill a Phyrexian Negator (or punish its controller severely), kill Hypnotic Specter and Flesh Reaver outright, and most likely kill an early Nantuko Shade if timed right.  Control Magic can turn one of your creatures against you, but is effectiveness is limited since the Accelerated Blue player cannot make good use of Nantuko Shade.

        A big difference between this matchup and the Keeper matchup is that a straight creature assault backed up by a disruption-light hand, or no disruption, can often be successful. Against Keeper, you really need to deny them their mana, or whack them with an early Hymn to Tourach, but against Accelerated Blue, this is not always the case since you can play a first turn creature and watch them desperately try to rush a Morphling into play. This is not to say that your disruption is not a big factor in this matchup, merely that you can sometimes get away with hands that wouldn’t necessarily cut it against Keeper.  However, if they do get a Morphling into play, and you do not have a Nantuko Shade, that is a problem. You might want to consider playing a third Null Rod if Accelerated Blue is popular in your area.

         Beware of Misdirection.  Unlike the one-two Misdirections of Keeper, you can expect three-four when facing Accelerated Blue.  Obviously, if you have a Duress in your opening hand, you can be safe before casting a Hymn to Tourach or a Sinkhole.  My advice on casting a Sinkhole or a Hymn to Tourach if you have not yet seen your opponent’s hand is to cast the Sinkhole first if at all possible. Having a Sinkhole Misdirected at you will be far less of a disaster than having a Hymn to Tourach Misdirected.  At least the target of the Sinkhole will be known to you, and it will merely cost you a land-drop (assuming you have at least another mana source in your hand).  A Misdirected Hymn to Tourach early will pretty much wreck your chances of winning.

        Finally, on Wasteland.  If you encounter an Accelerated Blue deck built in the mold of Legend Blue, you will have no targets for Wasteland (You can also expect four Morphlings from such a deck).  But most Accelerated Blue builders use at least some nonbasics. You might have the opportunity to waste a Library of Alexandria, their own Wastelands, or sometimes Mishra’s Factories.


   OATH

        Far less common than Keeper or Accelerated Blue, Oath deck are nevertheless a more difficult matchup for you than the other two control decks.  The reason for this is that their main threat (Oath of Druids) costs only two mana, and is therefore very difficult to keep off the table.  If an Oath of Druids resolves against you in game one, it might just be time to pick up the cards and move to game two, as it will not be long before free Spike Weavers and Morphlings start showing up.  You are also likely to face the same sideboard cards as you would from Keeper - Circle of Protection: Black, Compost, and Swords to Plowshares, and perhaps extra Oath of Druids if they are not already playing four, but not Ensnaring Bridge.  Game one in this matchup is very simple: If you can Duress an Oath of Druids away, or somehow prevent an Oath of Druids from hitting, you will likely win. Otherwise, you will lose.  Games two and three, you will want to side in as many Dystopias as possible, hopefully four if you are playing that many on that day, as you will have an abundance of good targets.  Being that Null Rod is not outstanding in this matchup, you may want to consider a sideboarding strategy of –two Null Rod, -two Flesh Reaver, +four Dystopia.  If you are playing with Masticores or Phyrexian War Beasts maindeck, you might try cutting four of those cards for the Dystopias.



        GROUP 2: THE AGGRESSIVE DECKS


        SLIGH

        The most common aggro deck that you will face is fortunately a good matchup for you. This is because games two and three are slanted so overwhelmingly in your favor as to give you the matchup, despite their game one edge.  If you are playing normal Legend Black, your Phyrexian Negators, Flesh Reavers, and Hypnotic Specters will likely accomplish nothing against Sligh. Your main hope is to disrupt them heavily and then ride a Nantuko Shade - a scenario that is not that rare.  Occasionally you can build up enough permanents and disrupt them enough to put them in topdecking mode and win with a Phyrexian Negator or two, but more often than not, Nantuko Shade will have to carry the load if you are not maindecking Masticores or Phyrexian War Beasts.

         Another way to win is to find them a little mana-light and just screw them with a Sinkhole or two — again, a scenario that is not that rare considering that most Sligh decks play seventeen or fewer Mountains.  They will also have mostly dead Price of Progresses in game one.

   Games two and three, though, are where Legend Black takes control. You will side into the maximum number of Masticores and Powder Kegs, and absolutely wreck them.  Most Sligh decks will merely side in a few Dodecapods, Guerilla Tactics, or even nothing (since many Sligh decks dedicate their boards towards anti-control cards). This is relatively insignificant, as these cards will only come into play if they get hit with a Hymn to Tourach.  Meanwhile, they will have no good answer to a Masticore.  If they somehow manage to kill a Masticore with an Incinerate and another burn spell, or Incinerate + Cursed Scroll, it is very unlikely that they will have enough resources to deal with a second one, or with a Nantuko Shade, which will also run amok against Sligh.  

        Simply put, it is unlikely that they will be able to deal with multiple Masticores and Nantuko Shades given the fact that you will be simultaneously draining away their resources with Duresses, Hymn to Tourachs, and Sinkholes.  Powder Keg will only seal this matchup further, as you can often net three for one trades, sweeping away Jackal Pups, Goblin Cadets, and Cursed Scrolls.  You can also side in a couple of Contagions.  My sideboarding is generally –four Flesh Reaver, -four Phyrexian Negator, -two Null Rod,  +four Masticore, +four Powder Keg, and +two Contagion, with the additional prospect of siding in Sol Ring if I elect to play it on a given day.  Hypnotic Specter, while not very good against Sligh, stays in for lack of a suitable replacement.  However, if you are maindecking Phyrexian War Beasts over Phyrexian Negators, side out the Hypnotic Specters instead of the Phyrexian War Beasts.

       I would now like to address one minor sideboarding issue that has continually come up regarding this matchup. That is, why not use Spinning Darkness, especially since it is better than Contagion?  The answer to this is that Spinning Darkness is worse than Contagion in nearly every other matchup, and is therefore not worth using valuable sideboard slots on over the far more versatile Contagion, which is better in the mirror match and against Stompy.  Contagion, I concede, is not great against Sligh. However, it is not bad either, and since there are so many cards that you want to side out against Sligh, Contagion comes in simply for lack of a better option, sort of a "why the hell not?" type of decision. Spinning Darkness, I have discovered, is not very good at all, especially given the disappearance of Ball Lightning from the Type I metagame (Spinning Darkness is good against the Ball). You will sometimes get caught without three black cards to remove from the game and more importantly, Spinning Darkness has poor synergy with Yawgmoth's Will.  Most importantly, though, Spinning Darkness will just be overkill, not needed at all given the fact that Masticore and Powder Keg will be more than enough to take care of things.  

        In conclusion, a Sligh deck will have a very difficult time burning you out because they will be compelled to try and deal with your large threats or else die.  It would be fair to say that games two and three are grossly in favor of Legend Black, or any Suicide Black deck that is built in this way.  It is very likely that if you lost game one, you will win the next two games.


        STOMPY

        Game one is distinctly in Stompy’s favor, but as with Sligh, you can get some cheap wins with Sinkholes - even more so than against Sligh, as many Stompy decks will only run nine or ten lands.  True, they only need one or two mana to operate, but this is one of your chances in game one. Another chance you have is if you can survive the early game by blocking with Flesh Reavers and slowing them down with Hymn to Tourachs, Nantuko Shade can run amok.  But that too is not necessarily great given the presence of River Boa, which you will not be able to remove, or neutralize in game one, unless you are maindecking Masticores.  

        Phyrexian Negators are horrible against Stompy, and any attempt to attack or block with them will likely be met with an enlarged weenie blocker to make you lose all your permanents.  Perhaps your best creature overall against Stompy is Hypnotic Specter.  They cannot block Hypnotic Specter, and if it comes out on the first turn, you have a chance.  Furthermore, Stompy will have several dead cards game one.  Hidden Herd immediately comes to mind, and perhaps Hidden Gibbons.  Skyshroud Elite will also be weakened.  But Stompy has an edge in game one.

        But, as with Sligh, games two and three are going to be in your favor, but not in nearly the same lopsided way depending on the circumstances.  There are several annoying things that Stompy can do. The first is using Rancor to thwart Dystopia.  If they have a Rancor in play, they can sacrifice the Rancor every turn to prevent your Dystopia from working.  Secondly, if the Stompy deck is playing Null Rods, they can ruin your Powder Kegs and horribly weaken Masticore. You have to beware of this before siding in four Masticores and four Powder Kegs, because this can be a nightmare as you have no way to remove a Null Rod. Thankfully, most Stompy decks do not run Null Rod because it dilutes their one-dimensional attacking strategy.  Thirdly, Stompy can side in multiple Composts - a strategy that I don’t see that often.

        What should the Suicide player do? You should side in Dystopias, Powder Kegs, Masticores, and Contagions - essentially your entire sideboard.  However, if there is a significant Stompy presence in your area, you should be siding in the best anti-Stompy card of all, Perish.  If you are siding in a couple of Perishes, your chances of winning against this deck increase dramatically.  If you are siding in four Perishes, they will have no chance of winning the match.  But you will not always have the luxury of siding in Perish if you were not expecting Stompy, so let us leave it out for a moment, as its power against Stompy is obvious.

        Looking at the other cards, how will you in some combination use all of them?  First of all, side out all Phyrexian Negators and Flesh Reavers in your deck, along with all four Sinkholes and almost all four Duresses - you can Duress a Growth spell or a Rancor, but as the game moves along, Duress will be essentially useless against a deck running over thirty creatures.  As for Sinkhole, it should be sided out even before you would side out Duress.  Going for the lucky mana-screw plan in games two and three is unwise because it is a weak, desperation plan to begin with.  Your victory conditions after sideboarding will be Hypnotic Specter, Nantuko Shade, and Masticore.  I am not going to get into specific quantities or combinations of how you should configure the Dystopias, Powder Kegs, Masticores, and Contagions, because you will have to judge each version of Stompy differently. Here is a sample sideboarding maneuver, though:
-four Flesh Reaver, -four Phyrexian Negator, -four Sinkhole, -three Duress, +four Masticore, +four Powder Keg, +four Contagion, +three Dystopia.


         SUICIDE BLACK

        If you are playing Legend Black and your opponent is playing a version running Sarcomancies and Carnophages, then you have likely already won.  In a straight mirror, it will mostly come down to luck - who can get the first Sinkhole or Hymn to Tourach off, or who draws more Nantuko Shades, etc. Sideboarding should involve the insertion of four Contagions (or however many you have), and a couple of Masticores.  Contagions will kill Nantuko Shades, Hypnotic Specters, all but neutralize Phyrexian Negators, and allow you to pull off combat tricks. Side out Flesh Reavers and Null Rods. You don’t want four Masticores because of its vulnerability to a Hymn to Tourach, but it is nevertheless a solid card that can take out Hypnotic Specters and Phyrexian Negators.  If you are playing a variant of Legend Black without Null Rods and Flesh Reavers, side out Powder Kegs and perhaps a couple of Phyrexian War Beasts or Masticores to make room for Contagions.  If for some reason you are playing Diabolic Edicts in your sideboard, you might also want to make room for a couple.


        ZOO

        This matchup is grossly in favor of Suicide Black.  First and foremost, Zoo decks (both more high end ones running Call of the Herds and Serendib Efreets, and “Gun” Zoo, running one-drops and more burn) will simply roll over and die to a couple of Wastelands and Sinkholes. Their mana base is horrendous, and unlike Keeper, the only deck I can think of with a comparably bad manabase, they will be able to do little to protect it. Some Zoo decks run Force of Will, but this will not be nearly enough. They might steal game one if they can survive the mana disruption to play enough creatures, but after sideboarding, you will simply outmuscle them.  Beware of Compost, though.  You may also encounter Zoo decks built in “The Patriot” style, running Mother of Runes, Meddling Mages, and Shadow creatures. These decks will not only be smashed by Masticores, but will be hapless against Dystopia.


         WORKSHOP DECKS
   
         This is a tough fight. There are all sorts of variants of Workshop decks. All run Juggernauts and Su-Chi, but I have seen some versions that run Metalworker, Snake Basket, Null Brooch, and Grafted Skullcap. There are also the “Stacker” versions that run Goblin Welders. This is probably the superior version of Workshop, and you will of course be indentured to kill any Goblin Welders that hit play or else suffer the horrific consequences. A game one Goblin Welder probably means lights out for you. Then there are other versions that splash blue & black for power nine, tutors, counters, and Capsize.  These decks are ultra-rare, but they do have the ability to spring a quick The Abyss on you. Null Rod is very good against most versions of this deck, being that they will run full sets of jewelry and other artifacts requiring activation costs, and is your main hope for victory.  

       Your plan in game one against most Workshop decks is to try and get a Null Rod into play and/or Wasteland/Sinkhole their Mishra's Workshops to keep their mana down. But they will often get explosive draws beyond your control, and if a Null Rod is not drawn, or if an unchecked Goblin Welder gets to work on their side, it can be all over you before you can really get going.  Side in a couple of Masticores, some Powder Kegs, and Contagions, removing Phyrexian Negators, Flesh Reavers, and Null Rods. Not the greatest solution, but you do your best with what you have and go from there.

        RANDOM 9 YEAR-OLDS PLAYING TYPE II DECKS, FIRES  
        DECKS, OR SECRET FORCE DECKS, etc.

        You are going to encounter these decks fairly often in Type I play, because there are legions of scrubs in Type I, and you may have to deal with them in the early rounds of a tournament. Surprisingly enough, that nine-year old with Blastoderms and Saproling Bursts, that clueless casual player with a bunch of mana critters and burn spells, or that newbie with Wild Mongrels and Fiery Tempers can be a headache of a matchup. This is because Suicide Black decks, most of all Legend Black, can be so geared towards beating other high-caliber Type I decks, that a bad deck played by a bad player can sometimes provide an unexpected difficulty. You can, and will sometimes lose game ones to scrubs and their ridiculous decks.  No problem, because you will beat them into submission after siding in Masticores, Powder Kegs, Contagions, Dystopias, and Perishes, but at least be aware of these decks and be prepared to possibly lose the first game.


         GROUP 3: THE COMBO DECKS


         TURBOLAND

   An annoying matchup that I would have to call a toss-up. This is for two reasons. They have very few non-basic lands, which will make their manabase more difficult to disrupt, and the fact that they are playing only blue and green will make them not the easiest deck to color-screw. They can save an island targeted by Sinkhole with a Gush if they have two islands in play, a loss in tempo for them, but annoying nonetheless, and just tragic if Horn of Greed is in play. The second reason that this match is such a fight is because of Oath of Druids.  If they are not maindecking Oath of Druids, the Turboland player will almost certainly sideboard Oath of Druids against you, which will compel you to side in Dystopias, which can also remove their Explorations. They will often side into the full Oath plan with Spike Weavers and Morphlings, and they can protect the Oath just as a traditional Oath deck would.

        The last time I played against a Turboland deck in a tournament, I was fortunate to salvage a draw after losing the first game. The Oath plan is extremely annoying.  Do everything in your power to force a Dystopia through, then leave it in play for a few turns, especially if you are beating down with creatures.  On the plus side, Turboland decks will have no point removal for your creatures and will not be running Mana Drains.


        WORLDGORGER DRAGON.DEC

        The newest combo deck in Type I is a legitimate force. This deck will be strong despite its horrendous weakness against Keeper. This is a battle for Suicide Black, and from my testing to this point, appears to be slightly in favor of Worldgorger Dragon.dec, and may require Planar Voids to turn this into an easy matchup for Suicide.  At least you will not be in the same position as the other aggressive decks of Type I, which will have almost no chance against this deck that can win on turn two with regularity. You will have more success against versions that run a full compliment of non basic lands like Gemstone Mine than versions that run only blue/black with four Underground Seas (I favor the latter version), since you can disrupt them a bit more with Wasteland.

   What are the factors that make this matchup difficult? The fact that Worldgorger Dragon.dec only needs two mana in play to go off will make it doubtful that you can prevent them from at least carrying out part of their strategy. By “part” I am referring to the fact that, frustratingly for you, if they are in a losing position and have only an Animate spell in hand without a Whispers of the Muse, Stroke of Genius, or other win condition, they can still draw the game by animating a dead Worldgorger Dragon. This is a very annoying tactic that will allow them to draw games that they are about to lose.  Then they will have a fresh start in the next game.

        Another problem element is that they will have a very high chance of either winning the game or drawing the game once the games goes into topdeck mode, provided they have a dragon in the graveyard.  All they need to do is topdeck an Animate spell, win condition, or tutor spell, depending on what they need, and as I have mentioned, all they need is two mana in play.  An unlucky Hymn to Tourach can even work to their advantage if it sends the Dragon into the graveyard.  

       Perhaps the most unsettling thing about Worldgorger Dragon.dec is the fact that you can have them at one life and about to be attacked by two Phyrexian Negators and a Nantuko Shade, yet the game can just come to a sudden end no matter what the board position.

       On the positive side, you can be extremely disruptive towards their strategy, and if you can deny them one color of their mana, you will help yourself out immensely. Duresses and Hymn to Tourachs will generally be annoying, and if you can pull Animate spells, you will seriously hamper their ability to pull off the combo.

        I do not want to get carried away here in praising Worldgorger Dragon.dec.  They do not have any sort of drawing engine and are overly reliant on Entomb.  This deck is quite good, but not nearly at the level of some of the great combo decks of the past such as four-Necro Trix, and degenerate Academy.  If this deck becomes a major force, Planar Void is a complete hosing. A first turn Planar Void will quite simply be game over, as their Worldgorger Dragon will not be able to hit the graveyard and they will not be able to go off.  This will also be a solid answer to the sideboarding strategy that I have proposed of bringing in Avatars of Woe to reanimate against Suicide.  I would not be surprised to see this deck become common enough to warrant a full four Planar Void sideboard slots in some metagames.  Diabolic Edict can also be a quality card against this deck, as it can force them to lose all their permanents when cast in response to the Worldgorger Dragon being reanimated. Without Planar Voids or other hosers, a matchup not overwhelmingly, but noticeably in favor of Worldgorger, but with hosers, can be made very much in favor of Suicide.


        ACADEMY

        An ultra-rare deck to encounter in real life. Yet, I do have a few things to say about this deck, much of it unrelated to the actual gameplay of Academy.  I have still never played against an Academy deck at Neutral Ground, where players have complete access to all the power cards, yet don’t ever play Academy.  The bottom line is that Academy is merely a good deck that is not nearly as effective as Worldgorger Dragon.dec, which I believe will become the number one combo deck in Type I rather quickly.  I wouldn’t be thinking much about Academy, but if it shows up, you’ll have a good matchup here, especially if you can resolve a Null Rod. Academy is prone to bad draws and can have a hard time putting things together, given that its signature card is restricted.

        Many proponents of Academy love to talk about how this deck is able to consistently go off, and tout its ability to overcome any challenge. They will also speak about Tolarian Academy as if it is not restricted, as if the fact that there are not four Tolarian Academies in the deck is no obstacle at all.  Well then why did the DCI restrict Tolarian Academy? Not for no reason, I can tell you that much. The reason of course was so that Academy would go from being the best deck of all time to being just another solid deck.

        Academy should not be dismissed or taken lightly - it can certainly go off very early and crushes any deck without disruption or countering - but I do not buy the common argument of Academy's proponents, who maintain that Academy has the upper hand against Suicide.  This is simply not true, and you should feel comfortable in this matchup against what is an explosive, but inconsistent and overrated deck.  Academy will beat itself some of the time with bad draws, and of couse will have its share of unbeatable hands.  

         Perhaps the most important factor of all when evaluating Academy decks is to remember that they are extremely rare and as such, are generally not something to consider when preparing for a tournament.  I have noticed that Academy is somewhat of a "phantom" deck.  What do I mean by this? Well, Academy is certainly discussed from time to time on the Internet, but let's face it: a lot of people talk this deck up, but in the end, a very small percentage of these people have either the true conviction in this deck's ability to play it, the skill to play it even if they do have the conviction, the desire to play it, or even own the cards to play it.  Seriously, don't sweat Academy.  


        PANDEBURST

        Another ultra-rare deck that nobody really plays. Also happens to be hosed by Planar Void or other graveyard removal, but don’t even think too hard about this deck. It is a highly favorable matchup, as Pandeburst decks are also extremely susceptible to your hand and land disruption.

        TRIX

         Yet another super-rare combo deck, and unlike Academy, which can actually work if built properly and played well, most Trix deck are now sad piles of restricted cards thrown together in a pathetic attempt to play this famous old combo. Most are trying to somehow get a Necropotence or Yawgmoth's Bargain into play, not likely against a lot of decks, least of all Suicide Black.  Several uninformed advocates of this abyssmal deck have attempted to portray this archetype as a deadly force in the Type I metagame, but I for one am not buying it. Trix is a weak deck in Type I right now, maybe you will see one every so often.


        GROUP 4: MISCELLANEOUS DECKS


         MIRACLE-GROW/SUPER-GROW


        A solid two decks gaining in popularity. Completely overrated, but still pretty decent.  They are designed to beat control decks, and you should have your way here. Winter Orb, if used, can be annoying, but not fatal.  Game one, it is possible that a Quirion Dryad can grow out of hand, but don’t bet on it. More likely they will get screwed by your disruption, especially your landkill (they play a very low land-count) and get overrun by your creatures which they will not be able to remove. Games two and three you will surely have your way with them thanks to Dystopia, and Perish if you have it. The common creature base for Miracle Grow seems to be four Nimble Mongoose and four Quirion Dryad.  

        A more interesting deck to me is Super-Grow, which is basically Miracle Grow with the addition of white.  This give them point removal in Swords to Plowshares, Meddling Mage, and the protection from black Mystic Enforcer.  Once again, a matchup that you will win - in the end, their shaky mana situation and vulnerability to Dystopia and/or Perish will be the deciding factors.

        PARFAIT

        A mono-white deck that attempts to control the game without the benefit of countermagic, Parfait will not be able to say no to anything you do. However, this can be a very annoying struggle. Wasteland will be ineffective, and Land Tax will prevent you from mana-screwing them and dilute their hand against your Hymn to Tourachs.  But you can nevertheless win a lot of games by overwhelming this ultra-slow deck before they can get set up. They will have several deadly enchantments game one that you cannot deal with, such as Story Circle and Moat.  However, Dystopias out of the board and perhaps Masticores if you deem fit, will often be sufficient to win this matchup. You can expect Circle of Protection: Black, additional Swords to Plowshares, and sometimes cards like Light of Day. Overall, not a deck I have a tremendous amount of respect for due to its lack of countering ability and raw card drawing. Nevertheless, this is a real fight since Parfait is not lacking for good answers against Suicide Black.


        ENCHANTRESS

   This wretched excuse for a Type I deck just stinks. As with Parfait, we have a slow, non-blue based control deck.  Except this deck runs mostly, or all non basic lands, and is extremely vulnerable to mana-disruption, especially given the lack of Land Tax.  The typical colors are green, white, and black. You will typically shred their hand and keep their mana down, and once again, this is yet another deck that Dystopia wrecks.  Do beware of The Abyss, however. Similar sideboard strategy to what you would do against Parfait.  Enchantress is an extremely weak deck that has been supported by delusional proponents for quite some time, don’t give it too much thought.   


        SURVIVAL

   This deck has been known to show up rarely at Type I tournaments. Once again, you’ll want Dystopias to get rid of their Survival of The Fittests, and the mana-creatures that they run. Attack their shoddy multicolor mana-base with Wastelands and Sinkholes, and away you go. Another deck that is ruined by graveyard hosing should Worldgorger Dragon.dec necessitate such a sideboarding strategy.
   

        NETHER VOID


        A slower mono-black deck. Since you are the faster deck here, you have an advantage, especially considering that there is nothing they can sideboard against you that you cannot sideboard against them.  Of course you can lose if they get a fast start and get the first Sinkhole off.  They will also be running Nantuko Shades, but more than likely you will swarm them with your more plentiful creatures.  Contagions are a good sideboard choice here.

-----------------------------------------------------------



Part VI: Conclusion

   Suicide Black is the perfect deck for you if you enjoy picking up a rock and damaging your opponent’s brain with repeated savage blows.  If you enjoy playing straightforward, redundant decks, Suicide Black is an excellent choice.  It is my opinion that this is the most outstanding aggressive deck available in Type I, and it is among the elite decks of Type I.  You will enjoy favorable matchups against control decks, most aggressive decks, and most combo decks.  Suicide Black is at its best against blue-based control decks, which you will need to beat in order to win in Type I.  No deck excels in this area more than Suicide Black, especially the build I believe to be optimal, Legend Black.  Suicide Black is one of the most fearsome archetypes of Type I, and if you want to win in Type I, consider playing Suicide Black.

------------------------------------------------------------

[Magimaster]

that was a pretty nice primer...


Part 1 was spot on, except for a couple of random points.

just a couple of things with part 2 tho'

- Academy is one of the most brutal fast combo's out there. The ironic thing is, it's the only powered deck in my area (and thus sweeps the non-sacntioned T1 tourneys thus so). Academy packs so much card drawing, that even 1 card draw spell or tutor (tinker included) is enough to negate the effect of a bad draw. Null Rod often doesn't come out fast enough to seriously stall the Academy player, and I've lost a couple of games where I had a Null Rod out (in one case on turn 2!. Your reasoning of Academy being sub-optimal due to it's star card being restricted is not correct. It packs many draw 3-4-7's as well as a few tutors to ensure that it gets it into play. It may be rare, but it's a powerhouse, and properly teched out it can even give a good show against Keeper. Abeyances are nightmares against Sui. There are many things wrong with how you depicted Academy.

In short - Your description of Academy is grossly incorrect.

- Parfait is a tough match against Sui. Land Tax is nightmare as well, coming out brutally fast before you can reliably discard it, negating your LD and Discard effectively. It runs enough Plows to stall you before it gets a finisher on the board like a Story Circle. All Plains means your wastelands are ass. Seals get rid of Rods + Kegs to ensure Scroll Rack and Mesa get used effectively. After boarding the match stays the same. He puts in more crap like Moat or CoP:Black, seals get rid of Dystopia's, the artifact creatures you sided in to avoid the CoP get plowed or sealed away...etc...

it's not lopsided in any way to either of the decks, but you make Parfait sound like ass. It's not. Parfait played well can cause tons of Headaches for a Sui player.

Same stuff with enchantress, it's not super, but it's not as bad as you claim it to be.

- Where's White Weenie?  It's a pretty effective deck against Sui.

other than that your primer was informative.

[Zherbus]

White weenie is pretty much dead in a competitive field. In an aggro field it is quite alive. I would say the masticore can take care of many a Knight after ripping any swords from the WW players hand.

Enchantress is bad against mono-black. Ask CooberP himself. The deck basically has to get out a moat, abyss, or pariah to stabilize. Problem is, its mana base is almost as fragile as keepers.

As far as academy goes, most players who play academy play a version that packs cards like abeyance to ensure control isnt an auto-loss for them. If I ran academy in a aggro only environment, I'd probably leave out anti-control measures and focus on just going off faster.

[Magimaster]

Quote (Zherbus @ July 02 2002,07:21)As far as academy goes, most players who play academy play a version that packs cards like abeyance to ensure control isnt an auto-loss for them. If I ran academy in a aggro only environment, I'd probably leave out anti-control measures and focus on just going off faster.

Thing is, Abeyance isn't only an anti-control measure. It stops wastelands pretty nicely.

[Pyromaniac]

Overall, congratulations with this. It's pretty well written, except for one glaring(imho) error and a few smaller ones:

The glaring error is this: You keep writing in the "I" form. I really, REALLY dislike that, especially in a primer. You don't have to keep saying I did this and I did that, it's annoying as hell to keep reading that.

The most prevalent of those other things are:

" My Legend Black deck that I developed with the help of Yan “Negator” Margolin, which I regard as the optimal Suicide Black variant available at this moment, immediately made use of this card to devastating effect." You cannot say it's the optimal suicide variant, cause those differ per metagame

The first paragraph of the Carnophage and Sarcomancy discussion should be rewritten or even left out. You don't diss an entire website in a primer, you're basically saying that everyone at BD was bad etc....

" However, I would like to offer what I believe to be the optimal Suicide Black deck available in the current Type I metagame, Legend Black, my Suicide Black deck that I have been playing for months.  I developed this deck with Yan “Negator” Margolin, my friend who I have built numerous winning decks with in all formats."  Would you mind not taking all the credit for things other ppl thought of as well. The fact that you're the first to publicize it doesn't mean you and Yan invented it per se

From the 2nd part:

"My own take on Accelerated Blue, Legend Blue, was the most successful variant of the deck, and defined the archetype and Type I in general last summer and on into the fall". You didn't create this deck dammit. You weren't the only person to recognize the power of FoF. Other ppl recognized it as well, it's just that you were so friggin annoying defending it that legend Blue was the best known example

[Dozer]

Quote WORKSHOP DECKS [...]
Side in a couple of Masticores, some Powder Kegs, and Contagions, removing Negators, Reavers, and Null Rods.

First of, cudos for this primer, Legend. It is a very good read with sound content.
However, I have something to say to your section on Workshop decks. I recently placed 33rd of 66 in my first sanctioned T1 tournament with Suicide. It was in Dülmen (Germany), where the metagame features a multitude of Workshop decks of all kinds. Although I did face only one Workshop deck in seven rounds, a friend of mine played Mono-B, too, and our combined experience yielded this:

a) Null Rod is good, but not overly good. What one would really need is Kill Switch, which we found too expensive. It's correct to side them out for Masticores.

b) Contagion SB is no good. Any critter hefted with Contagion-Counters will just be cleaned again by Goblin Welder. Our choice was Diabolic Edict. Additionally, we ran Spinning Darkness, which helps in blocking (we both ran Sarcomancies) and reduces some of the damage. Plus, it kills Juggernaut, Welder and (in most cases) Triskelion.
Spinning Darkness is better than Contagion, but still suboptimal in this match-up, though. Instant Edicts are a necessity.

c) Next time, I'm going to side 3-4 Planar Void not only against Dragonm but against Welder. Once a Welder is active, you have lost unless you can remove it. Recurring Triskelions and Juggernauts are bad news.

Dozer

/edit: A report is only available in German so far. It's up on www.morphling.de.

[Zherbus]

Honestly, why would one play suicide in an environment full of workshops?

[Legend]

Magimaster, Pyromaniac etc.

1)
On the Academy decks

Do you think that the Academy deck would perform the same if it had access to 4 Tolarian Academies? No, it would obviously be much better, which is why it was restricted.

I mean, I have tested this match. Otherwise I wouldn't write about it. A perfect example of an incident that crystallized my viewpoint was when I beat Matt D'Avanzo's Academy pretty badly at NG last year with Suicide.

My only points on why Academy is generally not unbelievable were:

A) It ony has 1 Academy, so it is not nearly as good as it once was. And yes, it is prone to inconsistent draws.


B) It is not a common deck choice in Type I.


2)On use of the 1st person, "I", "I did this" etc.

The reason I write in the first person is because this is the proper way to write when you are making an argument, defending a position, or forcefully putting forth a concept. Believe me on this, years of writing historical argument papers at a high level of academia has taught me that this is correct.


3)Parfait and Enchantress

Look, I am sorry, but these are not great decks. Parfait is very average, and Enchantress just stinks. Just look at Daniel Rosenheck's (CooberP) record in sanctioned play with this deck. Not pretty. Suicide has a favorable matchup against Parfait, and I stand by that. Enchantress is just an awful deck.



4) On Legend Blue

Actually, the issue is really not FOF at all. Everyone realized it was good. But if you had been paying attention last year, you would have realized that on BDominia, when I arrived there with Legend Blue, the mono-blue deck of choice was Mikephoen's Ophidian Draw-Go deck, a strictly inferior deck. There were no XLU decks running the full compliment of Moxes and running Mana Leaks.  You would have also realized that the maindeck 4 Back to Basics was my idea, that cleaning out the mana base to zero nonbasics was my idea, and that I was the first person to run 4 Morphlings in Mono-Blue. I fine-tuned the counter base and the sideboard, then I went out and won the biggest Type I event in New York for that summer, the Grudge Match Qualifier, setting the tone for the rest of the summer metagame.

Even in areas where you doubt my contributions, that is not even relevant. Just as with Legend Black right now, I attracted more attention to the archetype than anyone, I promoted it endlessly, and I wrote more than anyone on the subject, just as I am doing now. Promotion is one of the main elements of being involved or associated with a deck, and you need to understand that that is every bit as important as actual work put in on a deck. I have already addressed this issue in another thread, so enough on this.

[Dozer]

Quote (Zherbus @ July 02 2002,12:29)Honestly, why would one play suicide in an environment full of workshops?

What else to play if you don't have Power available?

And anyway, I thought Suicide could fare better. Actually, it didn't. Ah well, next time...

Although the funny thing is that I was only paired against Workshop once, and that was colorless mana denial with Sphere of Resistance and Juggernaut as finisher.
The whole thing in short: I went 3-3-1, tying (sp?) with a lucky Keeper, winning against Elfball, U/r, Dark Keeper and losing to Sphere-Workshop, SquirrelNest w/ Enchantresses, and Trix with AK/Intuition and Oath.

[Pyromaniac]

Legend: A primer is a general description of a deck/archetype, with general explanations and card choices. You don't write those in the "I"  form, cause you're not trying to convince people to play it, you're just explaining the good and bad points.

If I'm wrong, plz correct me, but I thought a primer wasn't a completely worked out argument for a deck.

[Cuandoman]

1. It's written well except of the use of the first person.
2. Where is the mention of Moat in Keeper's Sideboard?
3. The whole thing about the difference between your deck and other Suicide is lame; as is the text about Legend Blue.

[Bob Bastards]

Legend I love playing suicide (its the only decent Type 1 deck I can make and be competitive with) and your primer seem really good. I just start reading it. I really think it will be better if you not write it in the first person. A primer is suppose to be a guide line and a explanation of card and of a metagame not a argument. Use your deck as an explanation not an end...  

[Zherbus]

My thoughts are this:

First Primers are always biased. His is just more obvious. If he wants to celebrate himself, thats fine. Maybe its just me but I am not bothered by it at all. You, as the reader, need to pretend this isn't the Legend that you saw posts from on BD. Think of it as just another decent type 1 player and it'll certainly sound less arrogant. It is well written, and personally if a primer is one player advising another, he/she usually talks about their experiences.

It didnt list what every card did and was still long as hell, I thought it was very complete. Even though its played far less now, do mention moat.

As far as him stating what is acceptable to play, the whole one-drop thing is very debatable with people. Personally I've always hated having 8 zombies in the deck. I always though 4 was ideal, but now Im even testing legends critter base to see if it does better in testing before I say its a shitty way to go or not.

Legend, if you want to address this:
Maybe a possible solution would be to separate 'fact' from 'opinion'? Use footnotes for your playtesting results/experiences/opinions/etc.

All and all I liked it and would pay good money to see someone swarmed by a bunch of schoolyard children wielding cudgels.

[FeverDog]

I think most ppl know on which points me and Legend agree and disagree so i wont get into it again. I will just say one thing, hopefully for the last time:

Running 4 Zombies IS a viable choice, especially if Reavers dont fit the bill. My recent playtesting has only convinced me further that running them is a nice option in a less control-oriented field.

Also, could you explain why you left out Spinning Darkness from your sideboard? It is much better vs Sligh than Contagion is. It kills any creature, gains you 3 life(huge) and it isnt card-disadvantage like Contagion.\n\n

[Magimaster]

Quote From Legend

An ultra-rare deck to encounter in real life.  I have still never played against an Academy deck at Neutral Ground, where players have complete access to all the power cards, yet don’t ever play Academy.

Quote
I mean, I have tested this match. Otherwise I wouldn't write about it. A perfect example of an incident that crystallized my viewpoint was when I beat Matt D'Avanzo's Academy pretty badly at NG last year with Suicide.

Academy >>> Turboland

Academy  Worldgorger (we'll see, but from what I see Academy is still stronger)

Even restricted, Academy is still way more faster, consistent and brutally effective, as well as the most resiliant against control, it doesn't just bend over and die. It packs more card drawing to help recover from a sub-par draw, Sideboard more flexible...

and also,

it's Blue

It's Ultra Rare, but it's the strongest combo engine. Maybe you should find a 2002 build of Academy and try your luck against it with Sui, you cant' even go 50/50 even maindecking 4 rods (trust me, the Academy deck in my area belongs to my best friend, and I've played against that thing thousands of times, or more like watch my friend play solitaire)

Respect.

as for parfait...

meh, couldn't really care about that, I think its decent, but I don't wanan argue about it.

anyways, hope you write some more articles...

[Legend]

To Pyromaniac and everyone else.....

This is to clear things up for you....


OK, I am going to make something VERY clear right about now.....


I do not even pretend to be objective---I have an opinion, I have a viewpoint, and I have an agenda--the agenda being to promote my own viewpoint!!!!! There is no secret here---I am a promoter.

To me, the purpose of a primer is not to be objective. The purpose of a primer is to dispense my viewpoint into a medium--the medium being the article that I have written.

I know that I have the required expertise to write on this subject, or just about anything related to Type I, so I have no qualms about writing a forceful primer that is based on argument.

Yes, I am putting forth arguments here---I feel that the purpose of the primer is to make arguments and support them with examples. I don't care whether or not someone else thinks Carnophages are good--this is a primer written by me, and therefore should have my stamp on it.

You know what else? I not only couldn't care less about people's reaction to self-celebration, I think that it is a perfectly reasonable thing. Yeah, I am touting my decks. Yeah, I am proud of them, the work that I have put into them, and the work that anyone associated with me has put into them.


See, I don't make a secret of any of this, it is all out in the open.

So to answer Pyromaniac's question, hell no, a primer should not be objective, it should be structured around several driving arguments and themes, just like any academic paper should be.

In fact, I view this as an academic work in much the same way I would approach a paper on Ancient Rome--I am trying to make an argument here.

Would people like me to put this little rant in as a disclaimer? I would be happy to.

As for actual omissions on things like Moat, I will add them in immediately.

[kirdape3]

Legend's right.  Remember the bitches that would normally come out on Beyond Dominia when somebody would write a primer and everyone would bitch that the writer was wrong?  The only way to defend against that is to make it partial to one idea or another; otherwise the document would reach nearly 100 pages.

Think of this not as a 'Primer' in the classic sense, with history and development as well as the current status of the deck, but as a scientific paper.  In that it is mostly perfect; however there are some simple grammar errors (a couple of capitalization mistakes and whatnot).  Once those are cleaned up and any problems we can think of are taken care of, this will be a worthy addition to ANY Type One aficionado's reading material.

[Legend]

Kird Ape & Zherbus

Thank you, I REALLY appreciate your understanding of the situation, along with the suggestions.

Kird Ape, I would actually like it if you could point out some of the grammar errors that you spotted and tell me about them so I can correct them.

I would also like to note that I have added in a few words about Moat in the Keeper matchup, and I have addressed the Spinning Darkness issue.

Additionally, I have made a very slight change to the Parfait discussion, and have made a massive change to the Academy discussion that further crystallizes my viewpoint on that matter. I have also added more criticism of Enchantress and Trix, and made a couple of minor adjustments to Part 1.

Keep the suggestions and notes of omissions coming so I can address as many as possible.

Oh yeah, one other things I am looking into: perhaps adding a disclaimer at the beginning of the primer if more people cannot come to see what the purpose of my writing is.

Try and appreciate it for what it is, I really feel like I did a good job here of hitting on all the key points.

[Os-Vegeta]

Legend, thanks a lot for writing this primer.  I slightly modified your deck (replaced the broken cards for 1.5 legal tutors) for T1.5 (the environment I play mostly anymore).  I now sb Light of Day in my five color black sliver deck because of you.  You have a phenomenal deck there and you wrote a phenomenal primer for it.

[Milamber]

really nice primer.  actually, i'd go so far as to say this is easily in the top3 that i have ever read.  (rakso's and zherbus's being the other 2.)

i think the use of first person helped more than hindered.  it gave a feel of showing you have actually tested a vs. b, rather than merely theorizing on the subject.

the only thing i can really say is that i agree with magimaster in that you have played down academy and parfait, esp. academy.  these decks can sometimes just win.  academy goes off despite rit, duress, hymn followed by sink, etc.  parfait drops story circle or whatever.

i would like to see you write more primers that are so detailed.  good job, and keep it up. please.

[Legend]

Milamber & Os-Vegeta

Thank you very much for the kind words, I really appreciate it.

On the Academy and Parfait issues, I am definitely paying attention to these things, and of course there will probably be yet another adjustment made as more opinions flow in.

So far, I have adjusted the Academy to at least justify my position, but as I have said, it will need some more changes probably. Same for Parfait. We shall see.

[Magimaster]

Atleast we've hit a medium of sorts.

Good Job on the primer!

[Zharradan]

Very informative.

Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed primer, Legend.

If possible, I'd like to see some more detail in the "which lands to include (or not include)" area... You state that the Port is total ass which is fair enough, but how about some other things like a Lake of the Dead to help speed up a Shade? This may seem like a totally stupid, janky idea to you since you have played this deck extensively, - but it may not be so obvious to others. Perhaps even if you just stress that you feel running zero non-basics (since the 5 Strips really are just 0cc Sinkholes, not really land) is important ... and if so, why you think it is important.

Also.. You mention that if your opening hand contains a Ritual and both a creature and some disruption, you should opt for the disruption; but what if your opening hand is somthing like Swamp, Ritual, Duress, Hymn, Sinkhole, and two other cards? Do you Duress+Hymn, or Duress+Sinkhole (assuming you went second in that case)? A small discussion of when to use which elements of your disruption could be a good addition.

[spin13]

One thing I noticed (or failed to notice, as the case may be) was any mention of Balance in the Keeper matchup.  This is a worse oversight than Moat, as Balance is probably your worst enemy beyond the permanent effect of The Abyss.

Not only is it Tutorable by all their Tutors, but it is castable at 2 mana, and creates repercussions for each and every critter you've cast, as well as every Hymn and Sinkhole you've cast.

Obviously you know the effect of a well timed, and sometimes unstoppable Mystical/Balance, but you really need to mention this, and elaborate somewhat on it.  Walking blindsiding into Balance after netdecking a copy of Legend Black straight from the primer, while possibly fairly funny, is no way to teach somebody about the deck.

 -Eric

[Zharradan]

Oh, another thing - you made no comment on the Nether Void matchup at all.

[Legend]

Zharradan and Spin

I did make mention of the Nether Void matchup, it is at the end.

As for elaborations on the nonbasic situation,  I will elaborate on it later today when I get the chance. But as far as elaborating on the gameplay and disruption versus creature gameplay aspect...I think I have covered that pretty extensively. I cannot possibly get to every scenario, the goal here is that you will gain overarching themes and ideas from reading the primer...especially since the gameplay depends on what deck you are facing. I feel that I have covered gameplay issues rather thoroughly, this primer is really as detailed as I think it could get for the most part.

Spin, I definitely will add a word about Balance in the Keeper matchup. As you said, of course I am aware of it, but I for no apparent reason left it out of the Keeper matchup, and the only mention of it was briefly in my analysis of Null Rod. Thanks.

[jpmeyer]

On Sarcomancy and Carnophage:

(You've almost got what I'm going to say here, but to make everything 100% clear)

What I have found is that Nantuko Shade is what really invalidates these.  Prior to Nantuko Shade you would want to drop one of these and then deal damage while you throw out disruption.  With Nantuko Shade you can now switch the order so as to disrupt first and then have a threat that will make up the damage that the Zombies would have done until that point in one turn and come out way ahead afterwards.

On Workshop decks:

If anyone ever plays U/B Workshop decks anymore, you still have to be very wary of maindeck and/or sideboarded copies of The Abyss which can allow the deck to cheese out an easywin (espescially combined with all their mana acceleration.)  Secondly, while Stacker doesn't really need a large section on it (seeing how the deck is extremely rare outside of Germany,) the matchup pretty much revolves around Goblin Welder.  If Suicide has no creature removal (such as in game 1,) it simply loses to Goblin Welder.  There are so many things that can go wrong: Hymned creatures can come back at the price of worthless (because of Null Rod) artifacts, creature combat becomes completely lopsided, and Nantuko Shade even stops being a threat (attack with 2 creatures, one gets blocked, Weld it into a dead creature.)

[Legend]

OK, I will add a little more about Goblin Welder. I also think I will briefly discuss the Shadow creatures in the "not use" section and also Skittering Horror.

[Wobble]

Nice primer.

I certainly don't want to put myself at risk of being stung to death by an angry swarm of bees...but I'm not sure if I understand how to use Nantuko Shade correctly in your signature deck.

I think your explanation of the Shade under the creatures section could be improved if you could discuss how Nantuko Shade overcomes loss of tempo (by tieing up mana) in a deck designed to kill on a short clock. I'm not sure if I understand that completely, although I've yet to playtest your version. I want to hear more.

I also would like to know more about how the shade avoids direct damage, such as from fire/ice, bolts, earthquakes and masticore. If you are expending your mana on your turn to attack and do more damage, do you leave mana unspent to protect a shade in play on your opponent's turn, when it shrinks back to a 2/1 (assuming no tricks like DR in hand)?

In addition, your advancement that the Shade or the Reaver do as much damage as Sarcomancy/Carnophage reads a little like a New York street shell game can look to a tourist. It could be cleaned up a bit. For example, you make a simplistic comparison of the power of A sarcomany or carnophage to A nantuko shade, neglecting the fact that one could have cast two more before a nantuko hits play. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with your premise here, except to say that IMHO you could improve the entire commentary by leading with what the past strengths of including these creatures were then explaining why the shade and reaver are better afterwards.

I know it's a lot easier to be the critic than it is to be the author. I enjoyed the read.

 

[Zharradan]

Quote (Legend @ July 04 2002,02:41)as far as elaborating on the gameplay and disruption versus creature gameplay aspect...I think I have covered that pretty extensively.

That's not what I meant - I know you already described when to disrupt and when to cast creatures... I was asking about the different types of disruption.