Perfecting Long's Burning Desire

[Jacob Orlove]

Quote (Dante @ Oct. 20 2003,22:03)

Quote (Smmenen @ Oct. 20 2003,20:52)So I will try and spend some time tinkering with a post mirrodin build, although right now I'm very enamoured with Dragon and a new variant of Stax I've cooked up.

I'm curious - if long is the most degenerate deck you've seen and you want to build/tune/play the best deck possible at the time, why would you tinker with anything else?

Bill

Because he's hoping that the DCI will step in, and he wants to be ready for restrictions that shut the deck down (LED).

[Smmenen]

EDIT: Dead on Jacob.  That's the bigger picture..but:

That's a really really good question.

But sadly, it's answered simply and has already been answered in what I wrote above: it is hosed by Chalice.  And I expect Chalice to be everywhere.  

Then you have a relative cost/benefit analysis to go through.  Should I play alternative deck X, which I know either is not hosed by chalice or uses Chalice and which I is an objectively weaker deck, simply becuase of the expected prevanalnce of Chalice?  The answer to that question hinges on three points.  First, How prevalent is chalice going to be?  But really the pertinent question there is: how often/much is chalice going to really cost me games?  Second, can Long be tinkered with to adapt and win even faster?  Third, exogenous metagame shifts which make winning relatively harder/easier with long.  An example might be a huge increase in the number of Workshop decks increases the threat of chalice AND sphere.

Steve\n\n

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote (Smmenen @ Oct. 20 2003,18:52)VGB: that's fascinating that you say you don't see it dominating.
...
In my honest opinion, Long is the most degenerate deck I have ever played.  I don't say that lightly.  But yet, I see people who I respect seem to misvalue the deck.
...
To be honest, I'm flabbergasted by this kind of reaction.  In my mind it really can't get more degenerate than this deck.

I thoroughly agree that this is the most degenerate deck in the format - but it is nonetheless mentally taxing and skill-intensive, forcing a player to "earn" its degeneracy.  It also has the propensity to just die to core cards of various decks, from Sphere of Resistance to the "Glue of the Format", which often makes it flat out risky to try to integrate into various metas.

To pilot this deck also takes a certain mentality that not all people possess - taking pleasure in an almost pure mental exercise, where you are forced to pilot your hand a specific path with many incorrect and inferior options usually available, rather than just trying to play your cards when you can, which is what most other decks entail.  That is why the deck isn't dominating - the people who are best suited to playing it are also usually big control fans who detest combo decks due to them being historically unreliable.

[dandan]

Quote (Smmenen @ Oct. 21 2003,00:52)I honestly think that there is something wrong with Vintage in that Long isn't dominating.  I have several suspicions as to why: first of all, when people first test the deck, they come with some pre-conceptions and when the deck doesn't work like they want, they quickly give it up.  Let me explain, I heard Matt Smith tell me that he lost 9 out of 11 games to sligh with Long.  I was like, WTF?  When I talked with him further, it became evident that he was playing the deck like an academy deck instead of a I Win Now deck.  He would tutor up Twister, for example, something I never do.  So I think related to this is that Long is difficult to play correctly - unlike most of the degenerate decks we've had, Long actually takes a good time commitment to master, and I think most of the type one community just can't put in that kind of effort.  But once you master it, you got it.  It's like riding a bike - that's the thing I think most poeple miss.

Stephen Menendian

I play Sligh a lot, but you could play Long like it were Keeper and still win 90% versus Sligh. Sligh simply takes too long to kill you and has little effective disruption (Mountain Shamen/Vandal or Stripmine doesn't tend to stop a turn 2 kill).
I just can't see how it is possible to get 9 games from Long with Sligh. You could build an anti-Long Sligh but it would be horribly weak versus everything else AND would still lose to Long on average.

As for playing skill, I rate myself as barely competent and I can still get Long to win on turn 1 and 2* the vast majority of the time baring serious disruption from my opponent (Sphere, Chalice, Null Rod, Duress, FoW, Root Maze {honestly!}). As Smmenen pointed out in his article, skill helps you overcome these obstacles, to highlight my point a trained chimp can win with Long if the opponent doesn't intervene with the above.

*not counting longer games due to 'playing safe'

[MoreFling]

dandan: I'm assuming they are referring to Goblin Sligh, which can goldfish to a turn3 kill more often than you seem to think. Ankh Sligh has sucked balls ever since people only needed to play 1 or 2 lands to win.

[dandan]

Turn 3/turn 4 is too late. Basically that is a goldfish opponent and the goldfish shouldn't get 9/11!

My point wasn't meant to be a comment on Sligh (which I have widely commented on elsewhere) but far more to respond to this thread and in particular the skill level issue with Long. Even a 'bad' player can kill reliably on turns 1 and 2 with Long, a better player will win even when faced with obstacles. That is not healthy and the DCI should look 'long' and hard at this deck.

The problem for the DCI is that the metagame is not going to be more varied if they hamstring Long (LED, Spoils, Chrome Mox, even Burning Wish) and cripple prison (Workshop) because Tog and neoKeeper will still be around. Restricting Chalice would do little to help either as NeoAcademy, Dutch Tendrils and revamped Long would still goldfish far too fast against most decks. Prediction - DCI Restricted Spoils and Chrome Mox with a long watch list (also my choice if anyone cares).

[MoreFling]

So, in your last paragraph, you are saying that we should ban Yawgmoth's Will?

[Smmenen]

Quote (VideoGameBoy @ Oct. 20 2003,22:15)

Quote (Smmenen @ Oct. 20 2003,18:52)VGB: that's fascinating that you say you don't see it dominating.
...
In my honest opinion, Long is the most degenerate deck I have ever played.  I don't say that lightly.  But yet, I see people who I respect seem to misvalue the deck.
...
To be honest, I'm flabbergasted by this kind of reaction.  In my mind it really can't get more degenerate than this deck.

I thoroughly agree that this is the most degenerate deck in the format - but it is nonetheless mentally taxing and skill-intensive, forcing a player to "earn" its degeneracy.  It also has the propensity to just die to core cards of various decks, from Sphere of Resistance to the "Glue of the Format", which often makes it flat out risky to try to integrate into various metas.

To pilot this deck also takes a certain mentality that not all people possess - taking pleasure in an almost pure mental exercise, where you are forced to pilot your hand a specific path with many incorrect and inferior options usually available, rather than just trying to play your cards when you can, which is what most other decks entail.  That is why the deck isn't dominating - the people who are best suited to playing it are also usually big control fans who detest combo decks due to them being historically unreliable.

Take heed becuase VGB is absolutely correct in that eloquent statement.

But that still doesn't address why Long isn't just dominating pre-mirrodin (i realize its' Oct 21). I mean - shouldn't win percentages speak for themselves - and that alone motivate people to do the hard work?  Maybe vintage players are just the suck?

Steve\n\n

[Copperleaf]

Quote But that still doesn't address why Long isn't just dominating pre-mirrodin (i realize its' Oct 21). I mean - shouldn't win percentages speak for themselves - and that alone motivate people to do the hard work?  Maybe vintage players are just the suck?

I cant speak for everyone, but I can speak for my myself.  The reason it took me so long to build/play long is that becasue of all the "Long is so broken" threads and "it just gets hosed by chalice."  The deck doesnt really seem to be worth the time to learn to play correctly.  Seems people believe it's either going to get restricted or just plain hated out.\n\n

[Dante]

Quote (Smmenen @ Oct. 21 2003,09:22)But that still doesn't address why Long isn't just dominating pre-mirrodin (i realize its' Oct 21). I mean - shouldn't win percentages speak for themselves - and that alone motivate people to do the hard work?  Maybe vintage players are just the suck?

Steve - I think its a combination of

- being very hard to master, particularly vs control decks - you had good games because you spent weeks/months playtesting that deck only.

- many Vintage players are "the suck" - how many people here actually playtest top decks against the others regularly, take game notes to analyze later, etc....  It's not really that many, not to mention being creative enough to come up with new plays/combos/ideas/whatever.  

- Long requires a full set of power to run effectively.  A few moxes and a time walk won't do.  Some decks can get away missing a mox or the lotus, Long can't.

- People's personal preferences have a hand in what decks people play.  Not everyone will play what they feel is the best deck and opinions on the "best" will vary greatly, recall any argument/debate/discussion between Milton and any of the Paragons.

- people have been saying for months now that "Chalice will destroy Long", so why would they spend weeks/months playtesting/buildig a deck that is "dead" as of yesterday.  Also, a lot of people don't want to play a deck that is insane (and all the effort that goes into mastering the deck), yet rolls over (or has to wait for bounce) to a turn 1 chalice/sphere/null rod/etc.

Remember it's only a hobby to some people, the rest of us win.    

Dante

[MoreFling]

Dante is right on on all the points he raises (although the last one is a bit weak: A card hosing the strategy later on shouldn't matter, but that's my personal opinion).

Probably, a lot of people just don't want to put the time in. It was similar to my own experience when TPS was also created, that I (and my playtest partners) recognised the sheer power of the deck, but weren't playing it correctly. When I got back from Berlin I playtested again online, and it started to work out, yet I wasn't secure enough to take it to any tournament. With the last chance being at Duelmen past Sunday, I just had to take it, and playtested just that deck for 1,5 week, and put in more time than in a full month before that (in which I didn't play the deck once).
On a sidenote, I'm also the only player in our playgroup who plays the deck. Both Pyromaniac and Kaervek built it, and hated it ever since.

[Dante]

Quote (MoreFling @ Oct. 21 2003,12:44)Dante is right on on all the points he raises (although the last one is a bit weak: A card hosing the strategy later on shouldn't matter, but that's my personal opinion).

I wasn't necessarily saying I thought it did hose Long (I haven't really thought about it much), but what the "word on the street" is and that is what most people believe as true.

[Rico Suave]

There are some players like Smmenen who play the best deck to win.  On the other hand, the vast majority of people will play a "stylish" deck to win on their own terms.  

The typical T1 player will play an inferior deck, because if they win with that deck then they have major bragging rights (I beat the best deck, etc).  Now, if a player has the best deck and wins, well, that was natural.  However, it's very embarassing to play the best deck and lose.  I don't think most people are willing to put themselves on the line like that, because there's no ego boosting when playing the best deck.

I also think most people are more concerned about what other people think of them than anything else.  I've seen people go so far as to play decks they totally hate just because it would look cool to others.

There are many exceptions to this, but that's a generalized observation I've seen in most T1 players.  It's truer than you think.

[Thug]

Quote There are some players like Smmenen who play the best deck to win.  On the other hand, the vast majority of people will play a "stylish" deck to win on their own terms.  

The typical T1 player will play an inferior deck, because if they win with that deck then they have major bragging rights (I beat the best deck, etc).  Now, if a player has the best deck and wins, well, that was natural.  However, it's very embarassing to play the best deck and lose.  I don't think most people are willing to put themselves on the line like that, because there's no ego boosting when playing the best deck.

I can't totally agree,

I think that not many people play Long because it takes time to master the deck, and until you master it I won't be the best deck for you to play with. It's not like GAT which you could basicly take to a tournament with very little hours put into it.

Many people play decks that are "inferior" in other people's eyes, but often the people that play these decks have played it very long and know all the in's and out's. So it might even be the best deck-choice for them to perform with.

I don't really believe in your "bragging" theory, but maybe that's just because personally I don't think the deck you play has much influence on your bragging rights (off course there are exceptions, but as long as you play with one of the best ±10 decks out there I feel that it doesn't make a difference.)

Koen

[brianb]

It may take time to truly master the deck, but the deck has a ton of raw power even in unskilled hands.  I played it on Saturday with no live practice and went 3-1-1 in a pretty strong field (would have been 4-1, but I let my opponent stifle a mana source) despite often failing to make the "perfect play".  The deck outclasses the field to the point where the only thing that seems to beat it is dedicated hate (null rods, etc) and even that doesn't always do the trick.  The only thing that really keeps it (well kept it) from completely defining the environment is that it's hard to build.

[Dante]

Quote (brianb @ Oct. 21 2003,16:21)It may take time to truly master the deck, but the deck has a ton of raw power even in unskilled hands.  I played it on Saturday with no live practice and went 3-1-1 in a pretty strong field (would have been 4-1, but I let my opponent stifle a mana source) despite often failing to make the "perfect play".  The deck outclasses the field to the point where the only thing that seems to beat it is dedicated hate (null rods, etc) and even that doesn't always do the trick.  The only thing that really keeps it (well kept it) from completely defining the environment is that it's hard to build.

How did they stifle a mana source??  Did you mean a fetchland?  You can't stifle LED, Chromatic Sphere or any of the artifact mana, they are mana abilities.  Or do you mean they stifled it and you thought it was legal and didn't know until now that they couldn't do that?

3-1-1 and 4-1 are good records, but a lot of decks will put that up.

Steve's whole point is that while the deck is STRONG, it hasn't gotten the results of dominating like GAT did, even though it was (pre-Mirrodin) a more broken and stronger deck.  Now with unrestricted Spoils and Chrome Mox and Chalice, we'll see.

Dante

[Gzeiger]

Perhaps the best answer to this deck is close to the original Teletubbies deck - a Workshop deck that can fully abuse Chalice (and maybe Sphere?) that ALSO has Force of Will. I'm uncertain that such a deck has enough, or in fact any, tools for the Workshop mirror, but it does seem like it would be the best thing against Long. After I get back from States I'll see if I can make such a thing viable.

For the doubters, a turn-1 Spoils will get you the card you want without killing you 84% of the time, and 77% of the time you won't even be in Bolt range. If you've already drawn one copy of that card, you'll still succeed 74% of the time, with 67% chance of surviving a Bolt.\n\n

[Dante]

Quote (Gzeiger @ Oct. 23 2003,02:26)Perhaps the best answer to this deck is close to the original Teletubbies deck - a Workshop deck that can fully abuse Chalice (and maybe Sphere?) that ALSO has Force of Will. I'm uncertain that such a deck has enough, or in fact any, tools for the Workshop mirror, but it does seem like it would be the best thing against Long. After I get back from States I'll see if I can make such a thing viable.

For the doubters, a turn-1 Spoils will get you the card you want without killing you 84% of the time, and 77% of the time you won't even be in Bolt range. If you've already drawn one copy of that card, you'll still succeed 74% of the time, with 67% chance of surviving a Bolt.

I tested an aggro control deck like this, pre-mirrodin though, that had FoW and mana leak, in addition to workshop/tubbies.  The thought was that turn 1 clock, turn 2 mana leak+Fow....it was never consistent enough though.  And there were issues with having enough search/draw, blue spells for FoW, right creature mix, etc....

Dante

[leviat]

This is a little late, but I would like to add some comments in response to one of Smmenen's posts...

Quote In my honest opinion, Long is the most degenerate deck I have ever played.  I don't say that lightly.  But yet, I see people who I respect seem to misvalue the deck.  Three or four people have said that dragon is a better deck.  And other person said that inasfar as broken combo decks go, Long is a "floppy pussy."

Personally, I think your understimating the power of GroAtog. Long is easily the most degenerate combo deck I have ever played, however, I don't feel it has the same resilience that GroAtog had.

Obviously we're comparing apples to oranges here but; Long can be hated out, it's a combo deck which only does one thing, combo. I would compare it to the dragon in Tolkien's "The Hobbit" whereas it has a vulnerability, a chink in it's armour, and one well-placed arrow will kill the mighty beast. If you attack this deck's combo nature, you're going to push it so far back on it's haunches that it's on the verge of toppling over belly-up.

When we look at the GroAtog deck, I think the level of deck durability is taken up an entire notch. The deck had threats and answers. It was aggro, control, and combo all mixed into one neat little package. GroAtog also was able to use Gush on multiple-levels (draw engine, land protection, mana accel) and there was no easy way to attack this deck. If you attempt to hurt it, it would simply fall-back on another avenue of death.

Quote While I've been extremely pleased to see some metagames rapidly use Long - CrazyCarl's report, Hawks' report, etc - I am shocked that it has not caught on more.

One thing that wasn't very clear from Carl's report was exactly who was using Long. The three of us playing this deck were Carl, Bryce (kl0wn), and myself. All three of us read TMD, all three of us are fully powered, and all three of us have had a lot of experience with the wide array of competitive decks out there.

Long is a very hard deck to put together (even with 5 proxies), and Long is a very hard deck to play (properly). I think this point has already been made but I'm surprised that you haven't taken it more seriously. I think I am a pretty accomplished player but mistakes can still be made that this deck won't forgive. On top of that you can still make the right play and lose just because this deck requires topdecking to win (albeit your usually topdecking seven cards at a time).

Quote I am also shocked that people consider Dragon a deck that is even close to Long in terms of its Pre-Mirrodin strength.  I am the last person to under-estimate Dragon.  Any deck that has a combo that just says: I Win is pretty ridiculous.  And while Dragon is really consistent, I just cannot abide by the statement that it is more consistent than Long.

I agree with you on this point, Dragon is not more consistent than Long. However, I do feel that Dragon is a more resilient deck than Long. It survives the typical combo hate -- You can't just drop Chalice, Rule of Law, Meddling Mage, Sphere of Resistence, etc. and expect to win. Another advantage to the Dragon is that it has a reusable (uncounterable) draw-engine at it's disposal which allows it to come back from a situation where your opponent has control. I recently playtested a game against Carl where he had an active Library for three or four turns and I still was able to Duress his threat, FoW his counter, and cast a second Animate Dead to pull-through the win.

Quote I honestly think that there is something wrong with Vintage in that Long isn't dominating.

Smmenen, I respect you, but what I feel like your saying here is that "You have to play the most degenerate deck in order to play competitive Type-1". That's bullshit. I can understand that you may have to have the most degenerate deck in order to win in a healthy competitive Type-1, but let's face it, it's a "Good Thing"™ that Long isn't everywhere otherwise we would be back to GroAtog. It means that people are still able to have a good time throwing Ragin Joblins on the table.

I guess what I'm saying here is be HAPPY about this, don't think there's something wrong.

Quote I'm tempted to really try and continue to break the hell out of long post mirrodin simply becuase I want to Pown people with it.

You don't really expect us to believe that you'll stop breaking the hell out of this sans gamealtering restrictions?

Quote This deck is probably 2.5 times as strong as GroAtog ever was.

But really, it's not. Even if I felt you could argue a valid case where the deck was 2.5 times better than GroAtog, you still have to consider that the strength of a deck could (should?) be measured by the number of people playing it.

Quote Lion's Eye Diamond is a better card that Mishra's Workshop. I play LEDs in this deck like they are Lotuses.  The restriction of discarding your hand is less than the restriction of getting colorless mana. Further, the fact that it is an artifact and that you can replay it, and use it with Yawgmoth's Will ramps up storm count and makes it even more broken.

Oh come on. LED is very very good in this deck. But we are still at the beginning of an entire artifact block. LED is a niche' card, just like Illusionary Mask (and Workshop). It has only been successfully used in two decks, I think your jumping on the guns way too early here.

~Jason

Edit: I was trying to include Workshop in that statement .\n\n

[MoreFling]

Quote Oh come on. But LED is very very good in this deck. We are still at the beginning of an entire artifact block. LED is a niche' card, just like Illusionary Mask. It's been only been successfully used in two decks, I think your jumping on the guns way to early here.

The same goes for Workshop mister. LED is the engine that makes Long.dec go around.

[Maxx Matt]

Seems that everyone is worried to change deck or stategies for fighting ANY new deck well.

It is such like every magic player is doing the military service ( in italy is something compulsory... ) and all the OLD military discarge ALL the restrains and the power that they have acquired on the new ones...

really really sad...
even if we play a game in which we are informed and projected ONLY IN "WELL PLAY", I don't think that it is enough to claim all around about anything and the contrary of anything about a game that can be ruled only by HIS/THEIR creators and rulers.

Trying to induce something doing something is the worst of the choice in any case in life even in magic, even if you are right in the particular situation.


Magic is a game that ( luckily ) is ruled by a "superpartes" entity that we called WtC... not to be retorical or inconcludent, but due to the fact that every one of us ( I put me inside this argue too... ) is involved in a such peculiar way that should logiacally ALWAYS NOT BEING OBJECTIVE.

One of us can't be REALLY believed in his argue due to his personal relation with the game. WTc HAS TO DECIDE FOR US... if someone else would have done this game than someone else should have decided for us.

Not only is simpler but is really more more more more more more more more more more safer...

Stalin has never predicted the rise of the capitalism
Hitler would have conquered the world if anyone would have stopped him

THEY RULED FOR THEMSELVES
YOU ONLY DECIDE IF STAY WITH HIM/THEM OR ALONE

the problem is only if a sort of addiction has been previously created and we talk urged by it...




 
my useless 2 cents


-----------
Maxx Matt
-----------


PS: I could have written this lines in almost every posts after the come of Mirrodin's Spoiler...

Warned for ineligibility and coherency and wasting our time

Steve Menendian\n\n

[wuaffiliate]

ok what the fuck was that

im editing to add this in the quote of "my useless 2 cents" but you know what? why bother? i actually feel stupid for reading that post. I DIDNT EVEN INDERSTAND IT HOLY CHRIST.

:/\n\n

[VideoGameBoy]

I understood it; it's your generic "pussies cry for restrictions every time a good combo deck surfaces" post.

I thing the word you're looking for is "intelligibility" or "legibility", not "eligibility", Smmenen.

[Jacob Orlove]

Quote (VideoGameBoy @ Oct. 26 2003,04:33)I understood it; it's your generic "pussies cry for restrictions every time a good combo deck surfaces" post.

I thing the word you're looking for is "intelligibility" or "legibility", not "eligibility", Smmenen.

I think his point was that Wizards does and has to make all of our decisions for us, because we're inhenrently biased about the format. Of course we're biased: we want a good format. Obviously, we have a hard time agreeing on just what a "good format" actually is, but that shouldn't stop each one of us from articulating our own views. Only through discussion and debate can we ever hope to reach a rational consensus.

Yeah, he probably meant uninitelligibility.


None of the past umpteen bazillion posts have actually deigned to talk about what cards should be in Long, or how the deck should be played. This is the extreme vintage forum, people. If you can't stick to the topic, then threads get Closed.