What impact will Crucible of Worlds have on the metagame?

[orgcandman]

Crucible *is* like Clamp in the sense that ANY DECK can run it and make it effective and it is showing up in almost EVERY deck. How can you dispute that?

  Well then, in that case, lets restrict wasteland as well, as any deck can run that, and make it effective, and it shows up in almost every deck (barring combo, of course). Perhaps we should just restrict every card that could conceivably be part of a 1st turn hard-lock or win and be done with it. I know then I could sleep at night, knowing that the format was successfully neutered.

  With that having been said (and I hope you can recognize sarcasm), I really don't see the problem with crucible. At it's best, it may help budget players who need the added disruption. I don't, however, see this as format warping. That'd be like calling the island land type format warping. Decks that run crucible still need to ramp up to 3 mana to use it. "Well what about workshop decks" you might retort. Guess what? Workshop decks would almost always rather be using that workshop mana to drop a proactive threat (Jugz, 3sphere, smokestack, tangle wire) so if they DO drop a crucible, they're probably already winning by then. Look at the examples you've provided. They all involved a turn 1 trinisphere, or some other turn 1 lock piece that ISN'T crucible.

It's definately a decent card, there's no doubt about that. I just question whether or not it's more of a "If you can find room for it, run it" rather than a "To remain competetive you MUST RUN this" as was the case with Skullclamp.

Aaron[/i][/quote]

[racetraitor]

As a number of people have already pointed out, it's the strips that make crucible as good as it is. Without them, it's a reactive card that only protects/expands your manabase (through fetchlands and/or reccuring destroyed lands), with them it's a offensive lock-component. A lot of decks find themselves between a rock and a hard place right now, sporting manabases where 1/3'rd of their mana gets shut down by null rod and the rest by reccuring wastelands, and personally I think that SoLoMoxen and Dual lands are so integral to the distinctive character of Type1 that something needs to be done. I'm not saying we should go into all out Rakso-mode and call for the banning of Blood moon/B2B and whatnot, but the fact that Fish is the "best deck" right now says a lot. In fact, all of the three current Tier1 decks (Fish, 4CC and Stax) win largely through mana-denial, and all three use 5 strips and 1-4 CotW's. In a sense, the skullclamp/black vise analogy isn't that far off, but it's wasteland that's the offender, not CotW

In a format with so much emphasis put on the first three turns, having 3 or more strip effects played against you often mean being put into an unrecoverable game state. Free, uncounterable LD is so strong that no one in their right mind would want Strip Mine unrestricted, but honestly, is the differance between it and Wasteland so big that the latter can remain unrestricted? Lotus petal is a mere shadow of Black lotus, as is Vampiric tutor when compared to Demonic, yet all of them are on the restricted list. Wasteland also has a large part in making the WS + Trinisphere opening so nasty, because as I said earlier; circa one third of most Type1 manabases are artifact spells. This means that if you kept a hand with three mana sources, two of them will be lands. If you get one of those lands wasted, you need to topdeck two more non-spell mana sources to break out of the lock. A Crucible as this point means game, unless you have 3 fetch/basic lands. The probability of this happening would drop significantly if decks were restricted to 2 strip effects instead of 5. The strength of  Mishra's Workshop itself would be increased if there were less strips in the metagame, but as a whole I contend that Stax/7-10/other Trinisphere decks would lose at least as much as they would gain by Wasteland's restriction. Thoughts?

[Sextiger]

I don't see the reasoning behind the restriction/banning of strip effects.  Mana  Denial is a perfectly good gameplan utilized by many decks(if not all the good decks in the format) and wasteland/strip mine are the best ways to follow that plan.  

 If these were removed it would make other lands like bazaar, workshop and library far more potent. If your opponent opened with a first turn Library, how would you deal with it with only two land destruction in your deck? If wasteland was restricted, workshop decks would now have a much more secure manabase and probably would get even better.  Also, a workshop deck like Stax will still probably run Crucible just so it could replay lands under smokestack.

The best solution to Crucible is to start maindecking artifact removal, use a few basic lands, or just run something land destruction will not affect.  
If these factors don't solve the problem, then Crucible will probably have to go.

[Purple Hat]

Ok, so lets look at the restricted list and see what we can take off if being stopped by counters is good enough:

Everything but Academy, Strip Mine, Library of Alexandria and Mind's Desire.

ok?  Force of Will stops Burning Wish too, anyone want to unrestrict that?  Or maybe Yawgmouth's Will?  Jar anyone?

Ancestral can even be Misdirected so clearly it's not a problem.

Tinker and Rotation even produce card disadvantage.

Library only works when you have 7 cards in hand, the rest of the time it only produces one mana.  Clearly it could never be a threat so we can cut that one.

Academy only works if you have lots of artifacts so we can unrestrict that.  I mean sometimes it doesn't even produce mana, it CAN'T be a dangerous card.

So we should make the restricted list just Strip Mine and Mind's Desire?

Who here REALLY thinks this is a good idea?

Hale

[Pomaxx]

LoL, restricting wasteland or banning strip mine will never happen. Anyone thought about how important it is to stop library, bazaar and man lands with uncounterable lands? (beside mana denial)

[JackPot76]

Ok, Everybody on this thread ... Please try to get some focus and see the problem "Workshop" This is the only card that makes these cards to powerfull.

You want to give Stax a 6th gear, restrict Wasteland is ridicoulus.

Crucible Of The Worlds isen´t a problem at all i just can´t understand the disscusion on restricting a card like this. Give me an URphidian deck packed with maindecked Blood Moons and i will crush 4c Control with Crucible Of The Worlds.

So .. people remember FOCUS!

[Mixing Mike]

Ok, Everybody on this thread ... Please try to get some focus and see the problem "Workshop".

That's why every decks plays it, or plays a way to beat it, right?

[Mon, Goblin Chief]

Considering the fast response rate this thread has generated, I guess someone should make an article on crucible. Also, perhaps mention the part about restrictions suggestions (crucible, wasteland, workshop).

Actually, I've already sent one to SCG a few days ago. I hope it gets published. I pointed out why Crucible is that good, though I stayed away from any restriction-comments, as I want to see how exactly the envoronment will look like pre Crucible. And no, I don't feel it has shown it's impact yet. Shockwave is exactly on my point of view on Crucible atm, though. And I know those of CAB who've tested it are usually, too.

@Dozer: You didn't take part in Kims and my testing. It's far better than it looks. I was to silent in our own forum because of being at my parents, probably :/.

[jpmeyer]

I see that a 1st turn Crucible is a problem when accompanied by a Wasteland. So what? Then we'll have to play (or make) decks that are not affected. Goblins laugh about Wasteland, so does Stompy. Crucible might make mono-colored decks better. We might not like it, but it is no reason to call for a restriction.

You're kidding about Goblisnand Stompy, right? I certainly hope so. If not, feel free to play them in a powered metagame and get your ass handed to you.

Crucible *is* like Clamp in the sense that ANY DECK can run it and make it effective and it is showing up in almost EVERY deck. How can you  dispute that?

Here's a good example of this: Tooth and Nail was maybe a tier 2 deck in Standard, but after adding 4 Skullclamp, voilla!  Instant tier 1.

[Zelyon]

What's with all these people calling for the restriction of Wasteland. Wasteland is not restriction worthy, unless you are argueing that Fish with Crucible is broken...

Ok, Everybody on this thread ... Please try to get some focus and see the problem "Workshop" This is the only card that makes these cards to powerfull.

You do have a point there JackPot. I don't think Crucible is really restriction worthy in any situation except in what it does in Workshop decks. Playing it off just one land, and worse yet, a land that can play help you play everything from Trinisphere and Sphere of Resistance and can abuse Sundering Titan and Mindslaver to a degree they were never meant to be. Workshop decks can pack an extremely high density of game ending threats all of which can be cast either turn one off Workshop or turn two via Welder.

I honestly think that any restriction at this point is premature. But if Workshop decks do prove to be downright broken at some point in the near future as they well might, then something needs to be done to weaken them slightly. And as suggested in the original post, perhaps restricting something like Mishra's Workshop maybe a better option in this situation than restricting Crucible. The last block has undeniably given the land an extraordinary number of tools to abuse.

[jpmeyer]

I love threads on possible restrictions.  You have three kinds of people in them.  The first two are obvious:

Group 1: "Restrict controversial card!"
Group 2: "Controversial card isn't a big deal."

The third group is less so:

Group 3: "Uh, um, restrict Mishra's Workshop!"

The third group is even more retarded than usual here, because in this case one of the biggest arguments for the restriction of Crucible that's been listed in this thread is the fact that it can/should go in any deck.

[Cuandoman]

My previous post where I obviously took out "Black Vise" from the context was just a jumping point for everyone to use. Some of the lines didn't apply but i thought the paralle had been made and it would be best to leave it be.

I always tend to take a wait and see attitude when it comes to cards that are not obviously broken (Mind's Desire). If the next few events are led by decks sporting multiple CoW then there might be an arguement. Even then there has to be time to allow the meta to adjust.

[Shock Wave]

The third group is even more retarded than usual here, because in this case one of the biggest arguments for the restriction of Crucible that's been listed in this thread is the fact that it goes in any deck.

... "more retarded than usual" .... that was pretty priceless. lol.

[JackPot76]

Thank you Zelyon! You seem to understand the probelm.

Anyone going to Gencon? Are you playing a Workshop based deck? If not good luck!. StaX, EuroStax is going to own you all.

About Crucible Of the Worlds it may seem like a problem in the beginning but just wait until after Gencon and we´ll see that it´s not.

If a 4C, Fish, Landstill packs their decks with Crucible Of The Worlds and Wastelands then give me one reason that URphidian packed with Blood Moons won´t humiliate those decks.

Crucible is just a new cool card that we have too learn to live with, sure it´s good but it´s just a card that some people just overpower for the moment.

The only decks that can take take out it´s full power of CoW is prisondecks like Stax where it acts like an extra lockpart (Oneway Smokestack). It isen´t the best turn one drop but it´s a perfect turn 2 drop in prisondecks. Turn one Trinisphere or Sphere and a turn 2 CoW should make the lock hard enough to break.

I have discussed this for a few weeks already at the Swedish forums. Artifacts is supposed to have a higher castingcost because they can be played in all decks. The problem is that Workshop takes away the drawback of the highcasting cost artifacts and makes them droppable on turn one and that wasen´t supposed by R&D. If we look at type2, Extended, Standard.

Trinisphere (3)

Land + Chrome Mox(imprintcard)

Land + Trinisphere

A turn 2 Trinisphere with a Cmox this is acceptable in a format like T2, Standard, Extended. People even have the chance to disrupt the opponents manabase before he can resolve the Trinisphere on Turn2.

Type1

Workshop + Trinisphere

Your opponent can´t do anything until turn3 if not running Wastelands or Workshops also. This can´t be what Wizards had in Mind.

Without the Workshop

(City Of Traitors,Ancient Tomb) + Mox + Trinisphere

Same scenario but you have to get three cards instead of the 2 cards and this is more acceptable in Type1.

The problem is that good StaX players mulligan to a Trinisphere first Turn against many matchups cause they know that a resolved Trinisphere first turn is a autowin. It neats them 2 more cards and 2 more turns to play more lockparts.

Workshop has to go, Yes i am sorry to say that but that is the truth to make the format healty again . And everybody that has payed 200-250 $ for their Workshops, this gotta be done sooner or later.

Thank You!

[darkchild]

Hi,

For people who think that crucible is broken in stax, here are a few common plays:

first turn : workshop trinisphere
opp players: wasteland

There goes your second turn crucible plan. granted, a first turn tri followed by second turn CoW is powerful, but a first turn wasteland/stripmine on your workshop is even more powerful.

You have 5 strip compared to his 4 workshop so you have an advantage after all. Aggressive mulliganing into first turn trini is a play that I would make only if I am facing combo, Draw 7, TPS, Belcher.

Aggressive mulligan for stax going first is suicide if you are hit by a wasteland. I am a 4c control player and I can tell you that after the wasteland, just cuning wish for a RnR and you should have the game in the bag. Cunning wish for RnR is even easier if you are going first and happen to open with mox land.

Furthermore, using StarCity power 9 tournament as an example, there were 6 decks that use 4 wastelands, 1 that used 3 and only meandeck titan did not use any, 7 of the decks also run 4 x Fow each so stopping a first turn tri and sec turn CoW does not seem so hard at all.

CoW is a powerful card indeed but to call for any restriction in the present metagame is not necessary in my opinion as I think that a very healthy metagame is going arouhd.

[Dozer]

@Dozer: You didn't take part in Kims and my testing. It's far better than it looks.

I've taken 4cCrucible to some test games and to Berlin. Whilst I may not have had the scope of testing you had, I have had the experience that Crucible just wins games when you drop it with a Wasteland in play, and with Strip Mine, it is even crazier. Random example: After I wrecked one of my opponents with Crucible in the first game, he played a Meddling Mage in the second game naming Crucible - clearly a misplay* at the time, but he was so scared of it that he didn't even think about naming something else.

I recognize the power of the card, but I still don't believe it is restriction-worthy. Decks and players need to adapt, and I consider it possible. And as for my comment about mono-color decks: I do believe that if the multi-color decks adapt to Crucible, there will be room for mono-color decks, because especially the control decks will have to slightly weaken themselves in order to deal with CoW. A less consistent control deck that has more problems getting up its colors (harder to do with basics) or that dedicates MD space to Crucible has less tools to adress  plain aggro decks like O-Stompy or Mono-R Sligh/Goblins.

If Crucible should actually get restricted, I'd spill no tears over it. It would, however, be a missed chance to see the metagame re-adjust instead of keeping it as it is now.

Dozer

*It was a misplay because he had 3 basic lands and 3 Duals, and I had neither Waste nor Strip in play or in my graveyard. In my opinion, that makes Meddling Mage for Crucible unnecessary. At the very least, it surprised me when he said "Crucible".

[xrobx]

I'll start by giving kudos to the originator of this topic, Zelyon.  I love to see great discussion on TMD and once in awhile, they turn out to be huge decisions that affect the way the game is played in many areas where TMD members are prevalent MTG players.  A great, happy thank you for your involvement in TMD and broadening its discussions!  TMD loves users like you

On to the card discussion...

I'll start by addressing some past comments made by intelligent members here at TMD, I respect your opinions but I will offer arguments to analyze them further.

Crucible is a 3 mana drop that is only a must-counter when combined with a Strip-effect and is circumvented by basic lands, in addition to being less powerful later in the game.

This is a true statement, but usually the strip effect does not see play until after the crucible resolves.  This poses the problem of the counter, giving the control player 2 choices : Counter now and be safe VS don't counter and pray for no strip-effect.  The obvious answer in any deck that runs nonbasics and is control is: Counter now and be safe.  Thus, Crucible is a 3 mana drop that is a must-counter.  I agree that it is circumvented by basic lands (when used for an aggresive feel like LD), but is STILL useful late game due to fetch effects that thin your mana base and give you a broken draw complete with no land draws!

time to stock up the sacred ground and karmic justice (no seriously, go read the card)  Could white become an acceptable sidebord color ? I know that oxidize is probably a better card, but still karmic justice and sacred ground is a real stax-breaker as well as a crucible punisher.

White is acceptable as a side in some decks, obviously pending on their mana base.  That is not to say that every other color (negating black) has an answer to any artifact that is played.  

Some examples are:
(W): Disenchant, Seal of cleansing
(R): Rack and Ruin, Shatter, Artifact Mutation*(needs G)
(G): Oxidize, Naturalize, Elf (that sacs to kill arts), Artifact Mutation*
(U): Hurkyls Recall, Energy Flux, Capsize+any other bounce,counterspell

Thus leaving only one colour, black.  In competitive black decks, namely sui and sui variants, the mana base is primarily basic swamps; which makes crucible less effect against this kind of deck.  Also, this kind of deck usually runs Tormod's Crypt sideboard, and in great numbers, to deal with combo, graveyard effects, etc.  Hence, this also negates crucibles ability of recurring graveyard lands making black seemingly stronger against a crucible based deck. Sui based decks also like to run more graveyard hate, seeing as how their hardest matchups (combo and other, bigger aggro) somehow involve usage of the graveyard (negating gobelcher) and are weakened greatly by the use of harsh graveyard hate; namely planar void.  We revise our list to:

(B): basic lands*, tormod's crypt, planar void.

Games should never come down to "Who can resolve <card> first" and proceed to win the game.

Unfortunatly, in a format where tier 1/2/3 type decks are prevalent, archetypes played almost consistantly, and very few 'random aggro/jank aggro' type decks, there are going to be mirror matches and that will mean whoever does in fact resolve the said spell first should win.  For instance, in a welder/mud vs welder/mud matchup, the first person to hit with a welder has a GREAT advantage and should be able to turn this into a win.  In a control matchup (keeper, blue based, etc, anything able to run will), whoever resolves will first WILL in fact win.  In GAT matchups, whoever gets the early bird (Dryad) should win.  In some matchups, many matchups, where decks are very similar, this situation is bound to occur.  That's why god *ahem* cough cough *garfield* invented the sideboard.  They make an otherwise even matchup swing to one side, which is fair, based solely on chance and predictability (who sideboards what).  This fact is not alike in the situation of crucible of worlds in certain decks .  Resolving a crucible in a mirror matchup where crucible is fit to the deck, it does mean 'resolve crucible, you win'.  But alas, so long as there are creative type 1 players, not all decks will be to standard 'netdecks'/tier decks.  This allows the basic land users to be at an advantage, and furthermore, puts a somewhat disgruntled old deck back into the metagame.  Yes, I do propose sui black to once again be a viable option; as many decks run graveyard interaction, and crucible, and for the reasons mentioned above, black has answers to this.  Sui's hardest aggro matchups are simply solved by a nice sideboard hating graveyard and creatures.  It's mainboard dedicated to disruption (land and hand), with the same beefy creatures it's always ran.  Not to mention, mainboarding this new key card (crucible) for its obvious brokeness, thinning out lands in sui's deck, not to mention adding a great card like night's whisper to the maindeck.  Hmm...looks like black is getting powerful once again...

jpmeyer:

the best way to beat it is to run your own, therefore increasing the already high number of decks that could/should be running it

Very very very true.  Thank you for this one...the best way to get around it, is-as mentioned earlier-basic lands and using it's brokeness to your advantage.  The only problem here is this DOES look very suspicious to the man, and may make him take a second look at the card.  They decide simply if a card should be banned/restricted if "[said card] is played in all of the top competing decks, and if [said card] wasn't played in a deck, that deck would not be competitive."  Therefore, this statement is not true for crucible of worlds, as it does not necessarily make the decks that do not run it non-competitive.  I believe that it should, however, be run in all* of the top decks (*some decks obviously do not benefit from the use of crucible and should not run it, namely combo).

There has not been a proven Combo deck that can consistantly win on turn one or two that is based on crucible. In fact, there are no "broken" decks based on crucible. All crucible is used as right now is a support card. Crucible is nothing more than a powerful card, its by no means broken.

I agree with the beginning of the statement, there has not been a proven combo deck that can consistantly win on turn one or two that is based on crucible; for obvious reasons.  The main one being that combo decks do not base themselves on running crucible as a win condition, atleast the ones that go off on turn 1/2.

I do not agree with the rest of the statement.  There are broken decks "based" on crucible, in the sense that it is a staple card in that particular deck.  Crucible is not only used as a support card for many reasons, it is usually run in great numbers where it is seen as a staple.  Crucible is more than a powerful card, it is by all means broken unless broken defines a card as being restricted (which it should not, by any means).  Is StP broken?  How about counterspell?  FoW?  Manadrain maybe?  All of these cards are definatly broken, but not restricted; thus broken does not require a card to be restricted, and hence, crucible is broken.

If you do not play Force of Will, Null Rod, or combo in type 1 you pretty much deserve to lose regardless. Force also answers said Trinisphere.

Unfortunatly, this is very misinformative.  It is basically saying that if you do not run a blue based control deck or a combo deck in type 1, you deserve to lose.  Everyone knows this is not true, as many of the prominant decks in type one do not run all of these cards.  It is true that FoW is up there, and is a staple in many decks, but far from it to say one deserves to lose if they choose a different archetype than control.

Furthermore, 'force also answers said trinisphere' is a silly statement, as it can be summarized as "force also answers [insert card name, cannot be land/storm card]".

In summary, crucible is a great addition to the type 1 field of play.  I vote that crucible will greatly affect the current metagame and type one environment .  It will revive a somewhat dieing deck, sui, and force players to consider this as a threat when entering a tournament with a controlish type deck (which is prominant in todays meta).  This card will also see play in many high end tier one decks in type 1, but will not change the environment to becoming a necessity to run this card.  Hence, it is out of the question to restrict it; yet it is powerful.

Note:  I intend to start a discussion in the type one forum about sui, as it is now a viable option for tier 1/2/3 tournaments, and should not be passed by without first analysis.

[Marton]

It's a very long stretch of the imagination to argue that crucible of worlds will revive sui. Sui still cannot deal with opponents threats and cannot draw efficiently barring skeletal scrying/nights whisper (and the 2 obvious enchantments). If there is anything to say about black is that it has a lot of graveyard-hate card which make it a better color for dealing with crucible. If anything, the only involvement of black vs crucible that I can foresee is more sidebord graveyard-hate for deck already playing black. I don't think decks will be started from scratch because of crucible, or that dead archetypes will revive (other than the recent MUD/stax rise, but this isn't due to crucible). All that crucible will change is minor adaptations to maindecks and sidebords, not much more. Crucible is easily defeated many ways, all that needs to be done now is do like every other card; analyse the card and develop strategies with/against it then wait a bit and adapt yourself to current trends.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

If you do not play Force of Will, Null Rod, or combo in type 1 you pretty much deserve to lose regardless. Force also answers said Trinisphere.

Unfortunatly, this is very misinformative.  It is basically saying that if you do not run a blue based control deck or a combo deck in type 1, you deserve to lose.  Everyone knows this is not true, as many of the prominant decks in type one do not run all of these cards.  It is true that FoW is up there, and is a staple in many decks, but far from it to say one deserves to lose if they choose a different archetype than control.

1:What it is saying is that if you can't outrace other combo by playing combo and don't have something to stop it from going off turn 1-2 (fow) and then sufficiently slow it down (rod), you deserve to lose because your deck roles over to combo.

2: You admit that Force of will is run in many decks and not all of them are control, so why the reference to deserving to lose if you don't play control?  The quote doesn't say that at all.

3: Null rod is not run in control decks.

4: I do not agree with this statement, however, as other options do exist like an early trini in place of fow and mana drain in place of rod.


Now, on the restriction of wasteland.  ARE YOU PEOPLE INSANE?!  Restricting wasteland is the sort of suggestion I would expect to see in newbi, not here.  Since the isssue has been breached I suppose I shall have to discuss it.

Wasteland is definining to type 1 and helps keep multicolour decks in check.  With only 2 strip effects decks like 4cc will have an untouchable mana base (blood moon and b2b are easily countered, while wastes are not), and thus almost no disadvantage to running 4 colours.

Workshop and Bazaar would be very difficult to answer.  Wasteland is the only thing keeping these lands in check, not to mentaion loa even though it is restricted, becomes very difficult to deal with with only 1 waste 1 strip available.

As for multiple strips randomly winning games, many cards randomly win games in type 1, as in almost every card on the restricted list and timely mana drains/ force of wills.  And I can honestly say that yesterday I was playing 4cc vs fish and won despite him seeing 3 wasteland and 1 strip mine in the first few turns of the game.  (in fact if fish sees 4 early strips against 4cc, it probably should win, so I was the one who "randomly won" here)  If you can't stand people randomly winning, don't play type 1, or even magic at all for that matter.

As for restricitng workshop I see no need to unless workshop decks become dominant.  Right now, they are part of a healthy metagame so I see no need to kill off the archetype(s).

And as for the actual discussion, crucible, I mentioned my opionion a few pages back, which was that every good type 1 card is distorting and that that alone does not warrent restriction.  

I have a different opinion of the definition of broken with regards to type 1 than I saw mentioned however.  I think that a card being broken means it needs to be restricted because it is simply too powerful to be allowed in multples.  Hence, mana drain, fow, welder, etc are all not broken.  They are just good, even really good cards, that contribute to viable but not overpowered archetypes in multiples of 4.  Crucible is not broken.  It is merely a good, even a really good, card, and is not even run in mutiples eccept in a few decks.

[Sandster]

other options do exist like an early trini in place of fow and mana drain in place of rod.

Well, since at that time everyone was mentioning how powerful (broken) Workshop -> Trinisphere, Crucible is, I figured that I can leave out prison variants from the list.  We all agree that workshop-based decks are definitely considered among the top decks in the format.  Still, I admit that I should have included workshop just to avoid confusion.

Also, every deck that runs Mana Drain will first run Force of Will, but not vice versa, so that's why I just mentioned Force.

It is basically saying that if you do not run a blue based control deck or a combo deck in type 1, you deserve to lose.

Once again, we were talking about the sheer strength of workshop (since it's over 1/3 of the meta!), so I did not include that.  Here is the statement:

"If you do not play Force of Will, Null Rod, or Workshop in your deck or do not play combo, you will not do well in type 1."

Since Food Chain Goblins is not among the competitive decks anymore (and does include both a combo and often sideboarded Null Rods), I stand by my point until examples make my statement null and void.