[deck] Meandeck Oath

[firebird365]

I've been tinkering around with this new fangled thingy and have noticed everybody trying to figure out the way to win the mirror

I got it, blasting station (sorry about the crappy link I'm not so computer savy as most)

http://www.cardkingdom.com/card_viewer.php?sid=938045297&pid=111437

kill all the tokens you want at instant speed with no inconvienient colored mana costs I'm not sure exactly how the SBing for it would work probably - 4 oath, - big baddies that you can't cast , + 3 or 4 blasting chamber, + 3 or 4 smaller baddies you can cast like morphling.

That seems like an awful lot of sideboarding for the mirror match... I can't think of an alternative, but intuitively I feel that there should be some better way. Also, it costs 3 - too much for such a situational card.

[absolute]

I've been tinkering around with this new fangled thingy and have noticed everybody trying to figure out the way to win the mirror

I got it, blasting station (sorry about the crappy link I'm not so computer savy as most)

http://www.cardkingdom.com/card_viewer.php?sid=938045297&pid=111437

kill all the tokens you want at instant speed with no inconvienient colored mana costs I'm not sure exactly how the SBing for it would work probably - 4 oath, - big baddies that you can't cast , + 3 or 4 blasting chamber, + 3 or 4 smaller baddies you can cast like morphling.

Something, which has already been mentioned I believe, is altar of demmentia as an answer to oathing up a creature. It doesn't need to tap to take effect, and has just as devestating an effect on the game plan for oath. Both are instant speed, and altar costs one less to play.

[darkchild]

Hi,

First of all congratulations to meandeck for developing a new deck! I have a couple of questions that i am not sure about meandeck oath and hope that you could answer them for me please.

1) How does the deck deal with an early bloodmoon? It shuts down forbidden orchard and fetches making it dependent on mox emerald and lotus to get oath in play, even so, there is a possibility that there will not be any creatures in play.

2) i think this was brought up in starcity forum, how does the deck deal with platinium angel in the first game as it has no answers at all. Especially, if the angel was being weld into play. I understand that the deck wants to counter welder but it may sometimes prove difficult as welder is easily a first turn play.

Thanks for answering my questions

[Covetous]

I was discussing this deck in an abstract way with Rian (kirdape3) and he mentioned a dislike of the complete lack of answers in the deck.  I definitely agree--wouldn't a single EE/PKeg/CWish (or maybe even two) be good for those random "oh, shit" scenarios?  Also, it would be a good way to deal with random cards like opposing oaths, welder, blood moon, B2B, etc.  We were testing with a no-waste UGB build using duress, tutors and pernicious deed to good effect.  I will point out that duress and deed are good in the mirror and against most decks.  Once you oath, you wipe the board with deed and then their having/not having creatures to oath with is irrelevant because oath is no longer in play.  Deed answers welders, random threats, opposing oaths, B2B/blood moon, etc.--most of the cards you fear.  Couldn't you cut the three strips for 3 underground seas or 2 + 1 bayou, then include black?  Obviously this deck is very strong--your results are impressive.  I'm just wondering if you found yourself in situations, or could foresee future situations, in which more removal and/or black would be better?

On a random note--what is/are this deck's worst match-up(s)?

[Grand Inquisitor]

wouldn't a single EE/PKeg/CWish (or maybe even two) be good for those random "oh, shit" scenarios?

Perhaps I'm missing their intention, but I think the goal of this deck, as they said, is to play more aggro (re:combo) control.  The idea is that the deck has greater focus on carrying out its own objectives, and since it packs a quick win condition, and early answers in leak and FoW, that it can hedge against their opponent playing something that will make the game unwinnable if not removed.

If they wanted a maindeck catch all, they'd either have to allocate SB space to accomodate Wish, or find room for black tutors so that they could reliable get their one engineered explosive/keg/whatever.  Both of these detract from the overall strategy.

[Grand Inquisitor]

wouldn't a single EE/PKeg/CWish (or maybe even two) be good for those random "oh, shit" scenarios?

Perhaps I'm missing their intention, but I think the goal of this deck, as they said, is to play more aggro (re:combo) control.  The idea is that the deck has greater focus on carrying out its own objectives, and since it packs a quick win condition, and early answers in leak and FoW, that it can hedge against their opponent playing something that will make the game unwinnable if not removed.

If they wanted a maindeck catch all, they'd either have to allocate SB space to accomodate Wish, or find room MD for black tutors so that they could reliable get their one engineered explosive/keg/whatever.  Both of these detract from the overall strategy.

[VGB]

If they wanted a maindeck catch all, they'd either have to allocate SB space to accomodate Wish, or find room MD for black tutors so that they could reliable get their one engineered explosive/keg/whatever.  Both of these detract from the overall strategy.

I like this explanation a lot.

What it boils down to, I believe, is the fact that maindeck answers in a combo-control deck really don't amount to a whole lot game 1 anyways - the goal is all tempo in game 1, and you shore up your weaker matchups with the sideboard games 2 and 3.

That said, good Oath mirror cards are things like Ray of Revelation - but sideboarding for the mirror seems kind of silly, since all you have to do is agressively mull for Orchard.

I also like the idea of Drake in the SB, but that's just my inner Johnny talking again - I essentially believe that every deck could benefit from sideboarded Drake and maindeck Petal.

[MisterShark]

In this particular build I don't think cutting one Impulse and adding one Cunning Wish would throw off it's equilibrium.
Squeek one Fire/Ice in the board for Welders & mirror match Spirit tokens, and you're good to go.

Overall, I believe the previous sentiments regarding not watering down this combo deck's focus on it's primary objective are correct.  but it really does suck to lose to one particular situation duel-1 simply because you were too inflexible to at least give yourself one escape route (Cunning Wish).

[Toad]

Overall, I believe the previous sentiments regarding not watering down this combo deck's focus on it's primary objective are correct.  but it really does suck to lose to one particular situation duel-1 simply because you were too inflexible to at least give yourself one escape route (Cunning Wish).

The Platinum Angel issue had been discussed for long. Our build loses to Platinum Angel? So what? Let's take a gamble then! Looks like It paid off, right?

Running 1 Cunning Wish bastardizes your SB too much for what It gives you anyways.

[Azhrei]

Cunning Wish is a card you want 3-4 of in the maindeck and a sideboard of 10+ instants, or not at all. As they clearly went a different route in the SB, the Wish makes no sense. It's a pretty solid build; that damn land makes Oath VERY strong.

[Saucemaster]

Couldn't you cut the three strips for 3 underground seas or 2 + 1 bayou, then include black?

While you can pretty easily find room for Black (bayou, btw, is not the way to do it), you have to cut either spells or Islands for them.  You cannot afford to cut the Strips if you expect to see the mirror.  The mirror is about the Orchard war.

In this particular build I don't think cutting one Impulse and adding one Cunning Wish would throw off it's equilibrium.
Squeek one Fire/Ice in the board for Welders & mirror match Spirit tokens, and you're good to go.

Overall, I believe the previous sentiments regarding not watering down this combo deck's focus on it's primary objective are correct.  but it really does suck to lose to one particular situation duel-1 simply because you were too inflexible to at least give yourself one escape route (Cunning Wish).

We're not blind to this situation, trust me.  We have discussed it ad nauseum: what do you do if Control Slaver Tinkers into Platinum Angel?  What do you do against multiple Duplicants?  What do you do against (fill in the blank)?

We've also tried a number of answers.  Cunning Wish is bad unless you completely remake the sideboard.  That might be a potential solution from here on out, though I doubt it, but that was certainly not what we wanted for SCG.  And that turned out to be the correct call for that point in time--our sideboards served us very, very well all day, though we did overestimate the influence of Control Slaver, making our Ground Seals and Control Magics less useful than they might have been.  We also tried an Echoing Truth maindeck; we tried a red splash for maindeck Fire/Ices; we tried quite a number of things.  And the basic problem was that those one or two cards were never really worth the slot.  You ended up diluting the deck to answer problems that we weren't even really going to have at the tournament.  And we were right, we didn't run into those problems at the tournament.

My personal feeling is that, now that this deck is out, the whole thing is going to have to be rebuilt to prepare it for the mirror anyway.  The mirror, as it stands right now, hinges on your ability to control your opponent's Orchards, and on your ability to disrupt his attempts to control yours.  That almost necessitates you taking the control role in the mirror, and not the beatdown.  That might mean that the whole deck needs to be reworked as a control deck, as opposed to a combo-control deck that plays like aggro-control.  That means that your answers to things like Platinum Angel in game one will probably vary widely from what we had considered, and discarded, in this build.

Alot of people are control players at heart, and get very nervous if they don't have a potential answer to everything.  I am frequently one of them, and right up until the end I was pushing for a few maindeck answers.  For SCG, at that point in time, I was wrong.  Whether that will still be the wrong approach is going to depend on what Oath does to the metagame.  There's alot to be said, though, for (as Triple_S put it at SCG) just "picking your bad matchups and losing to them Game 1".  Just make sure you pick the right matchups to lose to.

[luke_twigger]

Hi

I don't have privilege to post in the Vintage Tournament Forum so hope this is the most relevant place to say this.

For those discussing the scooping that happened in the Oath mirror matches, you might find this Feature Match report from 2002 interesting, especially the part about sideboarding.

http://www.wizards.com/sideboard/article.asp?x=GPLIS02\490finals

Luke

[Smmenen]

Couldn't you cut the three strips for 3 underground seas or 2 + 1 bayou, then include black?

Alot of people are control players at heart, and get very nervous if they don't have a potential answer to everything.  I am frequently one of them, and right up until the end I was pushing for a few maindeck answers.  For SCG, at that point in time, I was wrong.  Whether that will still be the wrong approach is going to depend on what Oath does to the metagame.

What's impomrtant to remember is that we knew that we only had to win 12 of 18 games of magic in the first 6 rounds to go 6-0.  Once you understand that fact then the MD removal (which might be necessary in an objective sense sans metagame) isn't necessary since we expected very few decks to have MD plat Angels.

[andrewpate]

I totally agree with Saucemaster.  I had Fire/Ice at SCG and hated it all day.  I was cycling it to port Workshops for no reason as often as I was killing Welders.  You want to counter Welder and, barring that, win before Platinum Angel hits and, barring that, win the other two games.

But I also agree that the deck will need to be seriously reworked with the mirror in mind.  I will definitely be testing with Cunning Wish, now, although I will be trying regular SB options as well.  Regarding Pernicious Deed, I had a bit of luck with Nevy's Disk, as well.  The only relevant nonland you have is Oath, so you just Drain into Disk early, then pop it and cast Oath in one turn.  It also kills Platty more easily than Deed because you don't need 7 mana.  It might be horrible; I haven't tested it that much, but it's something else I'll be trying.

[Cavius The Great]

I may be wrong but shouldn't the Gaea's Blessing count be set to 2 just incase you ever draw it during a game?

[VGB]

I may be wrong but shouldn't the Gaea's Blessing count be set to 2 just incase you ever draw it during a game?

No.  Read Brainstorm.

[Cavius The Great]

I may be wrong but shouldn't the Gaea's Blessing count be set to 2 just incase you ever draw it during a game?

No.  Read Brainstorm.

I knew I was wrong about that. I know what Brainstorm does and failed to mention it in my first post.

Hey, on another note. With all these blue based decks dominating tournaments worldwide will Seedtime actually see some tournament play?

[Smmenen]

I think viewing the deck like GroAtog with a long game is probably the best way to look at it.  This deck really excites me when you think about the Flores article "Who's the Beatdown" becuase this deck plays both roles.  Zvi suggested that decks which do precisely that are the strongest decks to play.  This deck can also shift roles on a dime.  

I think one of the things that we were looking at when designing this deck is this:

Surprise.  In a tournament of 8 rounds, you only have to win 12 games of the first 18 to be 6-0.  Our objective was to reach that goal the best way possible.

If you win game one, your opponent will anticipate the same kill in game two.  If you can switch out your kill every game, you will steal games from otherwise superior decks that will cause you to win matches.

People seem to miss the fact that winning tournaments isn't about having the best deck always - it's about meeting the conditions which permit a perrson to win a tournament.  It is a mistake to assume that the objective best deck wins tournaments.

2) The monoblue comparison, while it seems to make sense at first blush, is actually a little off.  You should be comparing it to aggro-control.  It plays much closer to Gro than it does to MonoU.  Do not play this deck like you would MonoU, or you will lose far too many games.  This is actually probably the fundamental difference between this build and alot of the other builds floating around: in most of its matchups, this deck does not want answers, it wants threats.  It runs 14 counterspells because it wants to resolve those threats, and because it wants to ride out its opponents' answers or counter-threats long enough to make them irrelevant.
.

I'll add to this.  I don't think we addressed this in the up coming article, but one of the fundamental questions the deck has is this:

Should you Intuition for Oaths or for AKs?  The answer is not always clear.  Against more matchups than you might think, Oath is the right call becuase attempting to win now is better than attemping to win later.

[Clown of Tresserhorn]

I knew there was a reason Meandeck didn't post in my Oath thread.....

Anyways, it looks like a solid build. Has anyone tried Stilfe in the board for the mirror? It's good in the mirror, and it can help vs. combo. Also, what's the plan vs. the mirror? Do you take out all oaths and hope they keep one in or what? If this is the case, I'd really like to have one castable creature in the board (probably morphling).

-Bob

[Machinus]

People seem to miss the fact that winning tournaments isn't about having the best deck always - it's about meeting the conditions which permit a perrson to win a tournament.  It is a mistake to assume that the objective best deck wins tournaments.

This is perhaps the answer I was looking for. I agree wholeheartedly. I didn't go to SCG 2, so I didn't spend much time thinking about what the metagame would be like. Meandeck has expressed that their (accurate!) predictions of the field influenced their deck design. They guessed right, and took home the power. Good job.

I don't know what Steve's article is about, but hopefully it will discuss Oath in less clearly-defined metagames. I think Oath has a lot in store for it. SCG 2 was a showcase for Meandeck talent, and I am looking forward to more complete coverage. Many have expressed radically different approaches to the deck and I believe that playing Oath in the future is going to require changes in the deck's strategy.

[Covetous]

Now that this deck is out in the open and obviously powerful, I am assuming that people will begin to play it (mmm netdecking).  When that happens, do you expect to radically change the deck to seriously own the mirror or simply make a few relatively minor changes that give you an edge in the mirror, and leave the rest to playskill, etc.?  You mentioned using Wastelands to win the mirror through Orchard superiority, but what other cards would be effective against the mirror?  I mentioned a build using black for duress and deed, which would seem to be very strong in the mirror (more testing is required)--do you foresee a UG/x build of Oath  with more answers being substantially more resilient and better in the mirror, or a UG build with the more stable manabase and access to wastes?  Since you said that you tend to play control in the mirror, I can't help but wonder in a more controllish build with answers would be the stronger deck in the mirror.

I'm basically trying to think about how to make this deck beat this deck, which seems like the next important step now that it has been developed and proven.  Would SBing Duplicant be useful for the mirror, or a complete waste of time (it certainly won't do much vs. Pritine)?  Alhough it's Janky (with a capital J), Proteus Staff seems to have some utility in the mirror due to its lack of dependence on numbers of creatures.  I'm beginning to wonder if running 2 Gaea's Blessings might become good in the event that you are playing more long control/oath mirrors.

[Thug]

Cunning Wish does not really force you to bastardize your sideboard, it forces you to run Red as a third colour. If you run red you have more than enough decent Wish targets.

[Rico Suave]

Anyways, it looks like a solid build. Has anyone tried Stilfe in the board for the mirror? It's good in the mirror, and it can help vs. combo. Also, what's the plan vs. the mirror? Do you take out all oaths and hope they keep one in or what? If this is the case, I'd really like to have one castable creature in the board (probably morphling).

No.  You're still very much an aggressive deck in the mirror.  Orchard made it that way, since you are not reliant on your opponent's deck anymore.  That means you keep your Oaths in, since if you ever have an advantage in being able to produce more tokens you can just drop your Oath and go to town.  It's not like a smart opponent is going to play a free Oath for you.

You're thinking of it like a control deck.  It's not one.

[jpmeyer]

The mirror is so weird.  While testing, I brainstormed running an SB something like this:

-4 Oath
-2 creatures
-1 Intuition
+4 Sylvan Scrying
+2 Pristine Angel
+1 Gaea's Blessing

Also, one of the Wastelands (or a basic) would need to become a Dust Bowl and I'd need to find a spot for Library of Alexandria as well.  I was siding Oaths out under the idea that 1) if my opponent keeps in his Oaths, I don't need my own or 2) that if he sides his out as well we can play a land war that I hopefully could win with Sylvan Scrying for LoA/Dust Bowl or Blessing on my spent lands.

Ugh.  The mirror is so bad.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

The mirror is so weird.  While testing, I brainstormed running an SB something like this:

-4 Oath
-2 creatures
-1 Intuition
+4 Sylvan Scrying
+2 Pristine Angel
+1 Gaea's Blessing

Also, one of the Wastelands (or a basic) would need to become a Dust Bowl and I'd need to find a spot for Library of Alexandria as well.  I was siding Oaths out under the idea that 1) if my opponent keeps in his Oaths, I don't need my own or 2) that if he sides his out as well we can play a land war that I hopefully could win with Sylvan Scrying for LoA/Dust Bowl or Blessing on my spent lands.

Ugh.  The mirror is so bad.

Wouldn't crop rotation be better than sylvan scrying?

Also, isn't there the possibility of winning the land war whithout an oath in play and then being stuck with none of your own with that configuration?

What worked better, taking out oaths to try to focus on the land war, or keeping them in so you can capitialize on any advantage you gain?

[Smmenen]

Anyways, it looks like a solid build. Has anyone tried Stilfe in the board for the mirror? It's good in the mirror, and it can help vs. combo. Also, what's the plan vs. the mirror? Do you take out all oaths and hope they keep one in or what? If this is the case, I'd really like to have one castable creature in the board (probably morphling).

No.  You're still very much an aggressive deck in the mirror.  Orchard made it that way, since you are not reliant on your opponent's deck anymore.  That means you keep your Oaths in, since if you ever have an advantage in being able to produce more tokens you can just drop your Oath and go to town.  It's not like a smart opponent is going to play a free Oath for you.

You're thinking of it like a control deck.  It's not one.

The first part of this is right.  You can't take out Oaths.  It's much better to plan to win the Orchard war than plan on taking out Oaths because you can use your opponents Oath's too - and you won't play Oath unless you will be able to control who Oaths.  

I don't know what happens now - but I think any Oath list requires 5 Wastelands to win Orchard battles.  Try Polymorph and other tech for Oath mirrors.

The fundamental problem is that EVERY Oath mirror strategy can be beaten by your opponent, BUT ONLY IF THEY KNOW.  The Oath mirror is a information war.

[jpmeyer]

Pretty much

[Alfred]

Like gabethebabe said in the other oath thread, wouldn't claws of gix be an ideal sideboard card for the mirror? If this is the ideal card for the mirror, won't the mirror be akin to jamming a fork into your own eye?

[Malhavoc]

Like gabethebabe said in the other oath thread, wouldn't claws of gix be an ideal sideboard card for the mirror? If this is the ideal card for the mirror, won't the mirror be akin to jamming a fork into your own eye?

With a claw under each player's control the game would be won by the one who manages to destroy the other one or by the one who manages to hardcast one of his creatures. This could lead to a different creature selection post side, with creatures more easy to be cast with just blue and green mana.

[Alfred]

But then that would oath up your opponent's creature that they are playing, which may be bigger or better than yours.