Simic Sky Swollower vs Irredecent Angel in Oath

[Ged]

You are the one claiming it is so great. I don't really see any huge benefits unless you can play like 5 spells and bouce all his permanents. So I think it is your job to convince the people here...

Why do you think that Klu was talking about his opponent's permanents?

[ReAnimator]

Stuff about Tidespout Tyrant

The thing that Klu was trying to get at that the majority of you missed, is that you don't play the Tyrant as a control card you play it like a combo card and win the turn it comes into play.

It isn't to hard to figure out that if you have 2 moxes and this guy in play you get infinite mana and storm.
If you don't have the combo then you just play control and randomly wreck your opponent while killing him over the next 2 turns.

Yes this is disruptable and vulnerable to hate blah blah blah. but as far as comb oath goes it seems a lot better in theory than the salvagers lists. I don't know what the kill would be and how many slots but i'm sure some people are looking at it.

Edit: Sarnathed

[UR]

You are the one claiming it is so great. I don't really see any huge benefits unless you can play like 5 spells and bouce all his permanents. So I think it is your job to convince the people here...

Why do you think that Klu was talking about his opponent's permanents?

So far neither Klu nor yourself have given me any reason to look at this card in Oath. Heck, MoxLotus' arguement with the two moxen has been the best so far, but when you've got an active Oath on the table you're winning anyway. There isn't challenge in that, the actual win is little more than ceremonial. I realize that there are situations where the Tyrant may be better than Razia... I just don't see that happening in more than 50% of the games.

People managed to convince me that the Skyswallower is actually better than the (sideboard) angels in Vintage, but these days it looks to me that every time a large flyer is released, people suddenly have to re-invent the wheel and try it in Oath... first it was Blazing Archon, then it was Djinn Illuminatus and now Tidespout Tyrant. Prove to me that it is better with some results or solid reasoning and I'll gladly accept it, but until then excuse my scepticism.

[Moxlotus]

@ Tyrant

pro: win on first activation
better in mirror to bounce their guys
pitches to FoW unlike angels

con:
need another dead card in the main to take advantage of the infy storm and mana
need the set up for the win (top and mox)
vulnerable to REB
Don't get to run chalice as disruption

This guy is definitely better than Salvagers, but its debatable vs. Angels.  I know I usually blow my entire hand trying to find Oath and Orchard and wouldn't have enough of anything to combo out the next turn.  I've toyed with the idea for a week or 2 but haven't been able to come up with a deck that is actually better the majority of the time than with Angels.

[nataz]

@ Tyrant
This guy is definitely better than Salvagers, but its debatable vs. Angels.  

meh, I dont think so. It dies to the same kinds of artifact hate that salvagers does (i.e., null rod and chalice) while needing another card in had to go off (unlike salvagers which just cycles though its llib and draws everything it needs).

Sure, salvagers maybe a turn slower if you don't have the cog/lotus in hand, but the best thing about it was you could always just oath again next turn and win.

[dicemanx]

meh, I dont think so. It dies to the same kinds of artifact hate that salvagers does (i.e., null rod and chalice) while needing another card in had to go off (unlike salvagers which just cycles though its llib and draws everything it needs).

Tyrant allows you to bounce CotV and Rod first before going off. It also has a bimodal function - either combo off, or try to clear away as many of your opponent's perms from the table as you can. Those two things make it worthy of examination (and not just in an Oath shell - there's also reanimator and Eureka to consider).

[klu]

At the time, i'm playing a deck including both auriok and tyrant because of the great synergies they have together and the easy way to go combo with one or the other. The only "dead" card it brings in the deck is the pyite spell bomb which is cantrip and randomly kills welders (even if i don't run any volca).

need another dead card in the main to take advantage of the infy storm and mana

Something you may not have understand is the cards that must be used for the combo. 2 little artefacts and a merchant scroll or cunning wish. take your brainfreeze, cast it on you for most of your library and put opponent's one in his grave. Then flashback deep to have your opponent dying now.. all that costed UUUU (max) because colorless mana does not matter.
both merchant scroll and cunning wish are never "dead cards" in any way. maybe "sub optimal" but never dead...

Once i've put down oath in play, my hand may be really weak because of the fight.. but i'm currently running 3 deep analysis, so, once you've oathed your tyrant, you just flashback a deep analysis (CA+2, like ancestral) and begin to bounce opponents permanents or your own moxen to go combo. salvager just bring some food for the swallower and helps him wreaking opponent's board.
Something you shall now : your opponent will never race you with a colossus if you have oath on board.. Even if he has walk in hand.

intuition is the base of the deck, getting orchards, oaths or DA x3. You can take auriok, spell bomb and lotus... just cunning wish for shallow grave and it's done. same for the tyrant.

Don't get to run chalice as disruption

you can run chalice since you only have to cast a spell to remove it from your board once you need to kill. But i really don't think it is the right way to play that beast.

for your statistics : i've not lost any game to stax yet, i may have lost one or two game to fish and gift and slaver are considered as really good match up. the deck as nothing in common with most oath lists, it is a lot more combo/control..
You can distrust me, but for my defense, i will say i won the 3 last tournaments i've played for a twister, a set of drains and a mox ruby playing a control deck you have seen but never noticed here. (kI.merchant)

[nataz]

mmm, missed that you can bounce other peoples perms, my B.

It still stand though, at least in an oath shell, who wants to find 2 sets of combo peices? Combo #1 is getting oath on the table and a critter to stick.

Now with this (and to a certain exent salvagers) you need Combo #2, which is getting a kill card in hand (assuming BrainFreeze of TOA) with a succesful Cunning WIsh or Merchant Scroll/whatever + infiny mana. 

The positive of Salvagers is that you don't need to have the combo in hand, a second oath will bring the combo to you. This is at the expense of being open to cards like pithing needle, Null Rod, etc.

[Moriarty]

At the time, i'm playing a deck including both auriok and tyrant

I used to play Salvagers a lot and was thinking the same thing (about 10 seconds after I noticed the Tyrant from this thread). I am looking at ways to build a deck with 1 Salvagers and 1 Tyrant. But so far the list has issues and I am not sure a deck with 2 Tyrants wouldn't be better. Tyrant solves a lot of hate problems that the Salvagers decks had, but also introduces new challenges. First of all, Salvagers isn't a stormcombo deck and shouldn't be build like one. You really want to play only 1 Salvagers for the fastest possible clock, which implies that your deck should be build like an Oath deck (finding and protecting Oath is an issue). Time Walk must be included because of the synergy with Oath. On the other hand, random wins with a Tyrant (ie when you Oath up Tyrant first) require your deck to be buildt more like a stormcombo deck with lots of drawing power, Rebuild, Y.Will, etc.

These two directions seem different enough to be problematic.
I am curious to know more about your deck.

Did you try Flash of Insight? It's sort of broken in these types of decks. It also makes a nice drawing engine if you play Merchant Scroll and Cunning Wish anyway, because you can Scroll for Ancestral, rfg Ancestral with Flash and fetch Ancestral back later with Wish. Sound crazy but it works.

Sorry for going off topic with the Tyrant, maybe we could split the treads and make one for Tyrant?

[Khahan]

Wrong.  You are racing Gifts.  You are racing Slaver.  You are racing combo.  You cannot afford to give those decks any more turns than you have to.  Too many games are lost already with Oath on the table, why increase that number to help deflect targeted removal--which most decks don't even run anyways?

Gifts, slaver and combo are not really winning by combat damage. So the vigilance is pretty irrelevant there. If you read my whole post, you'll see I specify 'racing for combat damage' and make a point of discussing, however briefly, vigilance.  Against goblins, it is key. Against fish, vigilance is really not needed as much. You can pretty much get away w/ skyswallower in the fish match up. You NEED akroma in the goblins match up. And in a big tournament, you will see goblins still.

Against slaver, gifts and combo, you are trying to win the counter war to stop your opponent's deck from working. Yes, you are still trying to race them before they go off on you. But against those decks, you need to play your oath differently.  Vigilance is completely irrelevant to those match ups.

But the conversation to that point had been focusing on untargetability vs haste/vigilance. Sorry if I assumed you would make the leap that I was STILL discussing just decks to which that conversation is relevant.

[Moxlotus]

Sorry if I thought haste was relevant to how quickly you can kill someone.  My bad.

Who gives a fuck where the damage is coming from?  Combat or no--its still damage.  It is a race to kill your opponent.  Haste is vital to helping you win this race.

If you try to play Oath and win a counter war vs Slaver or Gifts you're probably going to lose.

[Khahan]

Who gives a fuck where the damage is coming from?  Combat or no--its still damage.  It is a race to kill your opponent.  Haste is vital to helping you win this race.

It does make a difference in how I would pilot my oath. My oath deck is still most similar to the meandeck build.  If I'm playing against goblins or fish who are trying to race me in the combat step, I'm letting certain parts of their deck go in favor of saving up counterspells.

If I'm playing against slaver or most drain based decks, or against combo decks, I'm countering aggressively the first few turns while I set up.  This, of course, is in an oath w/ 4 force, 4 drain, 2 leaks, stifle and misdirection. I will win the counter war.

[Tin_Mox5831]

Boy, this thread has sure hit a downward spiral. We've gone from a simple card-versus-card thread to a hodgepodge of almost every so-so card bandied about in Oath discussions.

The question was:
Is Simic Sky Swallower a better SB dork versus decks with removal than Irridescent Angel?

The answer is:
Yes. It's a faster clock. Period.

[Tha Gunslinga]

Haste and Vigilance win games far more often and untargetability (and limited hardcastability) would.

For everygame Vigilance is useful, there are 2-3 that it is irrelevant. Fish isn't going to race Oath, sorry, just not going to happen. Expecially if their StP's and Bounce don't work...

It's called racing your own tokens, and it happens all the time.  As a guy who has won a Jet, split a Lotus 4 ways, and split an Emerald with Oath, trust me, I know what I'm talking about.  Vigilance is extremely useful.

[scutakicker]

Exactly. When Gunslinga and I played a Top 4 mirror match I forgot about that--I got an Oath down but a turn too late. Oath's get randomly countered and Duressed--when you finally get it down being able to attack while blocking a few tokens is often necessary. Vigilance also won me my match against EBA last weekend because I could beat down FTW while his Exalted Angel and Phyrexian Negator just had to sit there.

[roberts91rom]

In my opinion the Swallower (Hehehehehe) is better than both Pristine and Irridescent. Irridescent is a smaller Swallower (Hehehehehe) that still dies to mass removal and non-coloured answers. (Maze, Dup, etc.) Pristine requires you to play instants, and odds are that the instant you are playing is a counterspell (Go figure). Not to mention Stifle.

This will not replace the angel pair. Nothing ever will until they create an 7/6 hasted vigilance creature. Oath can win in 2 turns of Oath resolving (Fetches, pains, shocklands?, deep anal [Hehehehehe], necro [Not Bargain for obvious reasons], etc.) I also agree that vigilance is useful, while not essential. Haste on the other hand is very necessary.

This guy will replace the "Untargetable" slot in oath's sideboard, and being non-legendary throw him into there in multiples. That is all.

[AngryPheldagrif]

I just got back from a tournament in which I played Oath against a very hate-filled field for which Pristine Angel was needed very much.

There is no question about it. Simic Sky Swallower is vastly superior to Iridescent and Pristine Angel in every way and there is no reason I would ever want either over the big beast. Unconditional untargetability, a 50% larger body and a nice hardcastability. This is just what Oath needed.

[Darkenslight]

I've been reading this thread, and I got to thinking...

Is it possible to run U/G/x Oath?  With red, you get extra burn, and hastability; Black, added control; and white, you get silly equalisers such as Balance.

For example;

In red, you get cards such as Need for Speed and Mass Hysteria...

Alternatively, you may run Concordant Crossroads in the board to help the situation.

[sa17dk]

I've been reading this thread, and I got to thinking...

Is it possible to run U/G/x Oath?  With red, you get extra burn, and hastability; Black, added control; and white, you get silly equalisers such as Balance.

For example;

In red, you get cards such as Need for Speed and Mass Hysteria...

Alternatively, you may run Concordant Crossroads in the board to help the situation.

Are you like completely new to vintage? U/G/B Oath has been the standard for a looooooooooooong time.

Red is crap because burn does nothing and the angels are already hasted.

As for white, it has been used in some rare lists, but I dont have much to say about it other than the fact that mostly white is used for the STP's.

[dicemanx]

I just got back from a tournament in which I played Oath against a very hate-filled field for which Pristine Angel was needed very much.

There is no question about it. Simic Sky Swallower is vastly superior to Iridescent and Pristine Angel in every way and there is no reason I would ever want either over the big beast. Unconditional untargetability, a 50% larger body and a nice hardcastability. This is just what Oath needed.

So which brother is right then?

[AngryPheldagrif]

You may be misinterpreting what one of us said, but we're in complete agreement on Sky Swallower's superiority.

[dicemanx]

You may be misinterpreting what one of us said, but we're in complete agreement on Sky Swallower's superiority.

Possibly, although the way I'm understanding Ben, he's putting more value of vigilance than untargetability, even if the opponent has targeted removal. Perhaps I have trouble seeing how a very "hate filled field" can exist, unless the meta starts to get choked with Fish running cards like StP, Bouncer, and Gilded Drake. 

[Tha Gunslinga]

Possibly, although the way I'm understanding Ben, he's putting more value of vigilance than untargetability, even if the opponent has targeted removal.

This is for the maindeck.  MD you absolutely NEED the Angels, but post-board the Sky Swallowers are fine.  Untargetability>Vigilance when you're facing down infinite hate, because Akroma and Razia's vigilance is irrelevant when your opponent has StP, Gilded Drake, Bouncer, Stormscape Apprentice, etc.

[scutakicker]

I have trouble seeing how a very "hate filled field" can exist, unless the meta starts to get choked with Fish running cards like StP, Bouncer, and Gilded Drake. 

There are enough decks that can board in hate (Duplicant, Swords, Seal of Cleansing, Gilded Drake and extra bounce are the easiest) that it is easy for a "hate filled field" to exist. There's generally not enough of this game 1 to bring in the Swallower. Game 1 you are racing the ability of other decks to win first, sometimes against your own tokens. Then if you are worried about lots of hate coming in you want protection. Against UW Fish their MD hate is really rough Game 1, but unless you're facing an all Fish field it's not enough of a reason to MD Swallower. The amount of hate they can be running post-board is disgusting (read AngryPheld's 5/13 tourney report of an insane T4 match vs UW fish having to face down 20+ hate cards) and untargetability is absolutely necessary. Sure haste & vigilance would be a nice bonus there, but you can't race a deck if they have the ability to RFG/bounce/steal everything you Oath up. That's were Massacre comes in, taking out their ability to race you and some of their control elements (mainly Meddling Mage if you're running the Swallowers). All you need to do is resolve Oath and win. Between SSS and Massacre, the UW Fish match should actually be quite favorable.

[Draven]

I know Massacre is free (usually), but what about Pyroclasm against fish? It isn't free, but cheaper than hardcasting Massacre. I know it will give them a chance to Oath, but fuck it, what is Fish going to Oath up that is scarier than the SSS?

[dicemanx]

There are enough decks that can board in hate (Duplicant, Swords, Seal of Cleansing, Gilded Drake and extra bounce are the easiest) that it is easy for a "hate filled field" to exist.

Well, not easy at all. For a hate filled field to exist it would probably have to consist of Fish decks for the majority (which I don't think is the case just yet). I don't consider random archetypes boarding 1-2 bounce spells as contributing to a "hate filled field". In fact, if a deck like Gifts or Grimlong were to SB in 1-2 bounce spells, would you shift to Swallowers over the Angels? I certainly wouldn't.

This is for the maindeck.  MD you absolutely NEED the Angels, but post-board the Sky Swallowers are fine.  Untargetability>Vigilance when you're facing down infinite hate, because Akroma and Razia's vigilance is irrelevant when your opponent has StP, Gilded Drake, Bouncer, Stormscape Apprentice, etc.

I guess parts of this thread are a little unclear as to whether people are arguing for main deck or SB Swallowers. I of course totally agree that Swallower doesn't belong main, but it indeed is a great SB card. In fact, when Fish was prevalent in our local events I was ready to try Morphlings to get around the targeted removal, but obviously Swallower is superior in many respects. Since Fish has all but disappeared locally, there's no longer much need to consider such a SB option, unless people realy start gunning for Oath.