[Discussion] Transformational Sideboards

[hauntedechos]

Greetings TMD community,

Generally speaking I avoid starting threads due to many personal reasons.  However I was unable to find a thread on transformational sideboards.  I have elected to make this post in the  Improvement side in case it is a thread that many would rather not have in the open forum.

I have been following the GAT juggernaught and its perormances and recently thought about playing the deck.  I have also found that there is a number of tough matchups for GAT (including the mirror) with the rise of MUD compliments of Thorn.  I am open to the possibility that I am reading the meta wrong (and if so please let me know so I don't wander around like an idiot), however it seems that many of GATs tough matchs are much better for Tidespout Oath.

The rise in Tidespout Oath has been great for a friend of mine, and has brought life back into a deck that many might have thought was going to stay offline for a good long while.  It also seems to be flying somewhat under the radar.  Now that Mr. Shay has shattered Day 1 Waterbury with an outstanding 11-0 record taking home the cake, I belive that Tidespout Oath will be looked at closer and measures will be taken against it.

*ok, but what does this have to do with your thread topic mate?*

It's just me indulging and setting the mood lights....nevermind.

So if we view the thread in the open forum concerning Oath, we see that there is a glaring resemblence to GAT in structure, this has been covered and I will not rehash.  The question I have been Pondering is:  Would developing a transformational SB for either deck be a good choice and under what circumstances?  To be completely forthcomming, I have not spent a large amount of time on this thought.

To open this discussion up, my initial thoughts were that you would have the deck that is heralding the best draw and resouce management of all time, with a SB that converts the deck into  Tidespout Oath, which is enjoying an intial period of glory across the world.  TSOath allows you to stand a much better chance in the Stax, MUD, Fish of all sorts, Goblins etc etc by morphing into a deck with strategy superiority, not resorting to hate cards.  This gives you the ability to seriously surprise your opponent and thusly add percentages to your favour.

Granted the conversion wouldn't be an exact cloning of TSOath, because I feel that 4 slots for Leylines should be kept open.  Never the less, I feel that the conversion would be sufficient to allow a more than functioning deck change which offsets it's shortcommings (NOT TSOath), by adding surprise, playing a deck that has better matchups than GAT and avoiding slots being taken up by cards that are able to affect game states in narrow cases and some that are effective in a few more, but not the afore mentioned.

My interest is in the Gat to Oath conversion specificly, however any discussion on transformational sideboards and tier pros and cons are greatly appreciated.  My hope is that there this thread can develop some quiality discussion and conclusions can be drawn on the matter.  I know that a conversion into Oath was attempted by Dragon.dec, however I feel that in this case, GAT and TSOath are currently 2 very strong decks that share a soul almost...almost.

A couple other options off the top of my head would be a conversions into:

 Tropical Storm, though what matchups you would gain advantage in I'm not sure as combo by enlarge is having a tough time.
 
 PonderLong, see above and add the difficulty in finding slots to pull it off.

I will end this opening period with a question.  Do transformational sideboards fall into "the danger of cool things"? or can this really be something viable?

please enjoy the discussion and feel free to critique.

Haunted.

[hauntedechos]

It seems silly to be responding to my own thread, however I have noticed in the Turbo Gush thread, there was a recent post that mentioned a transformational sideboard option, and that is exactly what I'm talking about.  The thoughts on this idea cross peoples minds, and thusly should be explored to find the viability of such a SB.

perhalps I can add a few more questions to entice the more learned into a conversation on the topic.

What do you really gain from a transformational SB?

Are the slots given to this transformation better served with the standard issue GAT choices?  Would you rather run around with 4 Eflux in case you come across some artifact based decks?  Or would you rather take them by surprise?

Is the aspect of surprise enough to make that kind of difference?  I think that this can boil down to the SB cards that your opponent drew out.  Are thoes cards good against Oath as well or did he just SB in dead cards against you.

In respect to the Turbo Gush thread, what do you gain from transforming into Oath or Bomberman?  The point of the thread seemed that the deck was fast, drew the pieces it needed in a timely manner etc, so why a transformational sb?

What kind of meta game considerations need to be given if one wanted to attempt this kind of boarding?

Now I have my own thoughts/points of view with this matter, the point was to get everyone into a discussion to get a more global village concensus on the matter.  I do not belive there is a "bad" way of thinking on the matter, so anyone can drop thier .02.

[Tareth]

What is written below is my own opinions and are not meant to be taken as right or wrong.

What do you really gain from a transformational SB?

I believe the main thing you gain is the surprise factor. I don't know what decks generally side in for the GAT match up, but to have a turn 1 or 2 oath drop down would be a shock after facing GAT.

Are the slots given to this transformation better served with the standard issue GAT choices?  Would you rather run around with 4 Eflux in case you come across some artifact based decks?  Or would you rather take them by surprise?

I don't know about Stax but Oath, in my experience, can race MUD. TyrantOath has the best shot due to the bounce.

Is the aspect of surprise enough to make that kind of difference?  I think that this can boil down to the SB cards that your opponent drew out.  Are those cards good against Oath as well or did he just SB in dead cards against you.

This all depends on what they sideboard in. In my MUD deck I would usually side in Staff of Domination's, so in this case, if I combo out it doesn't matter if you're GAT or Oath. But if you take game 2 with Oath I would bring in Jester's Cap, so if you felt switching back to GAT my Cap's would be a lot less effective.

In respect to the Turbo Gush thread, what do you gain from transforming into Oath or Bomberman?  The point of the thread seemed that the deck was fast, drew the pieces it needed in a timely manner etc, so why a transformational sb?

I have no experience with this deck, playing it or playing against it, so I won't comment.

What kind of meta game considerations need to be given if one wanted to attempt this kind of boarding?

I think the main problem you're going to have if you do this is the actual TyrantOath. Their deck will be stronger at getting and supporting their Oath. I wouldn't do it if there is a lot of TyrantOath in your meta.

[oneofchaos]

Transformational sideboards often suck because people speak.  Once you get into the higher tables, your surprise is made public information. 

[wethepeople]

I played around with the idea very briefly just over a year ago. From what I remember it very rarely worked quite as well as I planned. It was agreed that the original deck could not share a similar game plan with the sideboarded one. Reason being, say your opponent who is playing Stax is to side in some form of creature hate to fight off your Quirion Dryads. Attempting to trick them, you bring in Oath of Druids and friends.

The problem here is, although unintentional, your opponent has brought in cards that still hose your new game plan. Yeah, you surprised him with that Akroma, I'm sure, yet they still got you with that Ensnaring Bridge they boarded in, even if it was intended stop your initial win condition of Dryad-beats that he assumed you were still using.

With that said, testing showed that configurations of decks like Gifts to Oath were more effective, because of their great difference in win condition yet somewhat similar engine. But keep in mind, like OneofChaos said, they have no advantage once the word has spread, and even in the lower tables they still have the tendency to face consistency issues.
 
This is the thread I posted back in December 06. The content is a bit out-dated, but the idea is still worth looking at.

[Evergreen]

Regarding a transformation from GAT to Tyrant Oath, is there any reason to play GAT over Oath right now?  The only match-up that I could imagine GAT having a clear advantage in is combo (both Flash and Gush/Tendrils variants), while against any workshop deck, any form of aggro, and any version of GAT, I would much rather be on the Tyrant Oath side of the table.  I would imagine that Ichorid is a horrible match-up for both decks, but if you are playing Oath to begin with, you have more open slots in your side to handle the hungry hungry horrors.  Unless your meta is heavily skewed toward combo, and more traditional control decks (of which there seem to be very few these days), I see no reason to butcher your side just to play a weaker version of the deck you should have been playing in the first place.  All that being said, I have little experience with either deck, so I could be completely off base.  Any experienced GAT or Oath players feel free to chime in.   

[Zherbus]

It's been a long time since I employed the use of such a sideboard, but I do it to shore up holes, not for surprise. The last time I did such, was in May 07 at the Mox event in Atlanta. I was reviving 4cControl and had a pretty good build. However, in testing Fish would get the best of me because of Wasteland. I just added a Tropical Island and some Oath of Druids to the sideboard and it was often enough to just ignore things that swing for 2. I already had Collossus and Platinum Angel in the deck, but I moved Morphling into the mix because it was castable and evaded Swords to Plowshares that were often encountered.

I think before anyone employed such a concept, they should be intimately aware of how every matchup plays. You don't want to sacrifice valuable card slots in other matches to make something that's winnable with finesse just simply MORE winnable. So never rule it out, but don't get slap happy with it.

[Smmenen]

transformation sbs have been a staple of vintage decks for a long time.

Peter O has long been a proponent.  Since as long as I can remember his Dragon lists have had Mask-Naught or Oath SB plans.   

[piZZero]

I played a 91 people tournament last saturday in Barcelona at the LCV (Catalan Vintage League) with a Flash list featuring a completely transforming sideboard into Platinum Oaths. I performed really well doing a 5-2 (15 points), losing only to a top2 & top4 players at the end of the tournament.

Main deck:

TP Buble Flash: (60)
4 Protean Hulk
1 Elvish Spirit Guide
1 Carrion Feeder
1 Mogg Fanatik
1 Reveillark
1 Body Double
4 Flash
3 Merchant Scroll
4 Brainstorm
3 Ponder
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Imperial Seal
1 Mystical Tutor
2 Summoner's Pact
4 Force of Will
4 Pact of Negation
2 Misdirection
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Echoing Truth
2 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Island
3 Polluted Delta
2 Flooded Strand
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Emerald
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt

Sideboard: (15)
4 Oath of Druids
4 Forbidden Orchard
3 Platinum Angel
1 Gaea's Blessing
2 Rushing River
1 Tinker

In every second game of every round i did these changes:

-4 Flash
-4 Protean Hulk
-1 Carrion Feeder
-1 Mogg Fanatic
-1 Reveillark
-1 Body Double
-1 Elvish Spirit Guide
-2 Summoner's Pact

+4 Oath of Druids
+4 Forbidden Orchard
+3 Platinum Angel
+1 Gaea's Blessing
+2 Rushing River
+1 Tinker

The post side deck looking like:

4 Oath of Druids
4 Forbidden Orchard
3 Platinum Angel
1 Gaea's Blessing
2 Rushing River
1 Tinker
3 Merchant Scroll
4 Brainstorm
3 Ponder
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Imperial Seal
1 Mystical Tutor
4 Force of Will
4 Pact of Negation
2 Misdirection
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Echoing Truth
2 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Island
3 Polluted Delta
2 Flooded Strand
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Emerald
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt

I wrote a very complete report about the tournament in HERE. The report is in spanish, but invite everyone to have a look to it. You can also find in the blog the lists of the top8 players.

Cheers!

piZZero - Jordi Amat

[piZZero]

Forgot to mention that my sideboard strategy was obviously meant to fight against:

• Pithing Needle
• Leyline of the Void
• Tormod's Crypt
• Extirpate
• Pyroblast
• Red Elemental Blast

It obviously worked as intended. Many players told me after losing the round that they had sided in lot of hate and they couldn't answer Oaths or Platinums. Some even took out artifact bouncers to side in hate against Flash.

It feels really good to see your oponent do 0 turn Leyline + turn 1 Pithing to Carrion feeder and me going Orchard Mox + Oath with double pact back up

[hauntedechos]

I agree that transformational sideboards are not something to put together because they are neat.  Selecting Gat and TSOath may not have been the most compelling decks to illustrate the use of this strategy.

So let us look at what decent choices either deck could select.  As said, you would like to shore up the weakness of the main deck with the strengths of the sb deck.  This was the thought I had when suggesting Gat into TSOath, because of thier similarities and the really good matchups TSOath is having right now (way to go Mr. Shay).  It was pointed out that both decks use dudes to accomplish the end goal, albeit through very different methods which may suggest that there is no gains to be had with pairing up these two decks.

So what are some theoretical pairings that would do well?  We know we need to beat Shop decks, GAT and a lesser number of Stax.  Of course Combo numbers have begun to wane, which is good news for Oath, or could we use the Build offered by Eric in Tropical Storm to fight the combo matchup?  What is there to be gained by selecting Tropical Storm vs. the weakness the deck has?

I would love to see some of the selections that players could envision in theory and some that have been put into practice in the past years.  As Zherbus pointed out, you have to look past the single matchup you are thinking such a sb would aid you in.  This was in part why I looked to Oath to shore up Gat's current tough time, however as it was pointed out, why not just play TSOath then and find something for the Oath deck instead. It's a great point and one that I will be looking at with more attention in the upcomming weeks.

Haunted.

[Irenicus]

I have played Grim Long with a transformational Oath SB last december in Dülmen (Germany). There aren't that many players left playing T1 in Germany, but it was still a 5-0 record and the SB was pritty good. It helped vs. fishlike decks (e.g. Masks, got 2nd) and Shops. The last match was vs RG Beats and though Grim Long has a very decent matchup vs any aggro deck without FoW, Pyrostatic Pillar can be an pain and as far as I rember Oath helped me to win one game vs RG post SB.

Here is a link to that list:

http://www.trader-online.de/turniere/Decks/2007-12-T1.html

Anyway, in the end I liked the Oath plan that much, that I played successfully with it maindecked in January, but this shouldn't be discussed here.

[Outlaw]

transformation sbs have been a staple of vintage decks for a long time.

Peter O has long been a proponent.  Since as long as I can remember his Dragon lists have had Mask-Naught or Oath SB plans.   

I dont know if I agree that transformational SBs are a "staple" of Vintage decks and for such a long time?  I rarely see transformer boards in tourneys or in results postings.  Diceman is quite notorious for his use of transform boards, the issue that arrises is that when people find out about the board they tend to gear for it.  Transformer boards can be great because of the sneakyness that can be used (shuffling in all 15 sideboard cards and pulling 15 out, doing it again and again to confuse the opponent). 

[hauntedechos]

So this brings us back to the statement, that the sb deck has to be significantly different to be of any use.  With TSOath using Gush/Bond, can there be a sb deck that will prove to be difficult for the opponent (even knowing your trick) to side for?  Could TSOath get good results from becomming storm combo? or would the leaning on the yard prove to be folly?

Could anyone provide us with links to past threads on this issue and or popular transformations given a main deck.  Honestly Diceman turning into Oath was the first time I had ever heard of the idea a few years ago.  I think that given some history we may open up the discussion to pinpointing the exact requisites to a decent board.

Thank you for all that are participating in this thread.

Haunted.

[LotusHead]

I used a transformational sideboard to great success when Forbidden Orchard came out.

http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=22217.0

Basically, my Oath Salvagers build transformed into a Bomberman build.

[dicemanx]

I have used two different transformational SBs with WGD specifically with some success: the Oath transformation and the Masknaught transformation. However, I like to mix it up when it comes to SBing plans because the transformational SB serves two purposes - it allows you to maintain the offensive rather than resort to defensive plans in the face of powerful SB hate cards, and it sets you up for future events because your opponents, once they have knowledge of your tranformational SB, will have to SB carefully against you.

I have also used the transformational Oath SB plan in TFK-Gifts (albeit for different reasons - it was mainly to contend with Fish decks that used Null Rods and CotV to retard the Gifts early game mana and card development), again with much success. Even if the plan would cease to be a surprise later on in the event, or in future events wouldn't be that much of a detriment. I would consistently shuffle in 15 cards into my deck when SBing and then remove 15 cards - sometimes I would leave the Oath cards in, and sometimes I would leave them out. It was a guessing game in trying to determine whether or not my opponent was bringing in anti-Oath hate cards.

Basically, the idea with the SB plans is flexibility and keeping your opponents guessing. Transformational SBs might not be objectively "best", but the psychological impact that they have on your opponents and the SBing errors that they often induce (even when the opponents are aware of your transformational SB) typically more than compensates. However, I will say that the choice of such SBing is very natural for a deck like WGD, in which even the main deck is subject to drastic changes and not one configuration is arguably "best".

[hauntedechos]

With shop decks having to contend with the TSOath build, and Mono R having a better matchup than MUD: could the combo offering, including the Staff of Domination be a good choice for transformation in MUD or Mono R's case?  What do we need to consider, what are the pros and what are the cons and how many pople have already been thinking or working on this?

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

Could TSOath get good results from becomming storm combo? or would the leaning on the yard prove to be folly?

Thank you for all that are participating in this thread.

Haunted.

this is actualy a great game plan vs fish and r/g beats. not to mention a way to ignore the orchard wars in the mirror. A lot of time the deck functions this way soley off main deck cunning wish/ brain freeze. I know Shay's variant runns sb TOA.

[wiley]

IMO Transformational sb should do one of two things for your deck

1)Completely change the the dependancy of the deck from one aspect to another; ie aggro to combo or control to aggro, which will often allow you to beat a wider variety of decks, but is often hard to accomplish.

2)Completely change the list of viable hate cards against the deck; this often only works for combo, and as has been said before, is not really a good thing to do because people network at the tournament.  People will know what to do against both forms of your deck by the time you reach the upper tables.

So basically if you can't do the first form of transformational sb, then don't do it at all.  And even if you can, you still need to make sure that the hosers for your main deck do not overlap too much with those for you transformed deck.

[dicemanx]

IMO Transformational sb should do one of two things for your deck

1)Completely change the the dependancy of the deck from one aspect to another; ie aggro to combo or control to aggro, which will often allow you to beat a wider variety of decks, but is often hard to accomplish.

2)Completely change the list of viable hate cards against the deck; this often only works for combo, and as has been said before, is not really a good thing to do because people network at the tournament.  People will know what to do against both forms of your deck by the time you reach the upper tables.

So basically if you can't do the first form of transformational sb, then don't do it at all.  And even if you can, you still need to make sure that the hosers for your main deck do not overlap too much with those for you transformed deck.

I agree with your two criteria, but not the conclusion. When I have built transformational SBs it was mainly with criterion #2 in mind; as you point out, it is quite difficult to build such SBs that satisfy the first criterion. Criterion 2 should also be expanded to account for the potency of the opponent's SB hosers against your deck's primary strategy. For instance, Tormod's Crypt against WGD isn't potent enough to mandate a transformational SB to evade this hate card, but Leyline on the other hand is much more serious.

[tomjoad]

The advantage of the transformational sideboard is greater than just the surprise factor the first time somebody sees it. Sure, if you're at a 25 person tournament then, by rounds 4 and 5, whoever you play against will probably know that you could transform, but they won't know if you will transform. If your deck will lose 90% of games in which your opponent has Leyline of the Void/Massacre/Trickbind/whatever, then by being able to bluff the transformation, you at least buy yourself some of that percentage back by possibly making the other guy sideboard inefficiently. I'm not sure how often this is thebest plan, but it is at least a decent plan.

For example, at PT Honolulu (a T2 event) there was a Heartbeat of Spring combo deck in the top 8. Even though the decklists were made public before the top 8 started (meaning that the Heartbeat player's opponent knew about the transformational SB) the other guy had no idea, from game to game, what he would be playing against, making his SB choices very difficult. Of course, Ruel won anyway, but that is an example of a transformational SB that can try to steal back some percentage in a given match-up just by existing, not necessarily by being used.