Worldgorger Dragon Combo -- Still Viable?

[dicemanx]

I dont think graveyard hate is necessary in a Dragon sideboard. You always want proactive cards not defensive ones, it just defeats the goal of the deck. Ichorid isn't that bad of a match up for the most part anyways.

So what would you side against Ichorid ? Is the Oath plan enough quick to race Ichorid ?

After some tests, I have chosen to board 3 Extirpate (replacing the 3 useless duress) to have time to combo off before Ichorid have plenty of tokens.

My SB would be either 3-4 Chain of Vapor (if they run Leyline main, which they seem to not run anymore), or nothing. Ichorid is slightly slower than WGD, so the plan is simply to race; if they heavily SB against you, all the better.

[swawagon]

I've been playing and loving Dragon a lot lately (per Dice's earlier quick list)

The win condition (casting Animate Dead) ignores Cursecatcher which keeps coming up in Dragon's favor!

But I have some questions?
How often are you actually skipping a land drop (Or Ancestrall-ing yourself into 8 cards on purpose) (or simply your hand is full of uncastable stuff) and you get up to 8 cards in hand — Discard a Dragon (or a Deep Analysis) — And win the next turn!?! It seems to be coming up fairly often. It sure seems like a terrible re-animater strategy from a casual table, but it also seems to be working. Is this common game play for anyone else Dragon combo-ing people out?


Oath SB is still questionable. I really wanted to go 2 Tidespout and then add 1 Gae's Blessing to help against Painter/Grindstone, but with Bazaar digging I needed more creatures period to Oath into. Because once a should-be-Oathed creatures gets into your hand this deck has no way to get it back into it's library. And Tidespout wasn't great with few cards in hand.

My SB
4 Oath
3 Bogardan Hellkite
3 Orchard
4 Leyline
2 Chain of Vapor


Into Oath (opposing fish, opposing Tormod's/Leylines)
-4 Dragon
-1 Mulldrifter
-1 Oona
-3 Read the Runes
-1 Necromancy
-1 Intuition

+4 Oath
+3 Bogardan Hellkite
+3 Orchard
+1 Chain of Vapor

What are the best Oath creatures or alternate Dragon creatures?
Bogardan Hellkite
Akroma, Angel of Fury (cannot be plowed or bounced)
Hellkite Overlord
Platimum Angel
Sundering Titan

All play very different roles and are all pretty strong; to Animate or Oath into play.

[fury]

My SB would be either 3-4 Chain of Vapor (if they run Leyline main, which they seem to not run anymore), or nothing. Ichorid is slightly slower than WGD, so the plan is simply to race; if they heavily SB against you, all the better.

My plan against Ichorid was to replace duress (which is useless in this match-up) with Extirpate. On Narcomoeba and Ichorid, the token engine of the opponent's is totally stopped. The difficulty was then to win with Leyline in play. So basically, the choice is to annihilate the chances of winning for Ichorid, or, as you advised, to race them with bounces to combo off. I tried the second way, and it is actually a good solution, which is also useful for other matchups. With less Ichorids in the metagame (in Europe), Extirpate loses its interest.

How often are you actually skipping a land drop (Or Ancestrall-ing yourself into 8 cards on purpose) (or simply your hand is full of uncastable stuff) and you get up to 8 cards in hand — Discard a Dragon (or a Deep Analysis) — And win the next turn!?! It seems to be coming up fairly often. It sure seems like a terrible re-animater strategy from a casual table, but it also seems to be working. Is this common game play for anyone else Dragon combo-ing people out?

I is very rare that I want to have 8 cards in order to discard a WGD. Indeed, I have better to do most of the time : setting up the mana base, casting drawing spells, keeping mana open to disrupt the opponent or to make an Intuition or Read the Runes EOT, and so on. But in some cases, when Bazaar cannot be used because of Pithing Needle, or we can't find an Intuition or Read The Runes, it could be useful to cast Ancestral to have 8 cards, then discard and win with necromancy. But I never keep a hand which will make me apply this poor strategy only.

Oath SB is still questionable. I really wanted to go 2 Tidespout and then add 1 Gae's Blessing to help against Painter/Grindstone, but with Bazaar digging I needed more creatures period to Oath into. Because once a should-be-Oathed creatures gets into your hand this deck has no way to get it back into it's library. And Tidespout wasn't great with few cards in hand.

I think Tidespout Tyrant should not be played more than one. WGDX is not a control deck, nor a real Oath one. So most of the Oath-ed creatures should be offensive, like Bogardan Hellkite. According to me, Gaiea's Blessing is not necessary, especially against Painter/Grindstone. When playing WGD, you want to be outdecked by your opponent to cast a necromancy when WGD is in the graveyard thanks to the painter combo !

Into Oath (opposing fish, opposing Tormod's/Leylines)
-4 Dragon
-1 Mulldrifter
-1 Oona
-3 Read the Runes
-1 Necromancy
-1 Intuition

It is maybe preferable to remove some animate spells, instead of keys spells like Intuition or Read The Runes.

What are the best Oath creatures or alternate Dragon creatures?
Bogardan Hellkite
Akroma, Angel of Fury (cannot be plowed or bounced)
Hellkite Overlord
Platinum Angel
Sundering Titan

According to me, the transformal sideboard is efficient with an aggressive amount of creatures. Bogardan Hellkite and Hellkite Overlord seems to be the best for that. Platinum is too defensive, Sundering can be used only in a 5C version, and the "shroud" of Akroma is not necessary.

[Noah_33]

I think Hellkite is the best option for the WGD sb. It deals with Fishes creatures and can kill itself to deal with Ichorid's Bridges if you want. although, I wouldn't transform vs Ichorid, I'd simple board in 3-4 bounce spells and try to race like Fury said.

[nineisnoone]

Has anyone considered making Hellkite Overlord their animate with of choice over Oona/Witness? 

Pros
He would save slots for an Oath sideboard.
He can use infinite mana (assuming you can make red) to win off a Dragon loop because he has haste. 
He is a 3 turn win with Animate Dead/Necromancy (don't play Dance of the Dead anymore).

Cons
He requires you to play red mana. 
He doesn't pitch to Fore of Will.

He can't win at instant speed, but I don't feel that is that huge of a deal.  I especially like that he gives you a solid early play (the simply Animate on Hellkite Overlord play) which gives you more opening paths to win.  Animate Dead on Hellkite Overlord wins just as quickly as Tinker for DSC. 

[fury]

Has anyone considered making Hellkite Overlord their animate with of choice over Oona/Witness? 

Pros
He would save slots for an Oath sideboard.
He can use infinite mana (assuming you can make red) to win off a Dragon loop because he has haste. 
He is a 3 turn win with Animate Dead/Necromancy (don't play Dance of the Dead anymore).

Cons
He requires you to play red mana. 
He doesn't pitch to Fore of Will.

He can't win at instant speed, but I don't feel that is that huge of a deal.  I especially like that he gives you a solid early play (the simply Animate on Hellkite Overlord play) which gives you more opening paths to win.  Animate Dead on Hellkite Overlord wins just as quickly as Tinker for DSC. 

There is a problem choosing Hellkite Overlord as a main kill. In order to win, we must do the infinite red mana during the combat phase, otherwise the loop is ineffective. Indeed, Hellkite looses all his boost bonuses at each occurrence of the dragon loop, so we must give him his bonuses at one moment, and we loose all the mana with mana burn at the end of the phase. So the strategy is only effective with Necromancy played before attackers are declared.

EDIT : Sorry, the evidence was so easy that I didn't see it Thanks for the remark !

[theLastGnu]

What's to stop you from floating 20 some red mana in your first main, letting the final animate land on the overlord, pumping it 20 some times, and then moving to your combat phase?

[swawagon]

With Dices more typical build, if early in a game you have to pitch Oona to a Force of Will (or Oona is Extirpated, Extracted - whatever), how does the deck win?? A Dragon loop with Mulldrifter can draw your deck, but what is the kill then?

With Eternal Witness there is the break dragon loop targeting Witness, bring back another animate spell, re-Dragon loop, bring back and keep casting Deep Analysis or Ancestral Recalls on opponent to deck them. But what does Mulldrifter do to win if Oona is gone? Break the loop somehow - fill your hand and hardcast Worldgorger Dragon with Lotus and beat over a few turns? Perhaps I'm missing something, but Oona appears to be the only maindeck game one 'kill' and it sure feels like I need another whether Eternal Witness or something else... Maybe a lone Oona is all you need. Rare do I lose Oona certainly, but I'm just asking what is the plan without Oona, as I don't see it.

4 Deep Analysis
1 Mulldrifter/Eternal Witness
3 Read the Ruins
4 Intuition

Also anybody have a tip for explaining to opponents un-initiated to Dragon loops about actually walking them through the combo?

Intuition piles with Bazaar down: 2 Deep Analysis, 1 Dragon
Intuition piles without Bazaar, but RtR in hand: 1 Deep Analysis, 2 Dragon
Intuition piles with Dragon in yard, but no Animate spell: 2 Animate Dead, 1 Necromancy
Intuition piles with Dragon in hand: 3 Bazaar

Are there many situations where you put Oona in an Intuition pile? If you are without another Intuition, Read the Runes, or Bazaar you cannot break the Dragon loop. Oona doesn't have Flash and opponents will just put it in your hand. Maybe if an opponent has a creature in their grave that you can animate; then Intuition for 2 Dragons and Oona (that they keep in your hand). Dragon loop - float a bunch of mana, break the Dragon loop by targeting their creature, then hardcast Oona and mill them out. eh?

Does Dragon ever prefer to have Thoughtseize to get creatures in opponents yard for goofy situations like that?

[nineisnoone]

The 1x Mulldrifter lets you Intuition for Oona Mulldrifter X during the dragon loop for the win.  Can't think of another play...

As far as Hellkite goes, I've been fairly happy.  The main thing is I'm looking to incorporate more red spells and thus red mana, as it's just an ordinary animate target if you don't have red mana on the board, which might require more deck building finesse then -4 random cards +4 Hellkite Overlord.  A 5 color mana base might be better (you can still win pumping a Hellkite with City of Brass so long as you have 9 life before doing so).

[Harlequin]

Why would you run Oona if you were planning on boarding into Oath?  I played WGD just for kicks at an ELD tournement about 3 months back and I ran maindeck Hellkite Overlord + Eternal Witness as my basic kills.  I also ran I think 2 Mull Drifters, 2 DA's, and I think 8 animates (4 Necro, 3 Dance, 1 animate dead).  I went with Dance over animate dead because It makes Hellkite a 9/9!  Not too many decks can deal with a turn 2 animate a 9/9 flying haste... even if I have to pay 1B to untap.  And as someone pointed out he gives you infinite damage if you combo WGD durring your first main.  But I typically do the Witness Kill anyhow.  Hellkite was maindeck as a backup plan to Witness, as well as a 'reanimator' plan-B f WGD gets extirpated, as well as saving me sideboard space for the oath plan.

I just don't see any advantage to running Oona.

[swawagon]

Oona wins instantly, with Blue or Black mana, and pitches to Force, and can even be hardcast on color.

If you board into Oath and have a five color manabase a Hellkite Overlord in the main saves one slot in the Board, over Oona.

I'm using 2 colors main (with one Tropical Island, 6 fetchies, and 2 basics), one Eternal Witness, and one Oona.
I'm using in the SideBoard; 2 Hellkite Overlord, 2 Bogardan Hellkite, 4 Oath, 3-4 Forbidden Orchard.

[Harlequin]

I guess that makes sense.  I don't think you gain much by trying to build a non-5c oath transformation.  You may have a stronger manabase, but it means you basically have no sideboard.  I think the two strongest solutions are running UBg with Goyfs/Trygons MD and a real sideboard (throwing oath to the wind), or run a 5c~ish main with 4 Orchards maindeck and and a 6-7 card SB to oath and 1/2 a sideboard for real cards. 

I think the manabase I had was 4 Orchards, 4 Gemstones, 0 COBs and a few fetches with undergrounds.

[fury]

I guess that makes sense.  I don't think you gain much by trying to build a non-5c oath transformation.  You may have a stronger manabase, but it means you basically have no sideboard.  I think the two strongest solutions are running UBg with Goyfs/Trygons MD and a real sideboard (throwing oath to the wind), or run a 5c~ish main with 4 Orchards maindeck and and a 6-7 card SB to oath and 1/2 a sideboard for real cards. 

I think the manabase I had was 4 Orchards, 4 Gemstones, 0 COBs and a few fetches with undergrounds.

If you choose a UBg version, the Masknought sideboard with Tarmogoyf is very efficient :

3 Illusionnary Mask
4 Phyrexian Dreadnought
3 Stifle
4 Tarmogoyf
1 Echoing Truth

It allows a real beatdown power in game 2 and 3, and the strategy is very fast, and non dependent of the graveyard (except for Tarmogoyf, but it takes into account the opponent's one).

[dicemanx]

The Hellkite is not the best kill card because of the R requirement when the strongest versions of WGD run B and U. To make Hellkite feasible you pretty much have to run 5-color, but there are not enough good 5-C lands to run (Orchard and CoB can contribute to losses that would otherwise not happen if you're running a regular 2-C or 3-C manabase.

The advantage of Oona is that it is the best *single* kill card available to WGD; that is, if you plan to conserve space in the deck and limit yourself to a single win condition, then nothing beats Oona in that department. Witness comes close but it can generate a few logistical problems, and Witness doesn't provide a beefy body that can be used to beat down if you want to win outside of the WGD loop.

To answer the question about losing Oona early to FoW/Extirpate etc: the plan is to then draw the game. Obviously you'd only FoW with Oona to stop an immediate win by the opponent. If you are uncomfortable with this, then supplement Oona with Cunning Wish (not Witness, because then Oona isn't necessary), since Wish has both the advantage of utility outside the WGD combo AND it adds to the instant speed count allowing a win without needing a Bazaar in play. I think people often forget the importance of maintaining a high Instant count in the deck; if the count is too low then there is almost no point in running Read the Runes.

At this stage, I'd probably run one of two configurations:

1) 5-color with Hellkite and Sliver Queen
2) 2/3 color with either Oona alone, or Oona and 1-2 Cunning Wish

I'd run the Cunning Wish plan if there was a danger of seeing maindeck Leylines and/or Extirpates; otherwise, there is nothing else to fear game 1. I've also come to the conclusion that Thoughtseize is inferior to Duress, but then again I'm a big fan of running 4 Deep Analysis and have often added Ancient Tombs to the main in practice.

I don't think you gain much by trying to build a non-5c oath transformation.  You may have a stronger manabase, but it means you basically have no sideboard.

I disagree. WGD doesn't need much of a SB; if I was limited to only 3 SB slots that would often be enough (3 bounce spells). What is paradoxical is that WGD can sometimes improve its chances by not SBing much of anything and letting the opponent SB heavily.

One thing to remember is that WGD fears very few hate cards, and the most fearsome hate (which is first and foremost Leyline, while other graveyard sweepers come a distant second) is often best addressed through the threat of a massive shift in strategy to one that doesn't involve the graveyard. Note that I say "threat" of a strategic change, rather than the actual strategic change; that is, the Oath SB plan is there to dissuade the SBing of heavy graveyard hate. I'd rather never SB in the Oath, but I have to on occasion to keep my opponents guessing.

[Smmenen]

Peter,

When was the last time you actually played WDG in a tournament?

[nineisnoone]

The need for has been rough.  If it pumped for , it'd be an obvious choice, but it does give advantages. 

1) 5-color with Hellkite and Sliver Queen

If you were 5 color, why would you see the need to run Sliver Queen with (or over if you meant Bogardan) Hellkite? 

TfK is a superior draw spell than RtR, but it doesn't double as a combo piece unfortunately (You can combo off Intuition, Animate and RtR, but not Intuition, Animate and TfK for instance).

Just noticed that, but you actually can combo off Intuition, Animate, TFK with Intution for WGD, WGD, Oona, since TFK can still discard the Oona in hand even though it's not an artifact.  I think the only RtR's only win is WGD in yard, Animate and RtR in hand.  Though I could be wrong...

[dicemanx]

Peter,

When was the last time you actually played WDG in a tournament?

A long time ago, although I actually test by myself fairly regularly. I appreciate that it's often hard to make any definitive claims based on tourney experience since so few individuals play the deck at events, and WGD can also be extremely forgiving rewarding "inferior" approaches. Of course I also assume that people use this thread for ideas that they themselves test.

Nevertheless, one thing I've learned about WGD over the many years of playing the deck though is that while the opposing decks change, many of the WGD fundamentals of deckbuilding and playing don't.

If you were 5 color, why would you see the need to run Sliver Queen with (or over if you meant Bogardan) Hellkite?

There are several reasons:

1) Sliver Queen has more lax mana requirements
2) Sliver Queen is big and can beat down outside of the WGD loop
3) You can actually cast Sliver Queen outright in 5C builds
4) 2 creatures makes it easier to win with Intuition
5) Sliver Queen is blue

Point 3 would justify running Hellkite and Queen over Hellkite and Oona; Queen is very likely superior when animated outside of the WGD loop as well.

[Harlequin]

I totally agree with this:

To answer the question about losing Oona early to FoW/Extirpate etc: the plan is to then draw the game. Obviously you'd only FoW with Oona to stop an immediate win by the opponent. If you are uncomfortable with this, then supplement Oona with Cunning Wish (not Witness, because then Oona isn't necessary), since Wish has both the advantage of utility outside the WGD combo AND it adds to the instant speed count allowing a win without needing a Bazaar in play. I think people often forget the importance of maintaining a high Instant count in the deck; if the count is too low then there is almost no point in running Read the Runes.

Where I start to disagree is here:

disagree. WGD doesn't need much of a SB; if I was limited to only 3 SB slots that would often be enough (3 bounce spells). What is paradoxical is that WGD can sometimes improve its chances by not SBing much of anything and letting the opponent SB heavily.

I don't want to come off as insulting, I truely mean the following as an equal differance in playstyle...  But it seems to come down to: do you plan on Out-playing them or Out-smarting them?

If you want just out-smart them then you make a 13 card transformational sideboard.  You just hope that when you throw rock, they throw scisors.  I agree though, the entire concept of the transformational board is to potentially invalidate thier boarding choices... and thus have them 'overboard' and weaken thier deck.   

To truely out-play them, I think you need more options in sideboard.  Bounce, Extirpate, Board Removal (EE), and possibly artifact hate.  Maybe even Sphere's or cannonist against rit-combo.  There's no way to include this unless you concerve space and overlap as many cards as possible.  Minimally, you can get away wit a 5 card transformational by running 4 Oaths an 1 extra creature (potentially leaveing Witness in the deck for Yawg/Timewalk).  Maybe considering Tinker/Target as another 2 cards, or double Empyrial Angel (I think I had double Blazing Archon in the board). 

I think you're comments about what WGD hate cards work and don't is also revealing about the differance between out-playing and out-smarting.  I only partially agree with your statement: Leyline is 2nd, GY sweeping permenants and 3rd... but #1 is the unknown.  There are TONS of instants that screw over WGD hard.  Not that this is news to anyone but: Creature removal and enchantment removal, work against both WGD and Oath.  In additon to that Stifle, and instant GY disruption like Extirpate are extremely dangerous.  As a control player, letting Dragon resolve duress or Thought Sieze is a huge misplay.  I'll burn my only force on duress against dragon leaving 1-2 mana open any day.  This puts gamble back on the Dragon player.  Do they risk throwing the game away to comboing out now? or do they spend time trying to find another duress.  More often than not they will opt to wait - meaning even if I have 3 lands in hand, I only have to fake it till I make it.  Comming full circle, this is why I like Extirpate in the sideboard of Dragon.  Against control it gives you an uncounterable look at thier hand which is often all you need to plot a course to a win. 


Now that being said... Maybe WGD is not the right deck to out-play someone with.  I only ever played it competatively once, and it was just to try something differant and have some fun. 


In response to the Hellkite + x in a 5color deck.  I think Witness is solid.  It's hardcastable alone, and does relevant things when you cast it.  Also I have been known to keep it in even after boarding over to oath.  Maybe for game 3, if my opponent has lots of board removal and little GY hate. 

[dicemanx]

You have an interesting perspective, although I detect a slight caving into the "fear", something that can impede performance with WGD. This is a very natural initial response when picking up the deck given the vulnerability of the combo, but you'll very likely find in time that many such fears are unwarranted. Furthermore, if those fears are substantiated by ample evidence (for instance, you know for a fact that everyone is playing Leylines and Extirpate), then the correct decision is to not play WGD for that event, or rely on a massive strategic change out of the SB.

To truely out-play them, I think you need more options in sideboard.  Bounce, Extirpate, Board Removal (EE), and possibly artifact hate.  Maybe even Sphere's or cannonist against rit-combo.  There's no way to include this unless you concerve space and overlap as many cards as possible.

I think you're underestimating WGD's tools to fight much of the "hate" without resorting to specific solutions, and you're perhaps overestimating the importance of many potential cards given what you cite as the "#1 hate card" - the "unknown". WGD has to be very careful when it comes to using cards that specifically target hate cards, and generally wants to avoid wars of attrition where it trades 1-for-1. Traditionally, WGD utilized 3 approaches regarding its disruption:

1) Run very few disruption elements (4 FoW only) and maximize on combo piece counts
2) Run 1-for-1 "general" disruption (FoW, Duress, Bounce) that has both offensive (to push through combo) and defensive (to stop opponent's combo) capabilities
3) Run "sweeper" cards that negated multiple hate cards (Xantid Swarm, Abeyance, Orim's Chant)

One additional consideration in the past was how to deal with faster combo decks, which is what CotV and/or Null Rod was for specifically; since no current decks are as problematic as the very fast Long variants of old, the CotV solution is no longer necessary.
 

As a control player, letting Dragon resolve duress or Thought Sieze is a huge misplay.  I'll burn my only force on duress against dragon leaving 1-2 mana open any day.  This puts gamble back on the Dragon player.  Do they risk throwing the game away to comboing out now? or do they spend time trying to find another duress.  More often than not they will opt to wait - meaning even if I have 3 lands in hand, I only have to fake it till I make it.  Comming full circle, this is why I like Extirpate in the sideboard of Dragon.  Against control it gives you an uncounterable look at thier hand which is often all you need to plot a course to a win. 

In practice, control decks, in their struggle against WGD rarely are put in positions of such luxury where they can protect their hand with FoW, have a critical disruption spell, AND can advance their plan (this last part is arguably the only one that truly matters). WGD is rarely in a hurry, particularly post SB, and can engage in attrition wars without too many problems due to its strong draw engines, especially given that control decks are now without their strongest hand shaping spell (Brainstorm). Draw engines magnify the power of disruption such as Duress and Thoughtsieize, because even if you run 4 Duress in a deck, having powerful draw cards or cycling/tutoring effects AND having more time because your opponent is more defensively postured post SB can make it seem like you're running 8 Duress. I have rarely encountered the situation that you express so much concern about, and this was primarily from a time when Brainstorm was around.

As far as the specific instance you cited with Extirpate, I disagree with its described function and would easily opt for an additional Duress or Thoughtseize instead. I would possibly run Extirpate only in mirrors or against faster decks that utilize the graveyard (Ichorid for instance). I don't want to pick apart specific examples, but I do want to stress the idea that that is rarely WGD's game to engage in such battles from my experience.

[Harlequin]

Yeah, I basically agree with everything there.  I also 100% agree that control rarely has FOW -and- a WGD-ending castable instant in hand.  My point was actually that until the dragon player gets to see thier opponent's hand you risk throwing the game away on a gamble that they don't have the disruption to go along with thier FOW.  By countering the duress, control puts the dice in dragons hands and dares them to go for it.  In the unlikely even they do have E-truth in hand the WGD all but throws the game by casting the animate.  This is what I was refering to about the unknown... If the control player psychs out the dragon player into NOT casting the animate, the control player can stall the dragon player with a hand of 4 lands, a mox, a Force and a pitch.  They actually don't need E-truth at all.

I also agree with your 3 options to approaching game 2.  But going back to why I don't like that 12 card oath plan is you basically can only do option #1.  Beacuse you have no space for extra 1-for-1's or sweepers.  As I was saying, in my view there are two ways to go (which are based on your proposals).
1) 5c - Hellkite, Witness; 5-7 card Oath board, with some space for other SB cards.
2) UBg - Oona, 3-4x Tarmogoyf main; no oath in board, with Trygons and maybe Xantids or what not boarded.
Maybe a cunning wish board.

[dicemanx]

My point was actually that until the dragon player gets to see thier opponent's hand you risk throwing the game away on a gamble that they don't have the disruption to go along with thier FOW.

Certainly such decisions will always be "gambles" but this isn't anything unique to WGD as there are many forms of "gambling" with every archetype in T1. Simply put, with each play decision you are weighing your options based on as much information as you have gathered and based on certain probability determinations.

For instance, when deciding whether to go off with WGD without seeing the opponent's hand, you have to consider their behavior/mannerisms, their play decisions prior to the current situation, how they SBed and how many cards they brought in, what archetype they are playing and how many critical disruption spells such archetypes tend to play, and how many critical disruption spells your opponent specifically tends to play. You also have to evaluate whether you're in a position to wait because you're opponent is passive and not advancing his game plan and you have other lines of play that help develop your hand or cycle through your library looking for protection and making the win a guarantee instead of a gamble.

As I mentioned in the previous post, there really isn't that much for WGD to fear as far as specific strategies are concerned, because the cards that do the most damage against WGD aren't very good against the field in general; there will be exceptions, but when you do have evidence to the contrary as I mentioned your best bet is to either not run WGD, or run the massive transformational strategy. I will also repeat something I mentioned on a few occasions in the distant past - when I lost with WGD, it was typically because my opponent was able to execute their game plan more rapidly than me; either I got comboed out by a faster archetype, or a control deck established control by getting their draw engines online faster and drawing into a sufficient number of stoppers. Rarely did any of my losses come from hate cards specifically, and rarely did I have regrets about my SB plans. In fact, my solution against control was to strengthen the draw engines and card cycling in WGD and reduce the dependency on specific combo pieces (most notably Bazaar) by making the deck more flexible. This allowed me to reduce the gambling associated with having to make blind decisions at critical moments.

1) 5c - Hellkite, Witness; 5-7 card Oath board, with some space for other SB cards.
2) UBg - Oona, 3-4x Tarmogoyf main; no oath in board, with Trygons and maybe Xantids or what not boarded.

You'll have to elaborate what you mean by "5-7 Oath SB". You'll need to put 4 Oath in the SB to start, and then at least 2 more creatures, if not 3 (we cannot use Gaea's Blessing effectively since the point of the SB plan is to circumvent anti-graveyard strategies primarily). Then comes the decision regarding Orchard, which is the main issue; how many do you intend to run main, and how many (if any) in the SB?

For instance, here's one SB approach, with 1 or 2 Orchards main and Oona or Hellkite as the kill card:

4 Oath
3 Hellkite
2 Orchard
3 Bounce
3 random (CotV? Extirpate? Xantids?)

2) UBg - Oona, 3-4x Tarmogoyf main; no oath in board, with Trygons and maybe Xantids or what not boarded.

Maybe; I have yet to test this approach, but this approach diminishes the power of the transformation just to gain a few extra SB slots. For instance, what do you bring Trygons against? If your concern is primarily Leyline, then wouldn't a shift to Oath + bounce be more effective?


If you want another option for BUG, here's a board I ran a long while ago:

4 Illusionary Mask
3 Dreadnaught
2 Survival of the Fittest
3 Carpet of Flowers
3 bounce or CotV

The idea is to not remove the WGD plan entirely, because you can actually hardcast WGD under Mask and you still want to maintain the possibility of immediate wins if the opportunity arises. Carpet is actually pretty strong against U based archetypes, more than any specific hate card, since it can squeeze more out of your DAs and RtR while allowing you to hardcast WGDs faster. As I said, I rather build resources and present active threats to my control oriented opponent as opposed to trying to go toe to toe with 1-for-1 disruption.

The thing to keep in mind with SB plans is that you can SB passively (bring in hate versus hate) or actively (shift strategy to maintain pressure on your opponent); I am not a fan of passive approaches in WGD because I don't like to sit waiting for solutions.

[Harlequin]

Definately run all 4 Orchards maindeck.  And with 1 hellkite maindeck you can sneak away with 5 cards: 4 oaths + 1 hellkite.  7 Cards gives you 2 more cards, most likely 1 recursion card like Krosan Reclaimation and maybe a utility creature like Emp Archangel.  Or you could do something like Plats + Tinker and opt not to run the recursion card.  This gives you the option to run something like Hellkite, Plats, Witness, or even just Plats + Witness for the Oath plan. 

I've never tested the Mask sideboard.  But if you plan on the mask SB - do you run Ritual maindeck?

[nineisnoone]

If the control player psychs out the dragon player into NOT casting the animate, the control player can stall the dragon player with a hand of 4 lands, a mox, a Force and a pitch.  They actually don't need E-truth at all.

I don't see how the control player is in the advantage here unless if they are capable of actively winning soon though.  And if that's the case, it's not different then just countering, untapping and winning the game.  Despite running full power, WGD is actually very light in the mana department.  So removing "all permanents from play" isn't as deadly as it seems.  This isn't a storm deck, it doesn't need 10 spells it just needs 1 the animate and on top of that the other conditions (WGD and a win condition).  Let's say that WGD does turn 1 Bazaar, Black Lotus, activate discard Oona and Dragon.  Then cast Necormancy.  in response you Chain or whatever.  WGD loses all their permanents.  Dragon is back to hand.  Can you win in the next 2-3 turns?  All it needs is a couple of pieces of mana, a discard outlet and an animate to win again.  I'm not saying that is easy, but if you can't press that advantage well Dragon is capable of recouping their loss better than many decks.  And WGD still has their own control cards to buy it time to recoup as well.

And of course, if you lose that gamble, you lose the game not just all your permanents.  So while there a degree of gamesmanship there, it's not WGD that is at risk of losing. It is the opponent.

[Harlequin]

In the example you chose, the WGD player can't even win.... unless they are running Laquatus and riftstone portal.  Thier dragon loop will contain only Bazaar.  So now they need Jet or Sapphire to win.  So Bazaar + dragon + Animate + mana 1 + mana 2 = 5 cards.   That means they have 2 random cards + dragon to win with if thier opponent removes their board.  And they are also down a bazaar.  Now dragon needs two mana sources, a discard/entomb effect, and an animate to win the game.  Control in the mean time will be rebuilding as well. 

Also my point was that countering Duress and keeping your hand a mystery is often enough to hold back an insecure dragon player.  A typical hand might be: WGD, Animate, Land, Mox, Duress, Intuition, Bazaar.  Nice hand.  Lets say you've unfortunately lost game 1 and its game 2 and you're first against say... Ubg Tezzeret Control.  You play Land -> duress.  and they force pitching Thirst.  You pass.  They play fetch, mox and pass - 4 cards in hand.  Now its your turn again.  Say you draw something not so great - like another animate.  Drop bazaar.  Activate your hand is now: WGD, Animate x2, Intuition, Mox, Read the Runes, and another Land.  You have to discard 3 and then you could have potentially 2 mana this turn (with the land you played on turn 1 + the mox in hand).   Do you try to win this turn?  If so, what precautions if any to do take against Etruth, Chain, 2nd Force, etc.  Do you wait and try to make the Read the Runes or Intuition good?

Maybe this is a playstyle question - but I wouldn't try to win this turn.  And in that I believe that control has 'won the small war' by Forcing the Duress.  The 4 cards control has are not actually relevant at this exact moment.  The only thing that maters is that the dragon players knows they -haven't- seen those cards and are now uncomfortable.

[dicemanx]

Do you try to win this turn?  If so, what precautions if any to do take against Etruth, Chain, 2nd Force, etc.  Do you wait and try to make the Read the Runes or Intuition good?

You absolutely wait, unless you have reason to suspect that the FoW was a deliberate attempt to mislead. There is no urgency to win quickly here as Tezz hasn't put any pressure on you whatsoever, and your major play will be to Intuition for 3 DAs (or 2 DAs and Mulldrifter). In fact, getting to three mana quickly will be imperative, because it will cripple their ability to resolve instants eot (due to threats of Necromancy and Intuition) and thus slow their development. You also don't need to cycle into a Duress to clarify the situation; you could just as easily accumulate a hand, sandbag mana, and if the first animate fails to get the job done and you lose your permanents, then the second one might just pull through. Finally, even if you don't reach a 3rd mana, you still have to draw *something* which might serve as a good substitute, like Duress, FoW, or even a DA. I find the WGD side very pleasant to play in this scenario.

In any case, the struggle continues; these sort of games make playing WGD very exciting as you make your opponent sweat while looking for any tells indicating that you should strike. Meanwhile, the more stoppers your opponent has, the less pressure he is likely going to put on you in the early to mid game by developing his own game. The neat thing about WGD is that even though it attempts to primarily play the beatdown role, it sometimes can wrest the control role from the opponent via its spectacular array of draw spells and Animate "hammers" (Animates can serve to strip away disruption spells like FoWs, Drains, or Duresses). Even if the control might be on the verge of slipping away, WGD still has the option to "gamble" and simply steal the win.

This is an opportunity for an interesting experiment - recreate this actual scenario between Tezz and WGDX, and put a land, Mox, ETruth, FoW and a random blue card in Tezz's hand, plus two more random cards, and take it from there. See what happens over the course of five games if WGD chooses to postpone the Animate.

Incidentally, post-SB, I tend to SB out animates until I go down to 6 (keeping 3 Necromancy though, of course) if I see that my opponent is bringing in a number of SB cards (4 or more). I also look to see if they SB in a chunk of 4 cards, which looks suspiciously like 4 Leyline; all other graveyard hate cards or removal cards are typically in numbers of 2-3 cards, or maybe singletons even.

[nineisnoone]

In the example you chose, the WGD player can't even win....

Oops.  Yeah add in a Mox Jet to that or whatever. But the scenario still is the same.  Losing all permanents and you losing the game is not the same thing.  Winning the game and the opponent losing the game is the same thing.  Dicemanx goes into it well.  Again, not saying that the situation is ideal.  But when the reward is winning the game and the risk is losing your permanents, I'd say that you are in a good situation.  There is always the chance to rebuild permanents, but there is never a chance to win a game that you lost.  But the fact that I have the option to win-now or wait to make stronger plays, puts it more on my side than the opponent.  Until the opponent can threaten a win, WGD is not the one that should be under the gun.

[Harlequin]

I agree on all accounts.  I too would wait. 

I'm sure you would all agree that if the duress had resolved showing you lands + force + thrist, you would have taken the force and gone for the win.  I'm not even saying that Dragon is bad-off.  It's a game of calculated risk.  I think nine over simplified it by saying: "the fact that I have the option to win-now or wait to make stronger plays."  If that were true - you would choose 'win-now' ever time.  It's really a choice between "the risk of blowing my board to win-now or wait, risk nothing, and make stronger plays." 

Let's bring the example one more turn. 
So we agree we won't try to win this turn, and we like Intuition.  We probably ditch WGD, Animatex1 (to fit dice's board lets say it was a Necromancy), and Read the runes.  This gives us 3 mana next turn to cast Intuition and we still have an animate in hand. 
They play a 2nd land, and pass again.  4 cards in hand. 
You draw card X - which is a card you boarded in for game 2. 

I) What if card-X was a chain of vapor boarded in because they added a 4 card block from thier SB.  It doesn't do us much right now.  We play our 2 mana and pass, with the idea being Intuition plan EOT or inreponse to them not having UU (so hopefully they will crack that fetch and fall off drain). 

II) What if card-X was Thoughtsieze.  I know its really contrived but Let's make things interesting.  Lets say they Misdirrect thoughtseize leaving them with 2 cards left and UU1 open.  Ditch Intuition, then attempt the win? or ditch the animate and attemp intuition?  All of a sudden we're on the ropes now.

III) What if card-X was Extirpate.  Now it's easy... Extirpate on Force and look at thier hand.  If you see Force, or Drain, or Etruth.. You can opt to wait to win.  If you see a few lands, you throw down the animate and win easy.  We get to see thier hand without risking anything.  We get to see if thier force was protecting a royal flush or just a bluff.  If they have hate and/or more countermagic we may need more than just intuition to dig out of this.  In addition to that, we get to cruise thier deck and see what SB plans they had in store for us, we can re-evaluate those Chains we boarded in and maybe board smarter for game 2.  At very least we know not to walk into the RFGed-Trap.  It's even more interesting if they had a 2nd Force instead of the Misdirrect, because extirpate takes that out. 

[nineisnoone]

I think nine over simplified it by saying: "the fact that I have the option to win-now or wait to make stronger plays."  If that were true - you would choose 'win-now' ever time.  It's really a choice between "the risk of blowing my board to win-now or wait, risk nothing, and make stronger plays."

I do agree that I am simplifying the options, but don't you think that saying that waiting "risks nothing" is an overstatement? 

I'm saying merely being in the position to have a direction option to win is almost always a bigger advantage than an draw back you could have.  In all of those situations, WGD has better rewards than risks because his reward is winning.  Even in a stalemate, he is technically advantaged because he is still threatening the win.  Does that mean he should take the first win-now option?  Certainly not, there is always personal risk-aversiveness to take into account and opportunity costs to waiting.  But if the opponents options are lose now or force WGD to lose all permanents compared to your win now or lose all your permanents, I can't see how you can feel like WGD is seriously disadvantaged.

I) What if card-X was a chain of vapor boarded in because they added a 4 card block from thier SB.  It doesn't do us much right now.  We play our 2 mana and pass, with the idea being Intuition plan EOT or inreponse to them not having UU (so hopefully they will crack that fetch and fall off drain).

If you have 3 mana, a 2 mana animate, and a U mana source you can float blue to bounce the animate back to your hand in response to their Swords/Chain/Echo.... I think that works.  I don't think it'd work on Stifle though.  Or if you have 4 mana and a 3 mana animate.  (Though I guess they could just sac a land and rebounce WGD).

Or not.   

II) What if card-X was Thoughtsieze.  I know its really contrived but Let's make things interesting.  Lets say they Misdirrect thoughtseize leaving them with 2 cards left and UU1 open.  Ditch Intuition, then attempt the win? or ditch the animate and attemp intuition?  All of a sudden we're on the ropes now.

If I had only 3 mana and Necromancy/Intuition, I wouldn't play Thoughtseize.  What would be the point?  I have to pass the turn to do something relevant anyways.  I would rather EOT Intuition and get a Deep Analysis in the graveyard and then go Thoughtseize -> Deep Analysis.  Unless I drew the fourth mana source where I have the option to Necro.  (I would also play Duress rather than Thoughtseize).

As far as Extirpate goes, I've always personally loved the card, but I've never found it to be good enough to play.  It obviously helps on an intelligence level, but I feel those kinds of cards decrease in value as you increase in skill.  Because the more skilled you become the more knowledge you can intuit without direct knowledge.  Certainly, Extirpate gives you more knowledge, but I leave the intangibles strengths to the players and want tangible strengths on the cards.

[fury]

If you have 3 mana, a 2 mana animate, and a U mana source you can float blue to bounce the animate back to your hand in response to their Swords/Chain/Echo.... I think that works.  I don't think it'd work on Stifle though.  Or if you have 4 mana and a 3 mana animate.

This doesn"t work with a bounce (with a 2 manas animate spell, it works with Necromancy). The opponent will play his bounce when Dragon comes into play with animate dead, and before the permanents goes in the RFG zone. If the Animate Dead is bounced, we must sacrifice the Dragon, but the triggered ability which removes the permanents is still here.

But it works with Necromancy, because when you bounce Necromancy, WGD is sacrificed, and you can cast Necromancy on it again.

[Harlequin]

I do agree that I am simplifying the options, but don't you think that saying that waiting "risks nothing" is an overstatement?

Not nearly as much an overstatement as saying its a choice between "Win-now" and "other player."  To me that's like saying: somehow you hardcast Darksteel last turn.  Your opponent is at 10 with no creatures in play.  You draw tinker.  You're options in this case as I see it is "Win-Now" or tinker out Darksteel for lets say Mindslaver. 

Who know's maybe thier holding back Disharmony + Berserk and Fling.  And you should have tinkered out DSC for Mindslaver.  I agree that there is no certainty in who will win.  But as a rule of thumb - there's a big differance in a realatively straight forward "win-now."  And a play that bets all the commitment you've made thus far for a chance to win the game. 

If I had only 3 mana and Necromancy/Intuition, I wouldn't play Thoughtseize.  What would be the point?  I have to pass the turn to do something relevant anyways.  I would rather EOT Intuition and get a Deep Analysis in the graveyard and then go Thoughtseize -> Deep Analysis.  Unless I drew the fourth mana source where I have the option to Necro.  (I would also play Duress rather than Thoughtseize).

I wasn't really clear in my example, but I was going on a few assumptions based on some of Diceman's previous posts.  In my mind, your hand is: WGD, Animate Dead, Necromancy, Intuition, Read the Ruins, Mox, Land - and you have to now discard 3.  I think the general concensus that I got was to discard: Dragon, Necro, Read the Ruin.  Now when the turn passes, you draw card X which is a card spesifically brought in from the sideboard for this match.  I was assuming that the 4 duresses were already maindeck.  And in a previous post Dice said that he would prefer to board in 3 Thoughtsiezes against control.  So Card-X could only be thoughtsieze, unless you are saying that you sideboard your duresses.

But, even if we go with a 'double necro' draw and follow your example... you still arn't making the play that you claim you would make.  You aren't 'winning-now.' These two quotes don't support each other:

But when the reward is winning the game and the risk is losing your permanents, I'd say that you are in a good situation.

Does that mean he should take the first win-now option?  Certainly not, there is always personal risk-aversiveness to take into account and opportunity costs to waiting.  But if the opponents options are lose now or force WGD to lose all permanents compared to your win now or lose all your permanents, I can't see how you can feel like WGD is seriously disadvantaged.

Also, the last part about a 'serious disadvantage' makes it clear that you're missing my point.  I'm not claiming that the Control Player is somehow winning.  Nor Am I claiming that Dragon is in any sort of disadvantage.  My point is that by gambling for a quick win, dragon has lets say a 25% chance to lose their board, which results in a 80% chance control will win the match (remeber you lost game1).  So by casting animate 4 out of 5 times you will win this game and head to game 3; but 1 out of 5 times you lose the match.  It seems to me that we are all in agreement that dragon can improve those odds by waiting and developing other lines of play. 

To put an extreme twist on this: lets say that the control player's opening hand was Land, Force, Thirst, x4 Leviathon (drawing the mox as draw#1) - And they let duress resolve.  I think most of us would agree that casting Animate Dead on turn 2 is now suddenly the right play.  Up until this information is known - in my above examples where we all agree it's best to wait.  Whenever I said "4-cards in hand" that now becomes "4 Leviathons" in hand.  Now in a twisted way, I could claim that LEVIATHON is an effective hate card against dragon because by haveing 4 in hand, I've altered dragons line of play to extend the game past turn 2.   This get's back to "What dragon fears."  And it illistrates that dragon fears what it doesn't know. 

 
Now I'm guilty of cooking up an example to show my point about information.  But nothing in this example is far-fetched at all.  Control has seen 3 mana and 2 counters in the top 9.  Dragon has seen a fairly 'typically powerful' hand (nothing restricted, but it did get an ideal mix of mana, disruption, discard, and combo peices).