[Free Podcast] SMIP # 10: Five Vintage Scenarios!

[Smmenen]

http://www.mtgcast.com/?p=21525

We deconstruct 5 different Vintage scenarios.  

The first scenario poses the question of whether you would keep a hand with no blue mana, but Force of Will, Mental Misstep, Mindbreak Trap, and Ancestral Recall.

The second scenario involves the question of when to play Ancestral Recall in the Mental Misstep metagame.

The third scenario is a Fact or Fiction split.

The fourth scenario concerns what to do when your opponent is about to break Memory Jar.

And the fifth scenario is a Doomsday scenario.

Listen...

[Stormanimagus]

Most Workshop players will open on mox, Shop, sphere, mox in that order if you showed no land on turn 1. then your only play is FoW. Mindbreak Trap will be live a lot less often than you think is the shop player is intelligent.

Also, Stephen --> NO Workshop player will think you're on dredge if you don't play a land because NO dredge player will NOT mull to Bazaar especially if he/she has 7 in hand. They will think you're on Belcher or that you are sandbagging Mindbreak Trap and play around it.

-Storm

[Smmenen]

yes, we know that.   that's not the point, though.   Neither one of us would keep that hand against Shops.  However, I do believe that Mindbreak Trap will be live against Shops a non-trivial amount of time on turn one.  

Also, Stephen --> NO Workshop player will think you're on dredge if you don't play a land

You're also speaking in hyperbole.  yes, there are people that would do that.  I've seen it before.  

[Twaun007]

Also, Stephen --> NO Workshop player will think you're on dredge if you don't play a land because NO dredge player will NOT mull to Bazaar especially if he/she has 7 in hand. They will think you're on Belcher or that you are sandbagging Mindbreak Trap and play around it.

-Storm

I've done this before... Eot discard a dredger and pass the turn. It allows you immediate use from your bazaar. I've also kept a no Bazaar hand vs Landstill. I don't think it is that uncommon.

[Stormanimagus]

Also, Stephen --> NO Workshop player will think you're on dredge if you don't play a land because NO dredge player will NOT mull to Bazaar especially if he/she has 7 in hand. They will think you're on Belcher or that you are sandbagging Mindbreak Trap and play around it.

-Storm

I've done this before... Eot discard a dredger and pass the turn. It allows you immediate use from your bazaar. I've also kept a no Bazaar hand vs Landstill. I don't think it is that uncommon.

You are forgetting something. YOU were on the play. You aren't discarding anything turn 1. Are you seriously saying that GAME 1 as a Dredge pilot you are keeping a 7 card hand WITH Bazaar and NOT playing Bazaar on turn 1 so that you can discard your dredger at the end step of turn 2 and play a Bazaar on turn 3? OR that you kept a hand with no bazaar when you could easily mull to 6 (or 7 with powder) and find Bazaar? That pretty much sounds like the most terrible play ever. This assumption will NEVER happen against an opponent who knows anything about Vintage. They will ONLY assume you are a bad player or are playing Belcher and a fishing for another draw step to build storm. I am NOT speaking in Hyperbole Stephen. You yourself that said that we, as magic players, need to NOT be on automatic when it comes to analyzing situations. . . that we need to NOT always trust our instincts or pattern recognition. SO, I would ask you to think logically and critically about your statement that an opponent will think you're on Dredge. He/she will most certainly not if you truly analyze the variables.

1. You are on the play so discarding a dredger early than endstep turn 2 is out of the question unless.
2. You had a 7 card hand and DIDN'T mull to try and find Bazaar?

This is a simple analysis guys, c'mon.

-Storm

[Smmenen]

You're right about one thing -- it is simple.

If you go 'draw, go,' it's a not unreasonable thing to think that your opponent *might* be playing Dredge, and prepping to discard a dredger.  

Your post has way too many words written in all caps in too many absolute terms.  C'mon.  

Paul Mastriano just played in a tournament against a Dredge pilot, round 1, and what he described was exactly this thing.  It was the guys first Vintage tournament 

[Twaun007]

You are forgetting something. YOU were on the play. You aren't discarding anything turn 1. Are you seriously saying that GAME 1 as a Dredge pilot you are keeping a 7 card hand WITH Bazaar and NOT playing Bazaar on turn 1 so that you can discard your dredger at the end step of turn 2 and play a Bazaar on turn 3? That pretty much sounds like the most terrible play ever.

-Storm

Um, I don't think I've forgotten anything. And yes, I've passed turn one on the play(g1) vs Workshops to avoid my Bazaar being hit by Wasteland right off the rip. I don't see how its considered a bad play when you position yourself to get at least one proper use out of Bazaar before its wasted. Whats the difference if you play it turn one, activate, and it gets wasted? You're still only able to dredge one card. If you pass the turn to discard a dredger you see more cards off the Bazaar activation. Plus, I have no problem sacrificing a turn vs Workshops since my deck is faster.

-Twaun

[Stormanimagus]

You are forgetting something. YOU were on the play. You aren't discarding anything turn 1. Are you seriously saying that GAME 1 as a Dredge pilot you are keeping a 7 card hand WITH Bazaar and NOT playing Bazaar on turn 1 so that you can discard your dredger at the end step of turn 2 and play a Bazaar on turn 3? That pretty much sounds like the most terrible play ever.

-Storm

Um, I don't think I've forgotten anything. And yes, I've passed turn one on the play(g1) vs Workshops to avoid my Bazaar being hit by Wasteland right off the rip. I don't see how its considered a bad play when you position yourself to get at least one proper use out of Bazaar before its wasted. Whats the difference if you play it turn one, activate, and it gets wasted? You're still only able to dredge one card. If you pass the turn to discard a dredger you see more cards off the Bazaar activation. Plus, I have no problem sacrificing a turn vs Workshops since my deck is faster.

-Twaun

If it is game 1 you presumably don't know that your opponent is on shops. Even if you know he is I think that your play is always wrong. So what if they wasteland your Bazaar? That means that their mana is tied up turn 1 and you still dig 2 cards deeper and are able to put multiple dredgers in the gy. on your draw step you dredge and get the engine rolling. If you let them do whatever they want on turn 1 they could play spheres and then the only thing you'll be doing this game is Ichorid. Are you really going to rely on hitting your 2-3 MD Ichorid to win the whole game? You HAVE to put pressure on them now and Bazaar does that. I'm trying not to be senselessly automatic about this, but I would say that even if I know my opponent is on shops I'll probably run out Bazaar turn 1 every time because the opportunity cost of doing so far outweighs not doing so and trying to discard at the end of turn 2. If you are dredging for the first time on the upkeep of your turn 3 and you've given your shop opponent 2 full turns unmolested I can almost guarantee you that you'll lose. Game 2 and 3 is totally different, but game 1 on the play this is always better IMO.

If you are on the draw then things are different. Then you SEE that they are on shops and can judge based on their turn 1 play whether that is the correct course of action. In that circumstance I might consider it. But I still might play out the Bazaar to go into race mode if I want to risk walking into waste.

Again, I'll stand by what I originally said. On the play game 1 you do not hold up Bazaar in your hand to be played on turn 3. Period.

-Storm

[Smmenen]

I don't disagree with your assessment of how the Dredge player should play (although, it's a bit hyperbolic).

But like I said, that's not the issue.   Players don't play optimally, and if an opponent says 'go,' on the first turn, having done nothing, assuming they *might* be on dredge (not saying we assume they *are*, but that we should be open to that possibility), is far from unreasonable.   

In my view, it's at least as reasonable, if not more so, than assuming they are on Belcher (your idea). 

In any case, your assumption, that there is no way the opponent is playing Dredge, is far less reasonable than my assumption that they might be playing Dredge. 

[Stormanimagus]

I don't disagree with your assessment of how the Dredge player should play (although, it's a bit hyperbolic).

But like I said, that's not the issue.   Players don't play optimally, and if an opponent says 'go,' on the first turn, having done nothing, assuming they *might* be on dredge (not saying we assume they *are*, but that we should be open to that possibility), is far from unreasonable.  

In my view, it's at least as reasonable, if not more so, than assuming they are on Belcher (your idea).  

In any case, your assumption, that there is no way the opponent is playing Dredge, is far less reasonable than my assumption that they might be playing Dredge.  

I suppose that is a fair observation.

However, on a related side note, I would have to say that I am more in the camp of your teammate Kevin on this one. I never assume that my opponent will play any less than optimally. Why would you? If you assume they will play optimally and you then play to beat that shouldn't you also beat a player who makes mistakes? Isn't it just gravy if you face someone who makes bonehead plays? Why prepare for mistakes that shouldn't happen? I feel like that is just asking for trouble. If you throw out clearly obvious "bait and switch" types of plays to capitalize on sub-optimal play and that doesn't happen then guess what? You just lost. Why open that up as a possibility at all if you can make the right play based on an optimal opponent? I don't get these "mind games" that so many players profess to playing. If it is truly a judgment call that you are debating over (do I FoW this or not?) and the fact that you have imperfect information makes the call not 100% one way or the other then that is a different. If the correct play is relatively obvious but you try something else to catch your opponent in a mistake I think you are asking to have that thrown back in your face. Just my 2 cents on that FWIW.

-Storm

[Smmenen]

I don't disagree with your assessment of how the Dredge player should play (although, it's a bit hyperbolic).

But like I said, that's not the issue.   Players don't play optimally, and if an opponent says 'go,' on the first turn, having done nothing, assuming they *might* be on dredge (not saying we assume they *are*, but that we should be open to that possibility), is far from unreasonable.  

In my view, it's at least as reasonable, if not more so, than assuming they are on Belcher (your idea).  

In any case, your assumption, that there is no way the opponent is playing Dredge, is far less reasonable than my assumption that they might be playing Dredge.  

I suppose that is a fair observation.

However, on a related side note, I would have to say that I am more in the camp of your teammate Kevin on this one. I never assume that my opponent will play any less than optimally. Why would you?

Your confusing a negative with a positive.  Just because I don't assume my opponent will play optimally doesn't mean I assume they will play suboptimally either.  I try to plan for every reasonable eventuality.

Your assumption that your opponent always plays optimally is foolish. Not just because  most players make lots and lots of play mistakes, but because suboptimal plays may generates a line of play that you did not foresee, and cause you to lose the game as a result, and forgo lost opportunities to generate value by giving your opponent chances to make play mistakes.  

A related example of the latter is how Vintage players split Fact or Fiction piles, which, in my observation, they do incorrectly more than 50% of the time.  
 

[hitman]

Try to pretend like you understand what's important.

[MaximumCDawg]

I've only got through the first half hour of the podcast (it must be rationed, as they come out so rarely) but I don't see what is so controversial about Steve's thoughts on the no-land hand.  An opponent who sees you say "go" on your first turn will either assume: (1) You kept a no-land hand, and are probably gambling on a Force and a ton of gas; (2) You're on Dredge or Belcher; or (3) You have no idea what you are doing.  From the standpoint of Workshop, what difference does any of this make?  Whether she thinks you have no land or she thinks you're using an explosive combo deck, her goal is the same- quickly shut the door on your ability to play spells.  No matter what she thinks, she will probably not play around Mindbreak Trap because it just isn't ubiquitous.

What makes the no-land hand potentially keepable, and you guys didn't discuss this that I could see, is the combination of protection (Trap, Force, Misstep), a win condition (tinker) and ways to reclaim lost CA (A.recall, Ponder).  I do not think it is enough, as Kevin suggested, to simply have free counterspells and call that your opening "mana."  Free counterspells don't win the game.  This hand is special because it actually has a plan - protect itself just long enough to regain card equality, and then win with Tinker.  If you take any one of these three elements out of the hand, I don't think it is keepable anymore.

Even so, I'd never keep that hand because you're basically buying yourself into a terrible position and just gambling that you can draw out of it before you're crushed.  Why would you want to start out so far behind the 8-ball?  Going down to 6 doesn't even hurt the hand that much, since you're virtually guaranteed to be pitching a card to Force in order to stay alive anyway.  Is the "hope to god I draw a land" game plan really best?

[Smmenen]

Try to pretend like you understand what's important.

If you're talking to me, why don't you listen to the podcast before commenting?  What's important in this conversation is the context of the podcast and the answer to the scenarios posed.  

I will strongly suggest that we respond to all of the listener feedback in the next episode.   

Keep it coming. 

[DubDub]

Try to pretend like you understand what's important.

If you're talking to me, why don't you listen to the podcast before commenting?  What's important in this conversation is the context of the podcast and the answer to the scenarios posed.

Flavor text burn!



Really enjoyed the podcast.  Although, for the record, if an unknown opponent just says "Go." and my hand contains in part Shop, Mox, Lodestone, Chalice there's no way I'm going to play Chalice before Lodestone.

If you play Chalice@0 that potentially could be ignored (as you guys advocated in the podcast), since clearly they don't have jewelry they wanted to play on their first turn, and then you serve up Lodestone for a one-to-one trade with Mindbreak Trap (and it gets exiled, relevant if you have Welder).

If you play Lodestone first then your opponent *must* counter with Force of Will, a two-for-one trade, and then you can follow up with Chalice@0, which you should, I think, be willing to trade with their Mindbreak Trap.

Also, Steve, do you not play Lotus Petal?  My count of blue producing outs when I first heard the question was ~14 lands, Sapphire, Lotus, and Petal.  There's obviously only a tiny difference between 16 and 17 blue producing sources, but I think Lotus Petal is interesting, because it's the only one that isn't permanent that also only produces a single .  If I topdeck Lotus Petal I'm 100% to fire off Ancestral, whereas with a permanent source I think it's a non-trivial decision whether to Ancestral or Preordain first.

[hitman]

If you're talking to me, why don't you listen to the podcast before commenting?  What's important in this conversation is the context of the podcast and the answer to the scenarios posed.

Hahaha.  I wasn't making fun of anyone.  I agree with what you said about Fact or Fiction.  The flavor text on it is my favorite flavor text of any Magic card so I was just quoting it.  It wasn't directed at anyone.  Sorry for the confusion.

[playkenny]

Don't know your doomsday deck list but I would take/counter the lotus and take/counter a sphere leaving chalice at Zero.

Your doomsday stack fighting chalice at 0 is:
time walk
Gush
Maniac
Gin tax probe
Gin tax probe

Play land walk, untap draw gush, gush, reply land  and drop maniac then double probe and win right? This looses to waste and stip

[Troy_Costisick]

I'm listening to this bit by bit.  I think a much more interesting hand in the first scenario would have been if the hand had Surgical Extraction instead of Hurkyl's Recall.  This means you have three free counters AND a way to eliminate potential future threats without spending any mana.  That would have made it a much more keepable hand IMO.

In the second scenario, if I have a Mox in hand-as Steve suggested-then I wouldn't worry about Flusterstorm.  I'd lay my land and mox then pass.  I wouldn't run out my Ancestral as aggressively as you guys, especially if I have three mana sources as you guys suggested.  I'd wait for my opponenent to tap his mana for something then play A-call in response.

In the third scenario, I think the 4-1 split with the lands vs. Jace is easily the way to go.  Once you get past the second land, the third and fourth land aren't as big of a deal.  And you're going to have to put at least two lands in a pile no matter what, so I'd stack the lands in one pile and put Jace in the other and then hold on for dear life.

[Troy_Costisick]

In the fourth scenario, it's hard to know what's right at all.  I think you made the right decision with the Remora, Stephen, but that's a hard one to judge.  I'm sure that was a really exciting game to play!

In the fifth scenario, I was leaning toward Lotus w/ Thoughtseize at first b/c it really shut off Academy for all intents and purposes.  If they played Chalice @ zero, then if they draw a Mox they couldn't play it.  So that was my guess before listening to the answer.  Wow, but after listening to your answer, that's pretty brilliant.  There's no bulletproof way to beat MUD in this instance I think, but what you decided to do by Sphere and playing Draw-go is awesome.

Peace,

-Troy

[Smmenen]

Yeah, the Dday plan I sketched is great because it trumps Thorn and both Chalices, allowing you to ignore them AND save your Force for whatever they may play.

[serracollector]

nice podcast, lots of interesting scenerios.  One of the things you guys didn't touch upon tho, and I think should be talked about more, is the power of mental misstep not only stopping acall, tutors, and preordains etc etc, but the fact that they stop REB, one of the most used anti "big blue deck" spells used in sideboards, especially with the mass use of Jace.  I personally would NEVER run less than 2 misstep in ANY blue based deck now, and optimally would run 3, with a possible 4th in the SB, just for cards like REB, and Surgical extraction, which are sideboard fodder for MANY MANY decks now.  Maybe next cast you guys could touch up on this some more?  the MUD matchup is interesting and all, but I would really love to hear more "blue vs blue" scenerios next time, as from what I have noticed the meta has shifted to more and more big blue than any other types atm, including MUD.  With Gush, FoF, Remora, Jace, and Standstill all being viable draw engines for blue decks, this comes as no surprise to me.  As those numbers of blue decks increase, I beleive REB and Surgical Extraction will too.  And thus Mental Misstep will become more and more useful.

[DubDub]

Regarding the question for the listeners at the end:

'WotC resists printing Tiago Chan's originally submitted invitational card because it's deemed too broken, instead prints the best blue creature of all time.'

[Troy_Costisick]

Regarding the question for the listeners at the end:

'WotC resists printing Tiago Chan's originally submitted invitational card because it's deemed too broken, instead prints the best blue creature of all time.'

That's a good one.  I'd pick "Dredge wins Vintage Champs" as the biggest Vintage story of the year.

[Onslaught]

I think the biggest story of the year has to be the diversity of Vintage, it's truly incredible.

[MaximumCDawg]

Listened to the second half hour.   Still liking the format - really gets the noodle going!

On the Jace, 4 land question: I had the same gut reaction as Kevin, and it really didn't seem terribly complicated.  4x Land vs Jace forces the opponent to make a choice: any other pile does not for them to make a choice.  That is, if you put any land with Jace, they can take that pile to get mana and Jace.  The only remaining question is whether they desperately need more than 1 mana, and in Vintage, with a Pearl in play, I sort of doubt that. 

That's my (amateur) benchmark for making Facts piles: set it up so the opponent has to make a choice between two resources / lines of play.  I figure you, as the opponent, get maximum value out of a Fact when you at least restrict your opponent to one type of gain.

[DubDub]

If permissible, I'd like to expand on the Fact or Fiction splitting question.

If it seems generally agreeable that a split of four lands vs. Jace is optimal for those five cards, how would your split change if the Fact instead revealed:

Mox Ruby
Mox Emerald
Mox Jet
Mox Sapphire
Jace the Mind Sculptor

I think this will underscore the declining marginal return to lands that Steve was getting at.  Since we're limited (usually) to one land per turn receiving four lands at once is not significantly different from receiving three lands.  There's no such restriction however on Moxen so the calculus changes drastically.

I know how I would split that pile.  How would you do it?

[MaximumCDawg]

If permissible, I'd like to expand on the Fact or Fiction splitting question.

If it seems generally agreeable that a split of four lands vs. Jace is optimal for those five cards, how would your split change if the Fact instead revealed:

Mox Ruby
Mox Emerald
Mox Jet
Mox Sapphire
Jace the Mind Sculptor

I think this will underscore the declining marginal return to lands that Steve was getting at.  Since we're limited (usually) to one land per turn receiving four lands at once is not significantly different from receiving three lands.  There's no such restriction however on Moxen so the calculus changes drastically.

I know how I would split that pile.  How would you do it?

Gawd, I hope this never happens.

Anyway, I think right off the bat you cannot give them Saph+Jace in a single pile.  They have no reason not to just snap that up, since it gives them an all-important blue source, and gets them on the way to Jace.  So, where do Jet, Emerald, and Ruby go?

I guess the question is what I am worried about.  In a blue deck nowadays, I'm most worried about A.Recall and Tinker on the first two turns.  There's nothing you can do in this pile to stop them from getting a blue source for ancestral, so that's not a concern. 

You CAN, however, keep them off Tinker for awhile at least.  They need a blue source and something else to Tinker.  If you make a pile with Saph+3 Mox, they take that and can Tinker immediately.  If they have a land in hand, they can even Tinker right away with Saph + 1 Mox!  Since you have no counterspell (you didnt stop Fact) this seems really really bad.  A single Saph delays Tinker for at least one turn until they untap the Pearl, and if they don't have land, delays it two turns.  As part of this analysis, even if they don't have a Tinker in hand, they can tutor for it quick. 

As ugly as it is, I'd therefore do this:

Jace, Emerald, Jet, Ruby

Sapphire

[serracollector]

giving them jet allows them to cast a DT or Vamp next turn as well, or right then, IF they have a land.

Sap/Jet in one pile

Jace, Ruby, Emerald in the other.

[DubDub]

I guess the question is what I am worried about.  In a blue deck nowadays, I'm most worried about A.Recall and Tinker on the first two turns.  There's nothing you can do in this pile to stop them from getting a blue source for ancestral, so that's not a concern. 

You CAN, however, keep them off Tinker for awhile at least.  They need a blue source and something else to Tinker.  If you make a pile with Saph+3 Mox, they take that and can Tinker immediately.  If they have a land in hand, they can even Tinker right away with Saph + 1 Mox!  Since you have no counterspell (you didnt stop Fact) this seems really really bad.  A single Saph delays Tinker for at least one turn until they untap the Pearl, and if they don't have land, delays it two turns.  As part of this analysis, even if they don't have a Tinker in hand, they can tutor for it quick. 

As ugly as it is, I'd therefore do this:

Jace, Emerald, Jet, Ruby

Sapphire

You think they might have Tinker even though they didn't go: 'Pearl, Lotus, Tinker (saccing both).'?  I realize that leaves them with a board of: BSC.  But that's still a one turn clock and if they had the Force to protect Fact it could have protected Tinker equally well.

Would you never make the play 'Pearl, Lotus, Tinker (saccing both).' yourself, given that you also have Fact or Fiction in hand?

[MaximumCDawg]

That's a good point, DubDub, but I can't imagine someone blowing their whole board for a first turn Tinker; very dangerous way to walk into a Force of Will or, given the type of mana you used, Mindbreak Trap.  If I had a hand with Tinker, Lotus, Pearl, Fact, and maybe a land but nothing else relevant, I could totally see leading with the Fact to bait out a counter, then count on getting either counterspells to protect Tinker or whatever in the following turns.  Probably off the Fact.

giving them jet allows them to cast a DT or Vamp next turn as well, or right then, IF they have a land.

Sap/Jet in one pile

Jace, Ruby, Emerald in the other.

Yeah, but they take Saph/Jet, they not only can tutor up the Tinker, they can CAST it as soon as they get it.

No matter how you split this pile, they get tons of fast mana.  You can't keep them off accelleration.  However, you CAN keep them off a COLOR of mana, for awhile at least.  So, by splitting the Saph off by itself, they have to choose between Jace and access to Blue mana.  It's a crappy situation either way.