Quote from headminerve »Is Xathrid Necromancer really that much better than Sin Collector in the Vial list? Sin Collector can pick out all of the same wraths except O-Stone, doesn't have the same weakness to Anger of the Gods, and has more utility in some other matchups like Burn.
I also keep Living End in mind when comparing those 2 cards (they often have more cascade spells than we have disruption). I also think of Conflagrate Dredge can cast from the graveyard.
Then you have the races vs other aggros (including the mirror and eldrazis with Ballista) where you can push through damage, keeping critical mass even after unfavorable trades.
Finally, UWx control and Lantern have ways to let you strip their hand on their draw step, then play Serum Visions, Ancient Stirrings, activate milling artifacts and so on to dig for the wrath main phase.
Against Burn it's cool to have a body after they kill your Necromancer with Searing Blaze. Not great but it's better for combat purposes than Collector, which is better for noncreature spells. Not easy to figure which is better in such a MU.
I think Collector shines because it doesn't care about a 1-2 removal on it ->> Wrath, while Necromancer falls short to that combination. Collector shines more in other combo MUs like Valakut, Ad Naus and Storm, so while they overlap in the "wrath" MUs, they also have seperate applications elsewhere.
So the question is do we need other disruption cards while we already have Med + FreeB ? Necro looks like Canonist in a way, it's a card that attacks the opponent on a complementary angle. I don't know, both cards are ok.
Is Xathrid Necromancer really that much better than Sin Collector in the Vial list? Sin Collector can pick out all of the same wraths except O-Stone, doesn't have the same weakness to Anger of the Gods, and has more utility in some other matchups like Burn.
Quote from purklefluff »Haven't seen anyone mention why the vial list may have an advantage over the coco list (although I may have missed something. Apologies if I did)
- Allows you to run a lower land count
- Allows you to run a less painful manabase
- Allows you to run more rainbow lands (which can't cast coco)
- More threat-dense deck overall (so better quality of topdeck)
- Lower curve in general because you aren't over-focusing on three-drops for max value.
- Vial allows 'casting' multiple creatures a turn even when stuck on two lands.
- Less reliant on noble hierarch/mana dorks in general to make plays
- More ability to force threats through counters
- More ability to make tricky combat plays (although coco definitely allows this, you are required to hit 4 mana first which can sometimes be too late or too tricky)
Obviously coco is a powerhouse and a proven card in modern. It doesn't really need anyone backing its corner because it's an amazing tool, but I have to say. Taking a leaf out of merfolk's book could really stand up for this deck. After all, this is a fish deck.
Quote from headminerve »Ok so I watched the top 8. VS D&T obviously he lost G1 because his maindeck isn't prepared for creature MUs anyway. VS Merfolk same conclusion. Thing is he keeps the Freebooters, which is a pretty bad choice, so if we consider the Merfolk player played poorly and Collins sided poorly (and mulliganed more), I'm not sure we can decide which player deserved the win anyway. G3 was not a relevant example of how the MU should go.
He can easily do -1 Thalia V1 / + 1 Ref Mage in his maindeck.