Fatal push would not work as Ormendal is indestructible. They could still target (as, when flipped, is a creature and a land would be 0 CMC) but the spell would resolve without removing Ormendal.
So, I guess I'm not having as much success as everyone else. I see that the deck has 5-0'd a few times recently on MTGO (where I play), but I can't for the life of me see similar results. Just today alone I've lost matches against Saheli combo, Abzan DS, Jeskai Control, Scapeshift, and Burn. I'm not sure I've even won a match yet.
I'm assuming a lot of this is pilot error, since my list is very similar to all of yours, but right now I'm feeling really weak. I know the deck can do some pretty powerful stuff, and I've done that while goldfishing, but with all of the interactive decks out there (especially post board), I'm finding myself losing a lot more than winning (probably a 20-80 split).
If I can ask the more experienced players here a few questions, I'd be forever grateful for some replies:
1a. What do you like to see in your opening hand to know you have a good running opener?
1b. Conversely, what don't you like to see in your opening hand/what causes you to mulligan? Obviously all land or no land is an auto-mull, but outside of that I'm curious.
2. I know all sideboards are different, but in general what are you removing from your deck to make room for sideboard cards? Assume a lot of your SB cards are non-creatures if that helps.
3. Has there been any consensus on what "version" of the deck has been running better? I've seen GB and Junk versions doing well results wise, and mine is Junk (mostly for the board, but also for Shaman).
4. What are our best match-ups? Our worst? What makes those our best/worst match-ups?
Thanks a ton! I'll read over the title post again and edit this if I find out my questions have already been covered. Cheers!
One of the 5-0 lists was mine. I am finishing going back on replays (while watching Bad007's stream) to fill out the matchup information I outlined earlier and can let you know what the matchups were.
I have played GW, GB, Abzan and don't think Abzan is right for me. Prefer the consistent manabase and ability to switch a land or two for a utility land if needed. Shaman of the Pack has played big in wins I had no business winning. GW's reliance on Ezuri was the biggest reason I moved to GB even though GW has more flexibility to responding to opponents strategies. Shaman provides two plans of attack you can switch between based on how the opponent responds with retaliative ease. Also I think being proactive (things like thoughtsieze) is better than being reactive (going for W one ofs) in this meta. So many people know the hate cards that can come in and are ready for them that being reactive isn't always the best.
1
Fatal push would not work as Ormendal is indestructible. They could still target (as, when flipped, is a creature and a land would be 0 CMC) but the spell would resolve without removing Ormendal.
Only have to worry about exile effects.
1
One of the 5-0 lists was mine. I am finishing going back on replays (while watching Bad007's stream) to fill out the matchup information I outlined earlier and can let you know what the matchups were.
I have played GW, GB, Abzan and don't think Abzan is right for me. Prefer the consistent manabase and ability to switch a land or two for a utility land if needed. Shaman of the Pack has played big in wins I had no business winning. GW's reliance on Ezuri was the biggest reason I moved to GB even though GW has more flexibility to responding to opponents strategies. Shaman provides two plans of attack you can switch between based on how the opponent responds with retaliative ease. Also I think being proactive (things like thoughtsieze) is better than being reactive (going for W one ofs) in this meta. So many people know the hate cards that can come in and are ready for them that being reactive isn't always the best.