The top 2 decks in the standard portion of the pro tour were both Ramunap Red. One list ran 4 ferocidon. The other ran 3. Like I said, if you sideboard a car in 90 percent of your matches there is nothing wrong with mainboatding it. I am personally happy to see it more than any card beside hazoret. Maybe just as much. There are dozens of lists that chose this route.
Well sure, the top 2 lists that ran had 3+ Ferocidon and 0-4 Crasher, and Crasher has definitely dipped in my opinion than before; however, I still believe it is worthy of playing at least 2-3 in the MB Pre-board. The effectiveness it can have at putting through early damage is great and is essential on the aggro plan. Of course post-board the strategy for red changes a bit and that is why it is removed, but I still believe it is an effective card.
Very well put article there to explain the ideology behind sbing against each match-up on both the draw and play. The list he ran is pretty standard, so for all you whom are running pretty standard lists it's not very difficult to make changes based on what you have.
Also love how he mentioned potential deck popularity increases and how we should perceive it later on for SBing like the rise in GFG decks may want us to focus more on Abrade later.
Puncturing blow is too slow at 4 mana. Magma Spray is fine for Scarab God. You just have to find 3 other damage from another spell, or blocking it, or tricking them into using it to block you.
Repeating Barrage is also too slow. Paying 5 to get it back is useless. I'd rather just use that mana to play a Hazoret. Then it's 3 more to re-cast so effectively you are paying 8 mana for an additional 3 damage to re-cast it. Nope. I can just start throwing deserts at them with Ruins if I'm that desperate.
Curious. You really think that 2-for-1 is better than a single card? How is it that a 4 mana spell that exiles is too slow to deal with a 5 mana spell? If they tap out on 5 to drop the Scarab God, we have an instant answer, even on the draw. If anything, Puncturing Blow seems to be more efficient at dealing with Scarab than Magma Spray.
Barrage though, you may be right. I've been playing it due to a larger number of control decks at my local store (there's only so many times they can counter it!), so is more than likely to come out when I head to the GP in Portland, probably to be replaced by a couple of main deck Magma Sprays, which free up space in the side for other cards.
I'm also intrigued by the Fiery Cannonade idea as mentioned in the CommanderSphere blog link. Going to have to try that this week...
To his/her, their own. It really all comes down to the match-up as there is a tendency where the gameplay is slowed significantly that Puncturing Blow can be very successful. It all comes down to what each of us experience at our different meta's. I am also very intrigued by Fiery Cannonade. I know two players in my meta that run tokens; however, they are running Annointer Priest and Cannonade does not do anything against those match-ups.
Hey everyone, been playing with my build ... looking perhaps to go a bit more Tom Ross with it. However I'm curious. My biggest issue is Eldrazi tron which seems to be everywhere and running Chalice mainboard. Because of that I've experiemented with slashing green for abrupt decay, and then instead went back to running Ratchet Bombs and staying monoblack. Even started putting Fulminators in the side, just because I wanted to have all the options to punish Tron.
I noticed that many of the decks people are talking about here, and the Tom Ross one from September, aren't running ANY tron hate or reactive responses to Chalice. Instead are running Delirium Skeins (which is an awesome card, but).
So how are these abrupt-less/rachet-less decks actually managing to win against a Chalice on 1? (Which I swear Tron will always have in their opening hand)
So Tom Ross gave a Sideboarding guide utilizing his SCG top 4 list shortly after top 4ing with it. In his article he mentions that the two best cards in Eldrazi Tron AGAINST us is Matter Reshaper and Chalice. What you need to do is shorten down the one-drops in our deck and place in Delirium Skeins and Bontu's Last Reckoning. Skeins really does a lot of work against Eldrazi.
With this said, the match-up is not a good one for us regardless. They have the capability of topping out of a stalled state.
So how am I supposed to beat Tokens? I playtested the matchup tonight and I felt like a dog in the match even with 4 main deck Ferocidon. I sided into Key to the City, Pia Nalaar, and Glorybringer, and even with having a key out, their life gain just outpaced me (they had removal for my Ferocidon so often).
It comes down to can you get enough early pressure and put ferocidon on the board.
So is it your opinion that taking up 50% of the Pro Tour isn't a little much?
Would it change your mind if it was 50% or higher on the next Pro Tour, as well?
Yes and no respectively.
Bans "on principle" due solely to metagame share are horrible policy and long-term unhealthy for the game, which is what this argument implies.
If the higher metagame share is because the deck is doing something fundamentally unfair (whether it's "doing fair things too well" or doing unfair things), then yes, that metagame share may be cause for alarm.
Energy decks aren't doing this. They are 50/50 decks that have some flex spots which can be tuned for an expected metagame. If those flex spots are right for the weekend then yes, they'll crush the field and look OP. If those flex spots are wrong for the weekend, then you can easily scrub out of a real tournament even with tight play and decent luck. The energy decks can't be tuned to beat everything at once, so there's a ton of room both for pilots of energy decks and people who don't want to play energy decks to metagame and make good weekend calls that pay off.
That's exactly what you want out of a "best deck" format. Look at the last time Standard was truly great: Theros block and Khans of Tarkir block, especially the six months after Dragons of Tarkir came out and before Theros block rotated. You had one deck (Abzan Midrange) that was 50/50 or better against the field and was the single best deck the whole time, but you had a ton of viable other options: Esper Dragons, RG Devotion, RG or Temur Dragons/Monsters, Mono-Red/Atarka Red, GW Company, and even a couple more fringe decks like Bant Heroic, Constellation, Whip of Erebos, and OG Rally the Ancestors that all had a shot to spike a Grand Prix or at least an SCG Open on a particular weekend at some point during that season.
It gives the Spikes -- both grinders/pros and LGS-level players who just enjoy playing to win -- a single deck to master or target and a ton of metagaming room, and it gives the Johnny and Timmy players plenty of options to pursue whatever their hearts desire. Johnny in particular has an absurd number of cards that scream build-around-me: Anointed Procession, New Perspectives, Drake Haven, Aetherflux Reservoir, God-Pharoah's Gift, Metalwork ColossusMechanized Production, Metallurgic Summonings, Revel in Riches, Approach of the Second Sun, Sunbird's Invocation. And Timmy has friggin big stompin Dinosaurs.
After a couple of years of wandering in the desert, WOTC has finally made Standard great again. The only reason people are complaining right now is because the energy mechanic isn't something new. If the energy decks were replaced by some pushed Pirates or Treasures deck and had 28 cards from Ixalan in its maindeck, people would be losing their minds over how exciting and open this format is. But because it's from Kaladesh block (which in fairness had several puzzling R&D decisions, which have been worked out through the banlist already), people are complaining.
This exactly sums up my mental understanding of the current Standard meta state. Well put and well explained.
i think surgical extraction is better to cage against company decks . cage is a "hate card" in second game . qasali, decay , reclamation stage , etc. delirium is bad and mediocre for my reason
Both cards are used for completely different reasons; therefore, you cannot compare the two... Skeins is used against decks that run target hate (Chalice on 1, Leyline, etc). Surgical is used against decks that require key pieces to run off with which is why it is known as a "hate" card. You are actually "Naming" which card you are hating.
It's nice to see after the PT even with a field primarily made up off Energy based builds, Ramunap Red still held about a 37% conversion rate of being 6-3 or better compared the decks that made Day 2. Energy decks in total with this comparison made up about 44%.
I'd like to give my input here via statistical analysis of the decks that went 6-3 or better here. So let us begin by what is being argued here. It appears that many are viewing the ideology that if a meta fields 50% a specific synergy (energy based decks) then there seems to be a skew in the standard format and a ban is necessary.
Note: I am excluding top 8 contention here, these are decks solely based on their runs in the PT and whom did not top 8.
First off let us take all decks that went 9-1 or better here. There were a total of 3 decks here. 2 of which were Ramunap Red and 1 Temur Energy. This makes 66.7% towards Ramunap Red.
Secondly let us look at 8 Wins or better. Here there are a total of 13 decks. 1 Mono-White Vamps, 1 Ramunap Red, 1 White-Blue Cycling and 10 Energy builds. Here we see a massive skew towards Energy (8-2 Split of Temur/Sultai Energy decks. 77% Energy and 8% roughly for each of the other decks.
Thirdly let us look at 7 Wins decks. Here there are a total of 38 decks here. I am not going into the specifics, but just looking at Energy variants, but 24/38 decks ran Energy strategy. This posts at about 63% of the entire field of 7 Wins or better decks.
Finally we are looking at the 6 Wins decks. There are a total of 57 decks. 27 of the lists ran some sort of Energy variant making it 27/57 and about 47% of the field.
Now let us look at the conversion rates of decks that made day 2 (Assuming each of these decks made day 2) and the total for Energy that ran 6 wins or better. So according to WOTC, there was a total of 141 Energy decks that made day 2 (Take out 4 in top 8) , but only 45% of the decks were 6 wins or better. (Again consider I am combining all 4 of the Energy variants here). Comparing this to Ramunap Red, in which 22 out of the 61 (Again take out 1 for the top 8) and you get roughly 37% which is not far off from COMBINED Energy. We can also look at all other decks (UB Control/UW Control/BR Aggro/Etc) and see how they fair and the precentages would be less but not drastically less.
It appears that the perceptual understanding that because a meta fields more than one deck or pros choose one deck over the other mostly does not mean it deserves a Ban and is unreasonably good.
There were 4 Ramunap Red lists at 9-1 not including John Rolfe’s top 4 deck. Red is still looking good if I may say so.
Agreed, I think even with a meta filled with energy, Ramunap Red still can be competitively viable against it. Sure the meta may not be excellent and slightly favorable for them but still a good showing.
I would love to see how the deck evolves from me, I noticed many lists running less and less Crashers as it appears they always side them out. Currently I run 3 and in some situations Crasher can be good but I find myself siding it out most of the time (especially on the draw). Additionally, I think we have finally agreed to the point that Ferocidon is NEEDED in the MB. Whether you run 2 or you run 4, you need them there as it is our out against many of the control/token builds. It is also important to add that Mentor as should have a home in the MB if the meta is heavily Energy based. Mentor does not only force the opponent to make decisions without much knowledge, it forces them to take unnecessary damage which can be life or death in games (Remember the point of Ramunap Red is to deal as much early on then finish off with burn/utility).
I'd like to credit John for making it this far into the PT; however, he is truly piloting the deck horrifically in the top 8. Consistent punts and misplays on his part...
The deck clearly worked, and I believe his list is correct; however, do not follow what he did in his Semi match against Pascal. This was a match tossed away because of poor piloting...
I think that if you’re looking to really beat the mirror, then you play Harvester. Its abilities to crew after stun effects and gain life are very good. However, I do think it is getting worse with Harsh Mentor and Ferocidon being in a large number of RR lists now. I’m currently off Harvester because of that. It’s not quite as good as it used to be, and I feel like I have more matchups to have board cards for now (Tokens, Vampires etc) that require some of the sideboard slots that used to be devoted to the mirror.
I would say Harvester has decreased in strength but it is still a strong go too in the Aggro match-up including the rise again of Mardu Vehicles/BR Aggro.
And I would like to make a quick update! John Rolf is onto the Top 4 with Ramunap Red after beating Temur in 5. Bomat Courier pulling its weight in those games!
I'd like to congratulate John Rolf for the PT Top 8 with Ramunap Red! Deck looks identical to the recent 8-1 list that topped the MTGO PTQ. Sideboard also looks very standard! Even with the evident Energy decks running the format, Ramunap Red still has a home as one of the top decks.
Additionally Kentaro placed 9th who was also running Ramunap Red!
It's not quite that simple. If you look at the post again, you'll notice that while the extra two Ferocidon come in for most matchups, it's not always the same things coming out.
Absolutely, it is very deceptive to think "Oh, because I side in Ferocidon every match-up I should run a 4 of in the MB." The deck itself sides very differently according to the different match-ups. Sometimes you find yourself pulling out the removal package against decks like U/W Approach or sometimes you are siding out Crasher when on the Draw against Aggressive builds. The Ferocidon plays a key role against every match-up but what you are removing is entirely different.
Well sure, the top 2 lists that ran had 3+ Ferocidon and 0-4 Crasher, and Crasher has definitely dipped in my opinion than before; however, I still believe it is worthy of playing at least 2-3 in the MB Pre-board. The effectiveness it can have at putting through early damage is great and is essential on the aggro plan. Of course post-board the strategy for red changes a bit and that is why it is removed, but I still believe it is an effective card.
Very well put article there to explain the ideology behind sbing against each match-up on both the draw and play. The list he ran is pretty standard, so for all you whom are running pretty standard lists it's not very difficult to make changes based on what you have.
Also love how he mentioned potential deck popularity increases and how we should perceive it later on for SBing like the rise in GFG decks may want us to focus more on Abrade later.
To his/her, their own. It really all comes down to the match-up as there is a tendency where the gameplay is slowed significantly that Puncturing Blow can be very successful. It all comes down to what each of us experience at our different meta's. I am also very intrigued by Fiery Cannonade. I know two players in my meta that run tokens; however, they are running Annointer Priest and Cannonade does not do anything against those match-ups.
So Tom Ross gave a Sideboarding guide utilizing his SCG top 4 list shortly after top 4ing with it. In his article he mentions that the two best cards in Eldrazi Tron AGAINST us is Matter Reshaper and Chalice. What you need to do is shorten down the one-drops in our deck and place in Delirium Skeins and Bontu's Last Reckoning. Skeins really does a lot of work against Eldrazi.
With this said, the match-up is not a good one for us regardless. They have the capability of topping out of a stalled state.
It comes down to can you get enough early pressure and put ferocidon on the board.
This exactly sums up my mental understanding of the current Standard meta state. Well put and well explained.
Both cards are used for completely different reasons; therefore, you cannot compare the two... Skeins is used against decks that run target hate (Chalice on 1, Leyline, etc). Surgical is used against decks that require key pieces to run off with which is why it is known as a "hate" card. You are actually "Naming" which card you are hating.
Note: I am excluding top 8 contention here, these are decks solely based on their runs in the PT and whom did not top 8.
First off let us take all decks that went 9-1 or better here. There were a total of 3 decks here. 2 of which were Ramunap Red and 1 Temur Energy. This makes 66.7% towards Ramunap Red.
Secondly let us look at 8 Wins or better. Here there are a total of 13 decks. 1 Mono-White Vamps, 1 Ramunap Red, 1 White-Blue Cycling and 10 Energy builds. Here we see a massive skew towards Energy (8-2 Split of Temur/Sultai Energy decks. 77% Energy and 8% roughly for each of the other decks.
Thirdly let us look at 7 Wins decks. Here there are a total of 38 decks here. I am not going into the specifics, but just looking at Energy variants, but 24/38 decks ran Energy strategy. This posts at about 63% of the entire field of 7 Wins or better decks.
Finally we are looking at the 6 Wins decks. There are a total of 57 decks. 27 of the lists ran some sort of Energy variant making it 27/57 and about 47% of the field.
Now let us look at the conversion rates of decks that made day 2 (Assuming each of these decks made day 2) and the total for Energy that ran 6 wins or better. So according to WOTC, there was a total of 141 Energy decks that made day 2 (Take out 4 in top 8) , but only 45% of the decks were 6 wins or better. (Again consider I am combining all 4 of the Energy variants here). Comparing this to Ramunap Red, in which 22 out of the 61 (Again take out 1 for the top 8) and you get roughly 37% which is not far off from COMBINED Energy. We can also look at all other decks (UB Control/UW Control/BR Aggro/Etc) and see how they fair and the precentages would be less but not drastically less.
It appears that the perceptual understanding that because a meta fields more than one deck or pros choose one deck over the other mostly does not mean it deserves a Ban and is unreasonably good.
Agreed, I think even with a meta filled with energy, Ramunap Red still can be competitively viable against it. Sure the meta may not be excellent and slightly favorable for them but still a good showing.
I would love to see how the deck evolves from me, I noticed many lists running less and less Crashers as it appears they always side them out. Currently I run 3 and in some situations Crasher can be good but I find myself siding it out most of the time (especially on the draw). Additionally, I think we have finally agreed to the point that Ferocidon is NEEDED in the MB. Whether you run 2 or you run 4, you need them there as it is our out against many of the control/token builds. It is also important to add that Mentor as should have a home in the MB if the meta is heavily Energy based. Mentor does not only force the opponent to make decisions without much knowledge, it forces them to take unnecessary damage which can be life or death in games (Remember the point of Ramunap Red is to deal as much early on then finish off with burn/utility).
The deck clearly worked, and I believe his list is correct; however, do not follow what he did in his Semi match against Pascal. This was a match tossed away because of poor piloting...
I would say Harvester has decreased in strength but it is still a strong go too in the Aggro match-up including the rise again of Mardu Vehicles/BR Aggro.
And I would like to make a quick update! John Rolf is onto the Top 4 with Ramunap Red after beating Temur in 5. Bomat Courier pulling its weight in those games!
Additionally Kentaro placed 9th who was also running Ramunap Red!
Absolutely, it is very deceptive to think "Oh, because I side in Ferocidon every match-up I should run a 4 of in the MB." The deck itself sides very differently according to the different match-ups. Sometimes you find yourself pulling out the removal package against decks like U/W Approach or sometimes you are siding out Crasher when on the Draw against Aggressive builds. The Ferocidon plays a key role against every match-up but what you are removing is entirely different.