About twelve years ago, I sat down at a common computer terminal at the Case Western Reserve law library and began an article like this:
“The most common (yet subtle, yet disastrous) mistake I see in tournament Magic is the misassignment of who is the beatdown deck and who is the
control deck in a similar deck vs. similar deck matchup. The player who misassigns himself is inevitably the loser.”
Over the subsequent dozen years, I have lost a good many more games; and more common than that was what I think may be the cardinal sin of the
tournament player: over-valuation of card advantage.
“Card advantage” is a bit like “hedge funds” or “social media” or “the Google” … It is sexy. It
is better than not card advantage. People like to talk about it as if they are in the know, on the bleeding edge. And too often, they chase it like a
shapely glance of exposed ankle… And in much the same way, such pursuit of card advantage can lead to foolhardy decisions.
Case in point, when someone asks you to formulate an argument around a position, I no longer accept “card advantage” as very good support.
There was a time I thought card advantage was the bee’s knees; now… It’s not enough. Certainly it is better than not card advantage, but
supporting value is not the same thing as the real thrust of what makes a card – or a decision – right. Certainly it is not worth too much
extra mana.
With that, I segue into five questions posed by the Indomitable Twitter Army and elsewhere:
1) Why Did Lotus Cobra Fall Out Of The Standard Top 10?
This first question is one of two that have popped out of this Tuesday’s Top Ten article like a JavaScript ad in a low-rent neighborhood.
Lotus Cobra was a Top 10 card pre-Mirrodin Besieged but has fallen at least three spots out of the Top 10. Is it suddenly much less powerful than
before?
No. Lotus Cobra hasn’t suddenly gotten much worse than when it was contributing to decks like RUG and U/G Genesis Wave; in fact, it has awesomely
migrated to versions of Valakut Ramp. The problem for Lotus Cobra is simply that other cards have gotten better.
Think about a card like Mistbind Clique or Spellstutter Sprite prior to the printing of Bitterblossom. They are very good cards, but because both of
them require having other Faeries in order to do anything, they were significantly weaker than Makeshift Mannequin, Shriekmaw, or even Profane
Command in Standard. However – and through no virtue of their own – both cards skyrocketed in value with the printing of Bitterblossom. All
of a sudden, Spellstutter Sprite became a two-mana Dismiss and Mistbind Clique a reliable 4/4 Time Walk, when previously – even if both cards
could potentially swing for haymakers – they suffered from much more variance. Post-Bitterblossom, both awesome.
In the present context, Squadron Hawk and Stoneforge Mystic have proven to be stronger two-drops in blue decks than Lotus Cobra. Stoneforge Mystic in
particular was always good enough to play, but the printing of Sword of Feast and Famine has been absolutely transformational for RE: the
Mystic’s value. The sequence of turn 2 Stoneforge Mystic (for Sword of Feast and Famine), followed by an activation putting the aforementioned
Sword onto the battlefield has prompted our resident Dragonmaster and Hall of Famer Brian Kibler to compare the creature to turn 2 Bitterblossom (as a
control-killer). Stoneforge Mystic is usually too fast and too much a creature to stop on the play, and putting the Sword directly into play
conveniently dances around counterspells.
Stoneforge Mystic’s promotion to the Top 10 doesn’t seem like a stretch to many people… and it’s in large part Stoneforge Mystic’s
moving up that has brought Squadron Hawk along in its wake. Regardless of the reason, both cards are currently better than Lotus Cobra, which
doesn’t mean to say that that won’t change again sometime in the future (perhaps near future).
2) For That Matter, How Do You Evaluate Cards?
I try to evaluate cards based on their impact on deck performance, in-game proximity to victory, and effect on the metagame.
The reason I – last year at least – rated Spreading Seas ahead of Jace, the Mind Sculptor was that, at the time, playing a Spreading Seas
on-curve actually seemed more predictive of winning a game of Standard than playing a Jace, the Mind Sculptor, especially against Jund. Over hundreds
of games against Jund – meaning against the most popular deck in the format – I knew that a second-turn Spreading Seas would usually lead
to victory, and two were like tying a knot. Having played a lot of Jaces… I didn’t feel like it helped me predict if I was going to win or not.
Here are some head-to-heads that have come up via the Indomitable Twitter Army to further illustrate…
Sword of Feast and Famine versus Sword of Body and Mind
The argument – Sword of Body and Mind is comparably powerful to Sword of Feast and Famine, and better in a beatdown deck.
First of all, Sword of Body and Mind is not comparably powerful to Sword of Feast and Famine. Sword of Feast and Famine has literally transformed the
metagame. Sword of Body and Mind is… pretty good in an aggro deck. It isn’t even the preferred equipment in most situations. No one wrote a
dozen articles about Sword of Body and Mind synergies, whereas they did with Basilisk Collar. I realize a deck I personally championed that ended up
pretty primo (U/G Genesis Wave) could be vulnerable to Sword of Body and Mind in White Weenie Quest for the Holy Relic; however, it’s not like
that equipment was the real problem in that deck. Argentum Armor much? Sword of Body and Mind is a good card – no one is saying it’s not a
good card – but it’s just not comparable to Sword of Feast and Famine. I don’t know that it has won more games for the little beaters
than Adventuring Gear.
Compare to Sword of Feast and Famine, specifically how Sword of Feast and Famine enables and builds alongside the other tools in a U/W deck. When you
have Sword of Feast and Famine online, it’s almost as if you’re playing a different format than your opponent. You can play aggro but pull your
mana back to play control; you can tap all your mana on your own turn and get twice over what anyone else in the room can claim. Zvi likes to talk
about doing the most unfair possible thing he can (I’ve always maintained what he means has directly to do with mana utilization, which is
consistent here)… Does this seem fair to you?
Certainly there are decks against which Sword of Body and Mind is more effective, but it still doesn’t seem like a comparable card. The idea that
Sword of Feast and Famine is better than Sword of Body and Mind “in a control deck” is like saying Jace, the Mind Sculptor is better than
Adventuring Gear “in a control deck.” Because it’s better, and you can just cut the whole “in a control deck” part.
Making the opponent discard a card is probably less powerful than the production of a 2/2 Wolf token, but untapping all your lands is so much more
powerful than both of Sword of Body and Mind’s abilities put together it’s not really worth talking about.
Shouldn’t Squadron Hawk Be Higher On The List? Isn’t Squadron Hawk Comparable To Stoneforge Mystic?
Squadron Hawk is very good!
Making the Top 10 list is very good!
Squadron Hawk seems impressive for purposes of the un-mulligan… and can un-double mulligan (or more). It does indeed seem very impressive.
Let’s keep in mind that Squadron Hawk gives you some incremental 1/1 fliers. They’re usually cards, but there are countless games where Squadron
Hawk seems kind of irrelevant relative to the opponent’s development.
I mean, ship a Sword of Feast and Famine onto a Squadron Hawk, and its flying gets all kinds of relevant… But that’s more the Stoneforge
Mystic’s doing, isn’t it?
While I totally accept that Squadron Hawk is the backbone to two if not three strong Standard decks, a source of card advantage, a good dump on the
second turn, and a fine Swordsman (Swordsbird)… Most of the same arguments can be made around Stoneforge Mystic. The decks that play Squadron Hawk
for the most part play both creatures! I’m not trying to take anything away from Squadron Hawk (because, again, making Top 10 is very good)… I
just don’t see it as being in the same class as Stoneforge Mystic given the presence of the
second
fourth Sword.
3) What Makes “Who’s the Beatdown?” So Memorable?
I am a big believer in the Heath brothers’ SUCCES model. They use this model in their super awesome book Made to Stick to describe why
some ideas and stories are so sticky and memorable, when other very good ideas die before anyone ever hears about them. Briefly, SUCCES stands for:
Simple
Unexpected
Concrete
Credible
Emotional
Stories
The example that I like to use to talk about SUCCES is the meteoric and almost universally acknowledged (if ultimately short-lived) appearance of Susan
Boyle, the woman who dreamed a dream so hot she set the Internet on fire.
Simple
Boyle’s appearance on the YouTube / television / musical scene is very easy to summarize; it is simple. Conventionally unattractive woman surprises audiences with unbelievably gorgeous and confident singing ability. Done in one.
Unexpected
We simply don’t expect someone who looks like Susan Boyle to sound like an angel. It is very comparable to the limping and tiny Grand
Master Yoda breaking out into visually dazzling lightsaber acrobatics at the end of Episode II. No one sees it coming. No one can forget once
he or she has seen it. To form, Yoda goes back to limping and leaning on his walking stick after the fight.
Concrete
Everyone saw Boyle’s video. Nothing so concrete as seeing something (or in this case hearing something) with your own eyes [ears].
Credible
Ditto on the previous C. One of the potential daggers to the heart of a new idea is its lack of believability. But because we see and hear
Boyle for ourselves, there is no denying. Jon Finkel is some kind of crazy bullshit detector. Stuff everyone else believes Jon always takes with a
grain of salt. He likes to read up on everything from politics to the food we all consume to brain science. He is a born skeptic. You know what
you’re not skeptical about? Your own experience.
Emotional
Boyle knocks your socks off! Who wasn’t moved by her surprising emergence? Even the judges went crazy! Come on! Since when does Simon smile?
Stories
Anyone who has seen the clip can tell Susan’s story. She’s an almost-fifty, not-hot woman with terrible hair and an ill-fitting dress who
can sing so hot she melts the legendarily frigid Simon and strikes a match to the entire Internet.
There are all kinds of memorable stories than you can apply SUCCES to. If you want to write something really memorable, I suggest thinking about
hitting some of these six principles. Of course “Who’s the Beatdown?” pre-dates Made to Stick by close to an – ahem
– Deckade. But we still got some of the Heath brothers’ principles right.
Simple
Part of what makes “Who’s the Beatdown?” so beatdown is that it is so simple. There are two kinds of decks: beatdown and control.
Figure out which one you are and correctly play to it; else wise, lose.
Unexpected
The message is not only simple, but no one saw it coming. Magic strategy for the most part is about making models more and more complex. It
doesn’t hurt that “Who’s the Beatdown?” opens up with a hyperbolic – if very believable – opening statement.
Concrete
Every tournament player who has lost a game he should have won probably has the “Aha!” moment mid-read and can relate to the examples.
Credible
… Because every tournament player can relate to the examples, it is by nature credible.
Emotional
Not too emotional, other than you are cheering for Altran if you are a good person, and his not making Top 8 is therefore disappointing.
Otherwise, I would say that of the six levers we can pull in SUCCES, this is the weak link… Then again I wrote “Who’s the
Beatdown?” years before the Heaths revealed the secrets of how to make something memorable [to me].
Stories
The entire secret origin of “Who’s the Beatdown?” comes from a very relatable story, a situation many players have found themselves
in, playing for Top 8, starring an awesome human being / Magic player. You want to cheer… but the story doesn’t have a happy ending this time.
There you have it: Doesn’t hurt that it also advanced an ingenuous new way of approaching the game. Yet dozens if not hundreds of other articles,
similarly clever, or similarly valuable, or right have graced the Magic websites various since spring of 1999… But none have caught the imagination
or stuck in our memories like Number One. I think SUCCES may be a part of that. Try applying this model to your favorite Magic article and see how it
sticks. How about one that seems it should be spot on… but nobody references? Could be missing some SUCCES.
4) How Come You Stopped Blogging About Magic?
I have gotten this question quite a few times since coming back to Star City Games.
Many of you probably remember that I started doing MTGO replays on FiveWithFlores way back in 2008, before they were cool. Now I do them here!
To answer this question, I would say I didn’t actually stop blogging about Magic. The underlying issue is actually that I am writing more Magic
than any other point in my life. I had days last week where I wrote over 12,000 words, and when I write for Five, I am actually interested in writing
about other stuff.
If I am writing so many words, where are they?
They are actually beginning to take shape in a [formerly] super-secret project that maybe you should bother Joey Pasco or Lauren Lee or Steve Sadin
about… Because I’ll never tell (and by “never” I mean “probably not until April”). But in the words of Joey: O M G.
(hint)
5) What Would You Play This Weekend, And How Would You Sideboard?
I have not played any Extended since the release of Mirrodin Besieged; however, I would still recommend Animal Jund.
That said, I would make some changes.
Creatures (33)
- 2 Shriekmaw
- 1 Spitebellows
- 2 Boggart Ram-Gang
- 4 Demigod of Revenge
- 4 Kitchen Finks
- 4 Putrid Leech
- 4 Bloodbraid Elf
- 4 Cunning Sparkmage
- 4 Vengevine
- 4 Fauna Shaman
Lands (27)
Sideboard
The principal difference maindeck is -1 Anathemancer / +1 Spitebellows and -2 Boggart Ram-Gang / +2 Kitchen Finks.
The reason for this change is that Kitchen Finks seemed to be coming in a lot, and Anathemancer was never great. Moving Kitchen Finks out of the
sideboard entirely gives us room to play with Thought Hemorrhage.
I am in agreement with most everything GerryT says about Prismatic Omen decks based on my early experience with the format but have found my combo
matchups with Animal Jund much improved with the addition of Thoughtseize; I feel like adding Thought Hemorrhage can help primarily in taking out
Scapeshift before you’re dead. This deck is a bit slower with the removal of two copies of Boggart Ram-Gang but puts on enough of a clock that you can
race the opponent if he can’t kill you with one card.
Spitebellows is just too awesome. What I wanted in a lot of matchups was just another Shriekmaw, and that’s what Spitebellows is… Except it’s a
Shriekmaw that can kill Doran and other meaty black creatures! Just a great add-on.
That’s it!
Good luck this weekend if you are gaming!
LOVE
MIKE