|
Post by zugdude47 on Apr 22, 2013 13:14:55 GMT -5
Since the bannings I have faced many cloudpost deck or fissure decks n I have a very hard time beating them. Its very disheartening and I have stopped playing my favorite deck(5c teachings) because of its abysmal MU with those deck.
I have tried every combination of sb options and still are unable to win consistently. so my question is, what decks do post and fissure fear playing? not theory on what's good and what should work. actual decks that consistently beat them from personal experience.
I want to find a deck that makes these deck cry and rage quit. I've started brewing options but these decks are just so resilent and getting points in this MU makes me lose them in other MUs.
|
|
|
Post by joshfedagain on Apr 22, 2013 15:51:13 GMT -5
I find that the GW hexproof deck destroys post decks. Even fissure decks the bond Beatles add a nice touch against them and you can SB a couple forced adaptations
|
|
|
Post by zugdude47 on Apr 22, 2013 18:58:11 GMT -5
nice im probably gonna try that. im not a huge fan of hexproof but its much better then playing post control. thanx man
|
|
ckangas
Raging Brainstorm
Posts: 69
|
Post by ckangas on Apr 22, 2013 19:42:51 GMT -5
I find that the GW hexproof deck destroys post decks. Even fissure decks the bond Beatles add a nice touch against them and you can SB a couple forced adaptations I'm going to reference M U Fissure instead of Simic storm, since most players (at least in daily events) have switched from UG to M U, and M U is the more popular deck atm. If you can get a hexproof creature large enough so you can replay rancor each turn it can work out. Trample is a requirement though, as otherwise they can just chump block or block/fissure. That being said, I've always found hexproof to be a decent MU - at least for MU Post. It seems slightly in favor of post (maybe 55/45). If post runs curfews in the board, it becomes more positive of a MU. The best way to beat these decks is to race it. It's why the banning of ETW and invigorate opened the way for it (TPPS, ETW combo and infect were all terrible MUs). Infect is still good against the deck, again, especially if MU Post isn't running curfews in the board. Just make sure you play around snaps and you'll win most games. You can also vines their fairies in response to snap. The old school M G Post has an extremely positive matchup vs M U Post. 4 thermakarsts, 4 reap and sow, 4 moss makes it so the M U player will basically never reach 6 lands. t2 karst + t3 moss + t4 reap and sow = GG. By hitting LD before they can reach 3 mana, you nullify ghostly flicker. The problem is that all of the LD is really bad against the rest of the field. It's almost a dead mechanic against delver, MGA, affinity, etc. Burn can also have a decent MU, but they need to be running 4 raze and 4 molten rain. And not to board in 4 curse of the pierced heart . Really though, it's a *huge* mistake that I see at least half of burn players do. They don't seem to realize that they're playing against combo - not control. Honestly, the best advice is to treat post as a combo deck that "goes" off with a certain amount of land. Each LD (assuming it comes early) is basically a time walk. It gets you one extra turn, but you need to be *doing* something with that turn in order for it to matter. If you're MBC and don't have board position and a clock, M U Post can eat 3-4 LD spells and muscle through it with card advantage (or sculpt their hand so they can play a cloudpost and proceed to go off that turn). If you give the deck enough time and mana, it will find a way to win. As a result, it isn't possible for control to beat the deck outside nut-draws. Whether it's enough mana to fissure through hindering touch, a single game winning torch, enough mana to fissure through a hindering touch, lifegain against burn, etc., the deck will *eventually* beat you if you give it time and mana. To give you an idea of what I mean, I lose the vast majority of my games in turns 3-5 when I play M U Post. If I hit turns 6-7, it's typically too late for the other player. Nearly all of the game 1s I lose to affinity, MGA and burn happen on turn 3-4.
|
|
|
Post by zugdude47 on Apr 24, 2013 0:49:02 GMT -5
thanks ckangas that's very helpful info but unfortunately it leaves me in the same spot. play all in agro, play post, or lose to post/fissure deck. I wish there was an actual deck to reliably beat it since we're in "a healthy metagame" and all.
I believe the main reason curse isn't boarded in is that it would just be bounced with their lands or just hydroblasted, which everyday has in their board. When I tested curse of blood tomb I ran into that same problem.
|
|
|
Post by yugular on Apr 24, 2013 7:13:41 GMT -5
I believe Jason Moore/dimecollector is compiling up an article that is focusing on this specific topic. So I would wait for that also
|
|
|
Post by zugdude47 on Apr 24, 2013 12:31:49 GMT -5
I believe Jason Moore/dimecollector is compiling up an article that is focusing on this specific topic. So I would wait for that also I hope this is coming through cause I'm done playing competitively until I get this answered. I just hate those decks so much and I refuse to play burn or any form of all in agro deck.
|
|
ckangas
Raging Brainstorm
Posts: 69
|
Post by ckangas on Apr 28, 2013 19:24:49 GMT -5
thanks ckangas that's very helpful info but unfortunately it leaves me in the same spot. play all in agro, play post, or lose to post/fissure deck. I wish there was an actual deck to reliably beat it since we're in "a healthy metagame" and all. I believe the main reason curse isn't boarded in is that it would just be bounced with their lands or just hydroblasted, which everyday has in their board. When I tested curse of blood tomb I ran into that same problem. mtgo-stats.info/ is an invaluable resource for looking at how decks are doing Delver, affinity, MGA, goblins, URPost and burn have been roughly breaking even; they're above 50% at time, and below 50% at times. MBC, hexchant, elves, UB trinket all get played as well. They tend to do worse than breaking even, however. They're also not played often, so it's hard to tell if the data is reliable. Simic storm is winning more than average. It's been winning 60-65% of MUs. Familiar storm tends to be around the same amount (although it isn't played often, so the data isn't very reliable). M U Post is winning significantly more than average. It's been winning 75%+ of its MUs. This means that your odds of 4-0ing with the first tier of decks mentioned is 6.25%. Simic is 17.85%. M U Post is around 35% (going on the numbers from the last 40 days, it fluctuates). To answer the question of which decks I "fear" with M U Post: I fear M G Post, UR fiend and infect. These decks are rarely played, however. In "common decks" I guess I fear the mirror most, since it breaks down to mostly luck (do I have a cloudpost in my hand by the time I can mull to 5?). The next would be a good burn or goblins player who understands the MU and has a SB meant to hate on post. I also don't like playing against affinity. I've barely put up positive results against the deck. I have a feeling that I should be beating the deck more (for example, it can only beat MU Post with combinations involving atog (either with multiple burn to kill blockers, multiple disciples for life loss, or with fling - these need to happen on turn 3 or 4), and you're running 4 hydroblasts in the board), but it kills me on turn 3/4 fairly often. I'm often told that decks like hexproof and elves have a great MU against M U Post. Even if they did, they apparently aren't beating much else in the meta looking at the data. Still, I haven't ever felt disadvantaged in the MU. I've certainly lost matches to both, but I've won many more than I've lost. Both decks normally need to get a strong starting hand and be on the play (or have some really weak hands/draws by the post player) in order to win. The same goes with familiar storm, UW storm, etc. Many people talk about how these have a great MU against U Post, but I haven't seen it happen....especially with UW storm. I used to fear playing against delver, because in theory it's a bad MU. In practice, I've had very positive results. For example, I beat 5 delvers in a row while grinding 2-man queues on Friday, going 10-0 in games. I'd say that historically, it has been about a 70/30 MU for me. They have to get a very specific set of cards and play well in order to beat you. I also feel more comfortable with the MU after boarding. If the lists ever go less midrange (for example, stop running spire golem and 4 ninjas) the MU would be worse. Delver lists seem to have adapted to playing other aggro lists, and have become worse against decks like MU Post as a result. And why is no one running daze! Is it the ticket cost? Only slightly over half of delver decks are running it, and they're barely running 2 copies when they do. Anyways, I'm not sure it's a balanced meta atm. There are a lot of decks floating around, it's just that some decks are winning much more than others. That being said, non-post control and midrange haven't been viable for what....years?
|
|