Ho Hum Standard

Normally this blog is about EDH and, for the most part, I want to keep it so, but I really need to get this down somewhere to get it off my chest:


I hate standard.......

.......but I want to play regionals.


This has put me into a difficult position. We've been running a gauntlet at work and, so far, I like none of the decks I've been testing. Here's the run down:


RDW has stupid "I win" hands on occasion. It also has terrible hands that require you to top-deck the win every turn and your opponent to fall flat in order to have a chance. That's just game 1. In game 2 the fact that aggro strategies, not just RDW, are a viable strategy in the format means that every Tom, Dick & Harry has some sort of hate that will splash you. If they fear Red-based decks in particular, they can crush you out of the board. Life is too short and time away from a slow Sunday with my girls too precious to put your regionals fate in the hands of the dice roll. I'm prepared to bet against the occasional "Hurp-Durp" opening hand that RDW gets, and just not play it.


One of the early decks I championed was Caw-Blade which then became Dark-Blade and Spark-Blade. I never felt comfortable playing the decks. That may have had something to do with our rogue Vampires just destroying it all day but it just simply came down to another decision about whether I really wanted to spend the day playing a deck I didn't enjoy playing.


Paris style Grixis-Tezz got bombed out very quickly in the gauntlet and was replaced by UB Tezz Infect which didn't really last much longer. There's always the terrible feeling that you're not as controlling as half the metagame requires you to be and too controlling for the other half. You feel bad sitting back and worse going for it. The metagame seems to be pretty split into Control (UW and now UB), Aggro board-Control (Caw-X and RUG) and aggro (WW/Quest/KRed/RDW) and the big elephant in the room: Combo.


My most recent audible is a combo deck of sorts, Eldrazi Ramp. It's a pretty straightforward strategy; play mana dudes, play bigger mana dudes, play Eldrazi, profit. The real issue with this strategy (apart from the availability of Ulamogs) is that it uses the red zone. There's got to be a way to circumvent adding that extra step. In addition, once you've played Valakut often enough, you can't play Eldrazi Ramp without wishing all your searches were getting Valakuts/Mountains, Hurp, Durp, take 18. When you look at both decks side by side and accept that both are essentially just goldfishing in very similiar ways to get to a very similiar point, would you prefer to be dropping Ulamog and waiting a turn or just, you know, winning?


One deck I'd love to try out (ok, one of many decks, some others being Mono-W Angel Control and UW Venser/Spine and anything that uses Mirrorworks) is anything that just goes to town on your opponent's mana base. Unfortunatly when your LD suite starts at 4 you generally have to make some calls on the start of your curve to get your mana up and running. The natural extension of getting your mana-count high quickly in current standard isn't a 4CC LD spell, it's a 6CC Titan. If your opponent can get the Titan online before you get Demolish, Melt/Roiling Terrain, then you're pretty screwed. Even then a turn 3 LD spell is probably still too late. An opposing turn 2 Overgrown Battlements means you need to kill the Battlements, not a land, as killing a land will still enable a turn 3 Battlement/Wall of Tanglecord with 2 mana open. That's an invitation for a turn 4 Titan and suddenly you need to either kill a 6/6 or destroy 2 lands per turn just to keep up. While you can't really argue with the 9 ways to destroy any land for 5 mana or less in the current standard, maybe the format would be healthier (and a lot more honest) if Stone Rain or Rain of Tears were legal. As it is, too many commonly played cards obselete a land destruction strategy in the current enviornment.


And we haven't even started on JTMS.


Valakut? >pfft!< I don't know.