I'd like to hear Z's take on this. He does run mono, which is what I run, and while it may seem that I'm stubborn about my stance on Reverb, I have be absorbing the pro's and con's presented to me.
OK, cool. Thats the right attitude. It is important to know that we can all be wrong about many things, no matter who we are. It doesn't matter if you're a new player or a PT champion, everyone is fallible. I'll try and give you my thoughts on the card at the end.
Quote from quixotegut »
I side it in against a decent amount of decks as my favorite targets are Slaughter Games, Rakdos's Return, Sphinx's Revelation, Unburial Rites, Bonfire of the Damned, and counters.
I pulled this section because aside from Sphinx's Revelation and *maybe* Rakdos's Return, the rest are fairly bad targets. I will explain why when I address the card itself
Quote from quixotegut »
I play Mono-:symr: I have no interest in splashing black. With that in mind, I reiterate that Reverb, to me, is a very specific SB choice for certain decks... normally I'm dropping bodies and burning paths... that. is. it.
OK. I just want to be clear that if you just want to play creatures and burn spells, you should just play creatures and burn spells ~ consistency and reliability are huge elements of how RDW can be successful with underpowered cards ~ you're trading the high end power of the three-colour decks for your deck basically doing the same thing every game, and doing it quickly. That is, your trading getting velocity and consistency for intevitability. Let's keep that concept in mind ('inevitability') when we discuss the card.
Reverberate lets you copy a spell cast by your opponent. The value of this effect (which I will call V for illustrative purposes) will directly correspond to the value of the spell that you are copying (we will return to your proposed list shortly for discussion), moderated by
A) whatever it is that you're sideboarding out
B) whatever it is that you could have included in your sideboard instead
C) whatever effect including reverberate will have on your fundamental game plan (this can be a pro or con).
So, we need to agree that V must be positive ~ we need to benefit from the inclusion of the card in our deck. I posit that the sum of [V A B C] is not positive.
Let us start with A. A Mono Red maindeck is already going to be very aggressive. Against the sort of decks where you intend to bring in reverberate (as evidenced by your quoted list above) you're looking at using Reverberate against some midrange decks and some control decks. Against these decks, Mono Red usually sideboards out lower impact removal, and sometimes (if appropriate) lower impact creatures. The norm is to replace these cards with more appropriate creatures, more appropriate burn or something else. For now, let us continue with the assumption that we're taking out cards like Pillar of Flame, Flames of the Firebrand etc ~ burn spells that are not good against decks like Jund or UWr.
Turning to B, we need to see if the inclusion of Reverberate, which comes at the expense of other cards that could be boarded in for these matchups, is a boon or a loss. There are several limbs to this examination:
- which card fits better into the gameplan for the matchup
- which card has more raw game ending power
- which card is more flexible to the needs of the matchup
There might be others, but I am not that clever I think this short list is sufficient for the inquiry however.
If we agree that our plan is typically (transformational sideboards aside, but you have not listed a matchup in which Mono R would change roles, so we will not return to this branch of discussion) to "kill our opponent as quickly as possible, through resistance" we are going to favour cards that supplement or augment this plan. For example, Pillar of Flame against UWr doesn't kill anything relevant and is only 2 damage upstairs ~ sideboarding these for Thunderbolts accelerates the deck by allowing you to kill relevant targets or do 3 damage upstairs ~ the resultant 60 card deck is going to have a slightly higher win % by making this substitution. By accelerating the deck, the inevitability of our opponent's deck is less likely to be relevant and the higher power of their cards is comparatively worth less than the speed and reliability of ours. Usually, these exchanges are made to address the elements of the matchup that are problematic ~ eg: Thunderbolt for Restoration Angel or Traitorous Blood for Thragtusk. Each substitution accelerates the decks primary path to victory. At this point, I don't think it requires further discussion to conclude that Reverberate does not further the primary gameplan of the deck more than other potential sideboard cards would, as none of your listed spells except maybe Rakdos' Return (which is why I flagged it early) tie-into the go to strategy.
But, the utility and game ending power of Reverberate may counter-act this first concession. Let us continue.
The game ending power of a Thunderbolt is reasonable. It can go upstairs for 3, or remove a crucial blocker allowing you to swing for lethal. Traitorous Blood (or threatens generally) are documented for their ability to just destroy an opponent's board position. Neither card is always an instant win by any stretch of the imagination, but then neither is Reverberate. Copying a card like Slaughter Games doesn't bring you closer to victory. Copying a counterspell *could* but there are deep theoretical problems with this consideration, arising out of 1. how slow and unrealiable this is (if you're going to protect a Hellrider, you need 6 mana, and you need them to cast Dissipate but not Essence Scatter) 2. the lost raw power of just including another threat. A red mage should always be wary of removing a certain threat for a conditional one. Copying a Bonfire can maybe go either way ~ if you're opponent does nothave a similarly developed board, or a similarly vulnerable board you're still worse off, and you're own board is still getting wiped. In the abstract it is difficult to say whether the bonfire copy is going to be worth more or less than the extra threat you would have had in your hand ~ I can see it going either way against a deck like Naya, but it is almost always going to be worse against the other Bonfire decks unfortunately. This evaluation could change come GTC of course.
Now we turn to copying Sphinx's Revelation, a card that draws cards (yay!) and gains life (boo!). I contend that the value of both cards and life mean more to our opponent than they do to us. Let me explain.
- Life: life means less to us as a Mono R player than our opponent who is casting Revelation, because we will be the aggressor in the matchup (eg: Bant, Naya Blue, UWr etc). As our deck is concerned with Virtual Card Advantage, an opponent gaining life attacks our strategy in a way that is directly in opposition of our primary path to victory. In contrast, our opponent won't care whether we are at 20 life or 30 life ~ once they take over the board they will quickly kill us anyway. Both players gaining life extends the game, which leads me to ~
- Cards: the cards in our opponent's deck are more powerful than the cards in our deck, and they get to go first. They're going to have more many in play, especially if it is a large reveleation (obvious I know, bare with me). Consider the starting 7 cards you get in your opener. Its usually a mix of 1 drops, maybe a 2 drop and a Hellrider, and some land. That's a good hand. Some are worse. This is pretty much what you're going to get if you copy a Revelation. Your opponent is going to be drawing cards like Supreme Verdict, Snapcaster Mage and Restoration Angel. These are much more powerful cards than our average draw. Remember that the power level of our cards comes from their reliability and velocity ~ neither of which now apply that our opponent can untap with a lot of land and a hand full of really powerful cards. That time is over. Copying an opponent's revelation then playing a bunch of 1 and 2 drops is incredibly unexciting when they have a grip full of cards.
Assuming we agree that copying a big revelation typically leads us worse off comparatively (and completely discounting that a non zero amount of the time the reverberate in our hand could have been burn or another effect that would have killed them), we can turn our minds to a small revelation. If we agree that copying a revelation for x=1 is awful, we need to consider at what point the copy is worthwhile, and then at what point it becomes a 'big revelation' which we have decided was disadvantageous. I think that already by the time X=3, we're coming out worse, and definitely by the time X=4+. This leaves an incredibly narrow window wherein we can benefit from the Revelation, and a substitute card to Reverberate wouldn't have just killed them (because they're gaining so little).
The same considerations don't apply to Rakdos's Returns, which I admit, would be pretty sweet to copy and does both advance the gameplan and benefit us more than them (pretty much always I imagine).
The final element is C, which is about flexibility, which is mostly a consideration of pressure vs the potential for a blowout. Other cards we sideboard in are going to create pressure and force our opponent to react to us. This limits the strength of their power cards because their play can be tactically exploited (oh? tap out for an angel? thunderbolt! tap out for a thragtusk? traitorous blood! or hellrider, swing for lethal anyway etc) ~ because they need to address our velocity, they cannot always play their cards at optimal timings. Reverberate does not do this, because you're relying on them casting a relevant spell (ie: your list). This is inherently inflexible, because the strategy of the deck inherently makes these sort of cards sub-optimal against Mono Red (yes, even sphinx's revelation can be bad. The rest tend to be real bad), so there will be times where you don't have a valuable target. You're not going to copy their sweeper, their farseek or their think twice. Copying their removal is almost always going to be better for them than it is for us ~ not because the effect isn't good, but because it wouldn't further our gameplan as much as just having a removal spell in our deck would. So, we only come out ahead when we copy the big stuff, and I feel that I have shown that copying these spells just isn't that beneficial. If you want to copy a Slaughter Games, what are you really going to do? Why is your opponent even slaughter gamesing you? Unless they have legitimately a single win condition, this doesn't help. Counterspells, Bonfire and Sphinx's Revelation are discussed above. Unburial Rites is similar ~ it is more likely than not to favour the deck that is actively trying to fill its graveyard with powerful creatures. Let me make my argument this ~ you're more likely to reanimate Rakdos Cackler than Thundermaw Hellkite but they're always going to reanimate Angel of Serenity or Thragtusk.
Speakig to Ari Lax last night, his advice to me was:
the big picture is that the midrange decks and control decks have a definite point where the door closes on you being able to win the game. Instead of trying to dodge their answers, you are usually better off setting up your deck to kill them before their Revelations/Thragtusks take over and playing around their cards on a game by game basis.
and I would agree. There is a very real window in the format through which you must jump, or else you will be trapped at home with your parents watching midday television forever, while your hot neighbour sun bakes topless. Don't get trapped.
I think the discussion of whether Reverberate is good or bad misses the point somewhat. For those who read my latest article, I would consider it a Type 2 card ~ a card that's playablity shifts with the metagame and what is the best approach to answer it. Right now, the metagame actively rewarding going under, or at worst through ~ but not really over. Reverberate only really helps you go over, which isn't what you want to be doing because it is incongruent with your other main strategy. It may be (as discussed above) that the effects you're copying aren't even really winning ones.
Could reverberate ever be playable? Of course. It is an allstar in EDH for example and there could be metagames in Standard where you want the effect. But right now isn't that time ~ it just isn't going to offer the consistency or immediacy (remember, we want reliability and velocity) that the other options for those sideboard slots will. Don't fight their battle because you need to make them fight yours.
Hope this helps.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I write for Channel Fireball now! Read my CFB articles here. Read my Dies to Removal articles here. Read the definitive Red Deck Wins Primer here.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
OK, cool. Thats the right attitude. It is important to know that we can all be wrong about many things, no matter who we are. It doesn't matter if you're a new player or a PT champion, everyone is fallible. I'll try and give you my thoughts on the card at the end.
I pulled this section because aside from Sphinx's Revelation and *maybe* Rakdos's Return, the rest are fairly bad targets. I will explain why when I address the card itself
OK. I just want to be clear that if you just want to play creatures and burn spells, you should just play creatures and burn spells ~ consistency and reliability are huge elements of how RDW can be successful with underpowered cards ~ you're trading the high end power of the three-colour decks for your deck basically doing the same thing every game, and doing it quickly. That is, your trading getting velocity and consistency for intevitability. Let's keep that concept in mind ('inevitability') when we discuss the card.
Reverberate lets you copy a spell cast by your opponent. The value of this effect (which I will call V for illustrative purposes) will directly correspond to the value of the spell that you are copying (we will return to your proposed list shortly for discussion), moderated by
A) whatever it is that you're sideboarding out
B) whatever it is that you could have included in your sideboard instead
C) whatever effect including reverberate will have on your fundamental game plan (this can be a pro or con).
So, we need to agree that V must be positive ~ we need to benefit from the inclusion of the card in our deck. I posit that the sum of [V A B C] is not positive.
Let us start with A. A Mono Red maindeck is already going to be very aggressive. Against the sort of decks where you intend to bring in reverberate (as evidenced by your quoted list above) you're looking at using Reverberate against some midrange decks and some control decks. Against these decks, Mono Red usually sideboards out lower impact removal, and sometimes (if appropriate) lower impact creatures. The norm is to replace these cards with more appropriate creatures, more appropriate burn or something else. For now, let us continue with the assumption that we're taking out cards like Pillar of Flame, Flames of the Firebrand etc ~ burn spells that are not good against decks like Jund or UWr.
Turning to B, we need to see if the inclusion of Reverberate, which comes at the expense of other cards that could be boarded in for these matchups, is a boon or a loss. There are several limbs to this examination:
- which card fits better into the gameplan for the matchup
- which card has more raw game ending power
- which card is more flexible to the needs of the matchup
There might be others, but I am not that clever I think this short list is sufficient for the inquiry however.
If we agree that our plan is typically (transformational sideboards aside, but you have not listed a matchup in which Mono R would change roles, so we will not return to this branch of discussion) to "kill our opponent as quickly as possible, through resistance" we are going to favour cards that supplement or augment this plan. For example, Pillar of Flame against UWr doesn't kill anything relevant and is only 2 damage upstairs ~ sideboarding these for Thunderbolts accelerates the deck by allowing you to kill relevant targets or do 3 damage upstairs ~ the resultant 60 card deck is going to have a slightly higher win % by making this substitution. By accelerating the deck, the inevitability of our opponent's deck is less likely to be relevant and the higher power of their cards is comparatively worth less than the speed and reliability of ours. Usually, these exchanges are made to address the elements of the matchup that are problematic ~ eg: Thunderbolt for Restoration Angel or Traitorous Blood for Thragtusk. Each substitution accelerates the decks primary path to victory. At this point, I don't think it requires further discussion to conclude that Reverberate does not further the primary gameplan of the deck more than other potential sideboard cards would, as none of your listed spells except maybe Rakdos' Return (which is why I flagged it early) tie-into the go to strategy.
But, the utility and game ending power of Reverberate may counter-act this first concession. Let us continue.
The game ending power of a Thunderbolt is reasonable. It can go upstairs for 3, or remove a crucial blocker allowing you to swing for lethal. Traitorous Blood (or threatens generally) are documented for their ability to just destroy an opponent's board position. Neither card is always an instant win by any stretch of the imagination, but then neither is Reverberate. Copying a card like Slaughter Games doesn't bring you closer to victory. Copying a counterspell *could* but there are deep theoretical problems with this consideration, arising out of 1. how slow and unrealiable this is (if you're going to protect a Hellrider, you need 6 mana, and you need them to cast Dissipate but not Essence Scatter) 2. the lost raw power of just including another threat. A red mage should always be wary of removing a certain threat for a conditional one. Copying a Bonfire can maybe go either way ~ if you're opponent does nothave a similarly developed board, or a similarly vulnerable board you're still worse off, and you're own board is still getting wiped. In the abstract it is difficult to say whether the bonfire copy is going to be worth more or less than the extra threat you would have had in your hand ~ I can see it going either way against a deck like Naya, but it is almost always going to be worse against the other Bonfire decks unfortunately. This evaluation could change come GTC of course.
Now we turn to copying Sphinx's Revelation, a card that draws cards (yay!) and gains life (boo!). I contend that the value of both cards and life mean more to our opponent than they do to us. Let me explain.
- Life: life means less to us as a Mono R player than our opponent who is casting Revelation, because we will be the aggressor in the matchup (eg: Bant, Naya Blue, UWr etc). As our deck is concerned with Virtual Card Advantage, an opponent gaining life attacks our strategy in a way that is directly in opposition of our primary path to victory. In contrast, our opponent won't care whether we are at 20 life or 30 life ~ once they take over the board they will quickly kill us anyway. Both players gaining life extends the game, which leads me to ~
- Cards: the cards in our opponent's deck are more powerful than the cards in our deck, and they get to go first. They're going to have more many in play, especially if it is a large reveleation (obvious I know, bare with me). Consider the starting 7 cards you get in your opener. Its usually a mix of 1 drops, maybe a 2 drop and a Hellrider, and some land. That's a good hand. Some are worse. This is pretty much what you're going to get if you copy a Revelation. Your opponent is going to be drawing cards like Supreme Verdict, Snapcaster Mage and Restoration Angel. These are much more powerful cards than our average draw. Remember that the power level of our cards comes from their reliability and velocity ~ neither of which now apply that our opponent can untap with a lot of land and a hand full of really powerful cards. That time is over. Copying an opponent's revelation then playing a bunch of 1 and 2 drops is incredibly unexciting when they have a grip full of cards.
Assuming we agree that copying a big revelation typically leads us worse off comparatively (and completely discounting that a non zero amount of the time the reverberate in our hand could have been burn or another effect that would have killed them), we can turn our minds to a small revelation. If we agree that copying a revelation for x=1 is awful, we need to consider at what point the copy is worthwhile, and then at what point it becomes a 'big revelation' which we have decided was disadvantageous. I think that already by the time X=3, we're coming out worse, and definitely by the time X=4+. This leaves an incredibly narrow window wherein we can benefit from the Revelation, and a substitute card to Reverberate wouldn't have just killed them (because they're gaining so little).
The same considerations don't apply to Rakdos's Returns, which I admit, would be pretty sweet to copy and does both advance the gameplan and benefit us more than them (pretty much always I imagine).
The final element is C, which is about flexibility, which is mostly a consideration of pressure vs the potential for a blowout. Other cards we sideboard in are going to create pressure and force our opponent to react to us. This limits the strength of their power cards because their play can be tactically exploited (oh? tap out for an angel? thunderbolt! tap out for a thragtusk? traitorous blood! or hellrider, swing for lethal anyway etc) ~ because they need to address our velocity, they cannot always play their cards at optimal timings. Reverberate does not do this, because you're relying on them casting a relevant spell (ie: your list). This is inherently inflexible, because the strategy of the deck inherently makes these sort of cards sub-optimal against Mono Red (yes, even sphinx's revelation can be bad. The rest tend to be real bad), so there will be times where you don't have a valuable target. You're not going to copy their sweeper, their farseek or their think twice. Copying their removal is almost always going to be better for them than it is for us ~ not because the effect isn't good, but because it wouldn't further our gameplan as much as just having a removal spell in our deck would. So, we only come out ahead when we copy the big stuff, and I feel that I have shown that copying these spells just isn't that beneficial. If you want to copy a Slaughter Games, what are you really going to do? Why is your opponent even slaughter gamesing you? Unless they have legitimately a single win condition, this doesn't help. Counterspells, Bonfire and Sphinx's Revelation are discussed above. Unburial Rites is similar ~ it is more likely than not to favour the deck that is actively trying to fill its graveyard with powerful creatures. Let me make my argument this ~ you're more likely to reanimate Rakdos Cackler than Thundermaw Hellkite but they're always going to reanimate Angel of Serenity or Thragtusk.
Speakig to Ari Lax last night, his advice to me was:
and I would agree. There is a very real window in the format through which you must jump, or else you will be trapped at home with your parents watching midday television forever, while your hot neighbour sun bakes topless. Don't get trapped.
I think the discussion of whether Reverberate is good or bad misses the point somewhat. For those who read my latest article, I would consider it a Type 2 card ~ a card that's playablity shifts with the metagame and what is the best approach to answer it. Right now, the metagame actively rewarding going under, or at worst through ~ but not really over. Reverberate only really helps you go over, which isn't what you want to be doing because it is incongruent with your other main strategy. It may be (as discussed above) that the effects you're copying aren't even really winning ones.
Could reverberate ever be playable? Of course. It is an allstar in EDH for example and there could be metagames in Standard where you want the effect. But right now isn't that time ~ it just isn't going to offer the consistency or immediacy (remember, we want reliability and velocity) that the other options for those sideboard slots will. Don't fight their battle because you need to make them fight yours.
Post more things about your conversation with Ari Z! Did he say anything about Hound? Seems like no recent top decks are running them, but so many of us on MTGS are such huge fans of them.
OK, cool. Thats the right attitude. It is important to know that we can all be wrong about many things, no matter who we are. It doesn't matter if you're a new player or a PT champion, everyone is fallible. I'll try and give you my thoughts on the card at the end.
I pulled this section because aside from Sphinx's Revelation and *maybe* Rakdos's Return, the rest are fairly bad targets. I will explain why when I address the card itself
OK. I just want to be clear that if you just want to play creatures and burn spells, you should just play creatures and burn spells ~ consistency and reliability are huge elements of how RDW can be successful with underpowered cards ~ you're trading the high end power of the three-colour decks for your deck basically doing the same thing every game, and doing it quickly. That is, your trading getting velocity and consistency for intevitability. Let's keep that concept in mind ('inevitability') when we discuss the card.
Reverberate lets you copy a spell cast by your opponent. The value of this effect (which I will call V for illustrative purposes) will directly correspond to the value of the spell that you are copying (we will return to your proposed list shortly for discussion), moderated by
A) whatever it is that you're sideboarding out
B) whatever it is that you could have included in your sideboard instead
C) whatever effect including reverberate will have on your fundamental game plan (this can be a pro or con).
So, we need to agree that V must be positive ~ we need to benefit from the inclusion of the card in our deck. I posit that the sum of [V A B C] is not positive.
Let us start with A. A Mono Red maindeck is already going to be very aggressive. Against the sort of decks where you intend to bring in reverberate (as evidenced by your quoted list above) you're looking at using Reverberate against some midrange decks and some control decks. Against these decks, Mono Red usually sideboards out lower impact removal, and sometimes (if appropriate) lower impact creatures. The norm is to replace these cards with more appropriate creatures, more appropriate burn or something else. For now, let us continue with the assumption that we're taking out cards like Pillar of Flame, Flames of the Firebrand etc ~ burn spells that are not good against decks like Jund or UWr.
Turning to B, we need to see if the inclusion of Reverberate, which comes at the expense of other cards that could be boarded in for these matchups, is a boon or a loss. There are several limbs to this examination:
- which card fits better into the gameplan for the matchup
- which card has more raw game ending power
- which card is more flexible to the needs of the matchup
There might be others, but I am not that clever I think this short list is sufficient for the inquiry however.
If we agree that our plan is typically (transformational sideboards aside, but you have not listed a matchup in which Mono R would change roles, so we will not return to this branch of discussion) to "kill our opponent as quickly as possible, through resistance" we are going to favour cards that supplement or augment this plan. For example, Pillar of Flame against UWr doesn't kill anything relevant and is only 2 damage upstairs ~ sideboarding these for Thunderbolts accelerates the deck by allowing you to kill relevant targets or do 3 damage upstairs ~ the resultant 60 card deck is going to have a slightly higher win % by making this substitution. By accelerating the deck, the inevitability of our opponent's deck is less likely to be relevant and the higher power of their cards is comparatively worth less than the speed and reliability of ours. Usually, these exchanges are made to address the elements of the matchup that are problematic ~ eg: Thunderbolt for Restoration Angel or Traitorous Blood for Thragtusk. Each substitution accelerates the decks primary path to victory. At this point, I don't think it requires further discussion to conclude that Reverberate does not further the primary gameplan of the deck more than other potential sideboard cards would, as none of your listed spells except maybe Rakdos' Return (which is why I flagged it early) tie-into the go to strategy.
But, the utility and game ending power of Reverberate may counter-act this first concession. Let us continue.
The game ending power of a Thunderbolt is reasonable. It can go upstairs for 3, or remove a crucial blocker allowing you to swing for lethal. Traitorous Blood (or threatens generally) are documented for their ability to just destroy an opponent's board position. Neither card is always an instant win by any stretch of the imagination, but then neither is Reverberate. Copying a card like Slaughter Games doesn't bring you closer to victory. Copying a counterspell *could* but there are deep theoretical problems with this consideration, arising out of 1. how slow and unrealiable this is (if you're going to protect a Hellrider, you need 6 mana, and you need them to cast Dissipate but not Essence Scatter) 2. the lost raw power of just including another threat. A red mage should always be wary of removing a certain threat for a conditional one. Copying a Bonfire can maybe go either way ~ if you're opponent does nothave a similarly developed board, or a similarly vulnerable board you're still worse off, and you're own board is still getting wiped. In the abstract it is difficult to say whether the bonfire copy is going to be worth more or less than the extra threat you would have had in your hand ~ I can see it going either way against a deck like Naya, but it is almost always going to be worse against the other Bonfire decks unfortunately. This evaluation could change come GTC of course.
Now we turn to copying Sphinx's Revelation, a card that draws cards (yay!) and gains life (boo!). I contend that the value of both cards and life mean more to our opponent than they do to us. Let me explain.
- Life: life means less to us as a Mono R player than our opponent who is casting Revelation, because we will be the aggressor in the matchup (eg: Bant, Naya Blue, UWr etc). As our deck is concerned with Virtual Card Advantage, an opponent gaining life attacks our strategy in a way that is directly in opposition of our primary path to victory. In contrast, our opponent won't care whether we are at 20 life or 30 life ~ once they take over the board they will quickly kill us anyway. Both players gaining life extends the game, which leads me to ~
- Cards: the cards in our opponent's deck are more powerful than the cards in our deck, and they get to go first. They're going to have more many in play, especially if it is a large reveleation (obvious I know, bare with me). Consider the starting 7 cards you get in your opener. Its usually a mix of 1 drops, maybe a 2 drop and a Hellrider, and some land. That's a good hand. Some are worse. This is pretty much what you're going to get if you copy a Revelation. Your opponent is going to be drawing cards like Supreme Verdict, Snapcaster Mage and Restoration Angel. These are much more powerful cards than our average draw. Remember that the power level of our cards comes from their reliability and velocity ~ neither of which now apply that our opponent can untap with a lot of land and a hand full of really powerful cards. That time is over. Copying an opponent's revelation then playing a bunch of 1 and 2 drops is incredibly unexciting when they have a grip full of cards.
Assuming we agree that copying a big revelation typically leads us worse off comparatively (and completely discounting that a non zero amount of the time the reverberate in our hand could have been burn or another effect that would have killed them), we can turn our minds to a small revelation. If we agree that copying a revelation for x=1 is awful, we need to consider at what point the copy is worthwhile, and then at what point it becomes a 'big revelation' which we have decided was disadvantageous. I think that already by the time X=3, we're coming out worse, and definitely by the time X=4+. This leaves an incredibly narrow window wherein we can benefit from the Revelation, and a substitute card to Reverberate wouldn't have just killed them (because they're gaining so little).
The same considerations don't apply to Rakdos's Returns, which I admit, would be pretty sweet to copy and does both advance the gameplan and benefit us more than them (pretty much always I imagine).
The final element is C, which is about flexibility, which is mostly a consideration of pressure vs the potential for a blowout. Other cards we sideboard in are going to create pressure and force our opponent to react to us. This limits the strength of their power cards because their play can be tactically exploited (oh? tap out for an angel? thunderbolt! tap out for a thragtusk? traitorous blood! or hellrider, swing for lethal anyway etc) ~ because they need to address our velocity, they cannot always play their cards at optimal timings. Reverberate does not do this, because you're relying on them casting a relevant spell (ie: your list). This is inherently inflexible, because the strategy of the deck inherently makes these sort of cards sub-optimal against Mono Red (yes, even sphinx's revelation can be bad. The rest tend to be real bad), so there will be times where you don't have a valuable target. You're not going to copy their sweeper, their farseek or their think twice. Copying their removal is almost always going to be better for them than it is for us ~ not because the effect isn't good, but because it wouldn't further our gameplan as much as just having a removal spell in our deck would. So, we only come out ahead when we copy the big stuff, and I feel that I have shown that copying these spells just isn't that beneficial. If you want to copy a Slaughter Games, what are you really going to do? Why is your opponent even slaughter gamesing you? Unless they have legitimately a single win condition, this doesn't help. Counterspells, Bonfire and Sphinx's Revelation are discussed above. Unburial Rites is similar ~ it is more likely than not to favour the deck that is actively trying to fill its graveyard with powerful creatures. Let me make my argument this ~ you're more likely to reanimate Rakdos Cackler than Thundermaw Hellkite but they're always going to reanimate Angel of Serenity or Thragtusk.
Speakig to Ari Lax last night, his advice to me was:
and I would agree. There is a very real window in the format through which you must jump, or else you will be trapped at home with your parents watching midday television forever, while your hot neighbour sun bakes topless. Don't get trapped.
I think the discussion of whether Reverberate is good or bad misses the point somewhat. For those who read my latest article, I would consider it a Type 2 card ~ a card that's playablity shifts with the metagame and what is the best approach to answer it. Right now, the metagame actively rewarding going under, or at worst through ~ but not really over. Reverberate only really helps you go over, which isn't what you want to be doing because it is incongruent with your other main strategy. It may be (as discussed above) that the effects you're copying aren't even really winning ones.
Could reverberate ever be playable? Of course. It is an allstar in EDH for example and there could be metagames in Standard where you want the effect. But right now isn't that time ~ it just isn't going to offer the consistency or immediacy (remember, we want reliability and velocity) that the other options for those sideboard slots will. Don't fight their battle because you need to make them fight yours.
Hope this helps.
I'll take this any day of the week and twice on sundays over a "you're an idiot"-styled response.
Much appreciated, Z.
I'll take it out. Don't know what I'm going to put back in as I've never really liked the waifs, but it'll get rectified.
Isn't there a system in place where they take a yellow card away for service to the community in the shape of a very good post? There should be. You'd be practically unbannable by now.
(In all seriousness, that would make a lot of sense to me. Good posts are never an excuse for douchebaggery(*), but "small" yellow cards like getting called for spam by saying "Variance?" really could be revoked upon good posts. You know, rewarding (better than just) good behaviour and all, not just punishing bad behaviour.)
(*) Never seen you being a douche zemanjaski, just thought I'd clarify that I do pretty much only read this section of the forums though so who knows what you do out there
Don't fight their battle because you need to make them fight yours.
Hope this helps.
Read this last night. Certainly glad I did. Helped tremendously. Thanks for taking the time to write this up. I've learned quite a bit from zemanjaski over the last couple of weeks.
the big picture is that the midrange decks and control decks have a definite point where the door closes on you being able to win the game. Instead of trying to dodge their answers, you are usually better off setting up your deck to kill them before their Revelations/Thragtusks take over and playing around their cards on a game by game basis.
I want to reinforce this idea, because I think it's more or less correct. I've been playing a lot of Tourney Practice matches on MTGO and losing ("on purpose") for the sake of finding this door. Knowing what the issue is and when it occurs is a good step in the right direction.
I want to reinforce this idea, because I think it's more or less correct. I've been playing a lot of Tourney Practice matches on MTGO and losing ("on purpose") for the sake of finding this door. Knowing what the issue is and when it occurs is a good step in the right direction.
This is the reason I plan to focus on playing one deck right now. I like how the deck I'm playing this week goldfishes. Playing something similar, I found that I had a hard time against life gain (ie. Trostani) and other shenanigans (ie. Deathrite Shaman). Since they show up in my meta, I'm going to focus on removing those threats as much as possible and playing around them otherwise. Outside of that, this deck makes everyone nervous.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
OK, cool. Thats the right attitude. It is important to know that we can all be wrong about many things, no matter who we are. It doesn't matter if you're a new player or a PT champion, everyone is fallible. I'll try and give you my thoughts on the card at the end.
I pulled this section because aside from Sphinx's Revelation and *maybe* Rakdos's Return, the rest are fairly bad targets. I will explain why when I address the card itself
OK. I just want to be clear that if you just want to play creatures and burn spells, you should just play creatures and burn spells ~ consistency and reliability are huge elements of how RDW can be successful with underpowered cards ~ you're trading the high end power of the three-colour decks for your deck basically doing the same thing every game, and doing it quickly. That is, your trading getting velocity and consistency for intevitability. Let's keep that concept in mind ('inevitability') when we discuss the card.
Reverberate lets you copy a spell cast by your opponent. The value of this effect (which I will call V for illustrative purposes) will directly correspond to the value of the spell that you are copying (we will return to your proposed list shortly for discussion), moderated by
A) whatever it is that you're sideboarding out
B) whatever it is that you could have included in your sideboard instead
C) whatever effect including reverberate will have on your fundamental game plan (this can be a pro or con).
So, we need to agree that V must be positive ~ we need to benefit from the inclusion of the card in our deck. I posit that the sum of [V A B C] is not positive.
Let us start with A. A Mono Red maindeck is already going to be very aggressive. Against the sort of decks where you intend to bring in reverberate (as evidenced by your quoted list above) you're looking at using Reverberate against some midrange decks and some control decks. Against these decks, Mono Red usually sideboards out lower impact removal, and sometimes (if appropriate) lower impact creatures. The norm is to replace these cards with more appropriate creatures, more appropriate burn or something else. For now, let us continue with the assumption that we're taking out cards like Pillar of Flame, Flames of the Firebrand etc ~ burn spells that are not good against decks like Jund or UWr.
Turning to B, we need to see if the inclusion of Reverberate, which comes at the expense of other cards that could be boarded in for these matchups, is a boon or a loss. There are several limbs to this examination:
- which card fits better into the gameplan for the matchup
- which card has more raw game ending power
- which card is more flexible to the needs of the matchup
There might be others, but I am not that clever I think this short list is sufficient for the inquiry however.
If we agree that our plan is typically (transformational sideboards aside, but you have not listed a matchup in which Mono R would change roles, so we will not return to this branch of discussion) to "kill our opponent as quickly as possible, through resistance" we are going to favour cards that supplement or augment this plan. For example, Pillar of Flame against UWr doesn't kill anything relevant and is only 2 damage upstairs ~ sideboarding these for Thunderbolts accelerates the deck by allowing you to kill relevant targets or do 3 damage upstairs ~ the resultant 60 card deck is going to have a slightly higher win % by making this substitution. By accelerating the deck, the inevitability of our opponent's deck is less likely to be relevant and the higher power of their cards is comparatively worth less than the speed and reliability of ours. Usually, these exchanges are made to address the elements of the matchup that are problematic ~ eg: Thunderbolt for Restoration Angel or Traitorous Blood for Thragtusk. Each substitution accelerates the decks primary path to victory. At this point, I don't think it requires further discussion to conclude that Reverberate does not further the primary gameplan of the deck more than other potential sideboard cards would, as none of your listed spells except maybe Rakdos' Return (which is why I flagged it early) tie-into the go to strategy.
But, the utility and game ending power of Reverberate may counter-act this first concession. Let us continue.
The game ending power of a Thunderbolt is reasonable. It can go upstairs for 3, or remove a crucial blocker allowing you to swing for lethal. Traitorous Blood (or threatens generally) are documented for their ability to just destroy an opponent's board position. Neither card is always an instant win by any stretch of the imagination, but then neither is Reverberate. Copying a card like Slaughter Games doesn't bring you closer to victory. Copying a counterspell *could* but there are deep theoretical problems with this consideration, arising out of 1. how slow and unrealiable this is (if you're going to protect a Hellrider, you need 6 mana, and you need them to cast Dissipate but not Essence Scatter) 2. the lost raw power of just including another threat. A red mage should always be wary of removing a certain threat for a conditional one. Copying a Bonfire can maybe go either way ~ if you're opponent does nothave a similarly developed board, or a similarly vulnerable board you're still worse off, and you're own board is still getting wiped. In the abstract it is difficult to say whether the bonfire copy is going to be worth more or less than the extra threat you would have had in your hand ~ I can see it going either way against a deck like Naya, but it is almost always going to be worse against the other Bonfire decks unfortunately. This evaluation could change come GTC of course.
Now we turn to copying Sphinx's Revelation, a card that draws cards (yay!) and gains life (boo!). I contend that the value of both cards and life mean more to our opponent than they do to us. Let me explain.
- Life: life means less to us as a Mono R player than our opponent who is casting Revelation, because we will be the aggressor in the matchup (eg: Bant, Naya Blue, UWr etc). As our deck is concerned with Virtual Card Advantage, an opponent gaining life attacks our strategy in a way that is directly in opposition of our primary path to victory. In contrast, our opponent won't care whether we are at 20 life or 30 life ~ once they take over the board they will quickly kill us anyway. Both players gaining life extends the game, which leads me to ~
- Cards: the cards in our opponent's deck are more powerful than the cards in our deck, and they get to go first. They're going to have more many in play, especially if it is a large reveleation (obvious I know, bare with me). Consider the starting 7 cards you get in your opener. Its usually a mix of 1 drops, maybe a 2 drop and a Hellrider, and some land. That's a good hand. Some are worse. This is pretty much what you're going to get if you copy a Revelation. Your opponent is going to be drawing cards like Supreme Verdict, Snapcaster Mage and Restoration Angel. These are much more powerful cards than our average draw. Remember that the power level of our cards comes from their reliability and velocity ~ neither of which now apply that our opponent can untap with a lot of land and a hand full of really powerful cards. That time is over. Copying an opponent's revelation then playing a bunch of 1 and 2 drops is incredibly unexciting when they have a grip full of cards.
Assuming we agree that copying a big revelation typically leads us worse off comparatively (and completely discounting that a non zero amount of the time the reverberate in our hand could have been burn or another effect that would have killed them), we can turn our minds to a small revelation. If we agree that copying a revelation for x=1 is awful, we need to consider at what point the copy is worthwhile, and then at what point it becomes a 'big revelation' which we have decided was disadvantageous. I think that already by the time X=3, we're coming out worse, and definitely by the time X=4+. This leaves an incredibly narrow window wherein we can benefit from the Revelation, and a substitute card to Reverberate wouldn't have just killed them (because they're gaining so little).
The same considerations don't apply to Rakdos's Returns, which I admit, would be pretty sweet to copy and does both advance the gameplan and benefit us more than them (pretty much always I imagine).
The final element is C, which is about flexibility, which is mostly a consideration of pressure vs the potential for a blowout. Other cards we sideboard in are going to create pressure and force our opponent to react to us. This limits the strength of their power cards because their play can be tactically exploited (oh? tap out for an angel? thunderbolt! tap out for a thragtusk? traitorous blood! or hellrider, swing for lethal anyway etc) ~ because they need to address our velocity, they cannot always play their cards at optimal timings. Reverberate does not do this, because you're relying on them casting a relevant spell (ie: your list). This is inherently inflexible, because the strategy of the deck inherently makes these sort of cards sub-optimal against Mono Red (yes, even sphinx's revelation can be bad. The rest tend to be real bad), so there will be times where you don't have a valuable target. You're not going to copy their sweeper, their farseek or their think twice. Copying their removal is almost always going to be better for them than it is for us ~ not because the effect isn't good, but because it wouldn't further our gameplan as much as just having a removal spell in our deck would. So, we only come out ahead when we copy the big stuff, and I feel that I have shown that copying these spells just isn't that beneficial. If you want to copy a Slaughter Games, what are you really going to do? Why is your opponent even slaughter gamesing you? Unless they have legitimately a single win condition, this doesn't help. Counterspells, Bonfire and Sphinx's Revelation are discussed above. Unburial Rites is similar ~ it is more likely than not to favour the deck that is actively trying to fill its graveyard with powerful creatures. Let me make my argument this ~ you're more likely to reanimate Rakdos Cackler than Thundermaw Hellkite but they're always going to reanimate Angel of Serenity or Thragtusk.
Speakig to Ari Lax last night, his advice to me was:
and I would agree. There is a very real window in the format through which you must jump, or else you will be trapped at home with your parents watching midday television forever, while your hot neighbour sun bakes topless. Don't get trapped.
I think the discussion of whether Reverberate is good or bad misses the point somewhat. For those who read my latest article, I would consider it a Type 2 card ~ a card that's playablity shifts with the metagame and what is the best approach to answer it. Right now, the metagame actively rewarding going under, or at worst through ~ but not really over. Reverberate only really helps you go over, which isn't what you want to be doing because it is incongruent with your other main strategy. It may be (as discussed above) that the effects you're copying aren't even really winning ones.
Could reverberate ever be playable? Of course. It is an allstar in EDH for example and there could be metagames in Standard where you want the effect. But right now isn't that time ~ it just isn't going to offer the consistency or immediacy (remember, we want reliability and velocity) that the other options for those sideboard slots will. Don't fight their battle because you need to make them fight yours.
Hope this helps.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
Well, this seems...thought out and logical.
I'll take this any day of the week and twice on sundays over a "you're an idiot"-styled response.
Much appreciated, Z.
I'll take it out. Don't know what I'm going to put back in as I've never really liked the waifs, but it'll get rectified.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
(In all seriousness, that would make a lot of sense to me. Good posts are never an excuse for douchebaggery(*), but "small" yellow cards like getting called for spam by saying "Variance?" really could be revoked upon good posts. You know, rewarding (better than just) good behaviour and all, not just punishing bad behaviour.)
(*) Never seen you being a douche zemanjaski, just thought I'd clarify that I do pretty much only read this section of the forums though so who knows what you do out there
R Reach out and torch someone R
Find me on MTGO under the same username
Read this last night. Certainly glad I did. Helped tremendously. Thanks for taking the time to write this up. I've learned quite a bit from zemanjaski over the last couple of weeks.
I want to reinforce this idea, because I think it's more or less correct. I've been playing a lot of Tourney Practice matches on MTGO and losing ("on purpose") for the sake of finding this door. Knowing what the issue is and when it occurs is a good step in the right direction.
This is the reason I plan to focus on playing one deck right now. I like how the deck I'm playing this week goldfishes. Playing something similar, I found that I had a hard time against life gain (ie. Trostani) and other shenanigans (ie. Deathrite Shaman). Since they show up in my meta, I'm going to focus on removing those threats as much as possible and playing around them otherwise. Outside of that, this deck makes everyone nervous.