The Curious Case of Mishra's Workshop



  • @moorebrother1 Fair enough. Could you stop misrepresenting the most common argument for Shop's restriction? Play sequences like the one above are being used to 1) emphasize the aggressive nature of current Shops builds and 2) explain how this doesn't imply a weakening of the archetype. No one is (or very few people are) arguing that Shops is doing something more broken than other decks. I am certainly not.

    Based on your background, you are an example of Vintage trying to serve different masters. You play in monthly small events with metagames that diverge from broader, more competitive metagames. This isn't meant to invalidate your opinion, but I would counter that it's going to lead you to different conclusions than those who play more regularly in larger events.



  • @chubbyrain said in The Curious Case of Mishra's Workshop:

    Yeah, this was an insane start

    Thanks for the screenshot.

    Dear lord, that's crazy. He get's to play his entire opening hand of 7 cards plus the one he drew.....and then topdecks the Ravager?

    Situations like these are definitely outliers. It's fun when it happens (unless you are the opponent), but that's such an anomaly.

    Statistically, a turn 2 Oath should win with a higher frequency. While it definitely shows the potential explosiveness for Shop Aggro, I'm not sure how much this situation matters for the big picture.



  • @madmanmike25 That's why we collect the data and why they are the most important part (or should be the most important part) of any argument. Again, the point is not that Shops is doing anything inherently unfair in a format that has Power. It's that it's winning way more than other decks. I only mentioned it because you expressed disbelief that the deck was still winning despite the restrictions of Lodestone and Chalice. Shops as it's built right now asks "do you have the right answers", "did you draw enough mana to cast them" and "can you assemble them before you die?" It's the advantage of playing an aggro/tempo deck of considerable power.



  • @chubbyrain

    It’s possible that in that particular game it almost doesn’t matter WHAT he forces he maybe still just loses. My point is that if I’m on the oath side of the table there I easily force the inspector in vacuum cause that usually slows my opponent’s win by at least a turn and likely 2. Players not understanding the simple math of inspector and how busted it is is what irritates me when they complain about losing to it. Again, this situation may have been one where the hand was too broken to fight through with a single fow but many will not be and the play pattern of letting inspector resolve is almost always incorrect in my experience.



  • @stormanimagus You Force the Inspector when you have turn 2 Oath of Druids? Noah, I'm pretty sure you're shouldn't be the judge of which Blue players are competent or not....



  • @chubbyrain

    Blind? Sure. There’s no guarantees that they have a sphere at all and certainly not on turn 1 if inspector didn’t resolve. You are missing the forest for the trees. The forest is their clock, which is dangerously fast with mr. inspector. Without it one can trust an oath deck to get to 3 lands by the time it matters. With it in play all bets are off and insane speed is no a possibility. Remember that sphere hampers their speed as well with no inspector in play and their ability to lethal you. I have the same problem with players who don’t force Lotus vs blue only to get blown out by multiple threats the following turn. Again, do not conflate my comments with this particular scenario where the shop player kinda had it all and also topdecked like a champ. Understand that I’m playin the numbers and making the play that wins me the majority of games.



  • @stormanimagus Yes, Inspector is a good card. No, you don't blind Force it. It's contextual and I have played many more competitive matchups against Shops with Blue decks than you have. Having a turn 2 Oath of Druids on the play is one such instance when I wouldn't do so. Please stop assuming 70% of Vintage players are morons.



  • @chubbyrain

    I only do cause they repeatedly demonstrate that they are. Sorry, but i also have a lot of experience with the matchup and your line is frequently incorrect even if you have a turn 2 Oath. It really depends on your hand and the other support cards you have though. Sorry, not backing down on this.


  • Administrators

    It is absolutely possible for two people to disagree on a line of play without calling each other names. Please find a way to do so.



  • This post is deleted!

Log in to reply
 

WAF/WHF

Looks like your connection to The Mana Drain was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.