Golgari is better in BO3 than BO1 but I really don't think this was an optimized Golgari list. What was the sample size on that 90% winrate? I've brewed decks that had very high WRs for the first few games (just from a string of good luck) and then dropped below 50% with more play. Usually I need more than 20 games with a deck so get an idea of it's actual winrate. I do think you're right about low mythic most people just play their jank because they finished grinding for that extra pack at the end of the month. On the ladder the best decks seem to be the ones that get to the top numbered Mythic followed by the decks that rank people up from Diamond into Mythic.
It was a pretty high number of games, which is why I found it a bit odd and suspicious. That said, stranger things have happened. But so far, no I know that has tried this in BO1 or BO3 has had any better luck than with other versions of Golgari. I didn't mind doing it as an experiment, but I wouldn't recommend the deck to most folks.
What is astonishing in these games is your selflessness in playing a deck that is obviously bad, without even showing the urge to change a single card. Respect! And an interesting video for sure.
The original brewer had a plan, though that plan isn't obvious. A worthwhile experiment to try and figure it out, though perhaps it would be more efficient to find the person and ask them, or work off a list with a description
Oh, the urge was there. LOL BNut for the scientific side of things, I had to play through a bunch of games with it to figure out interactions and try to understand why choices were made and/or what made them successful as a pile.
It's almost as if someone got drunk one night and on a bet said, "Hey, let's make the most ridiculously random deck ever and see how it performs"! My only gripe is that the deck needs more green cards. Thanks again for the analytical breakdown of the deck and lol's!
Don't get me wrong. I know there are differences, but even asking around, those number don't really make much sense if you're up against other good decks and comeptent players. Edit: Also, If this were the way to go, why wouldn't more players be adopting it? People have jumped on way worse bandwagons.
Incorrect, the wild 1-ofs are explicitly because of the existence of the Pillage the Bog which when used for 10-16 cards in the lategame can find a "silver bullet".
In game 1 you had the combo in hand. Caustic Bronco + Insatiable avarice to deal a lot of damage. I think the sunken citadels are for the manlands since that is the one of the few things this deck is playing a full playset of. You see a lot of people playing sunken citadels in formats where lands have activated abilities such as nykthos, Garenbrig, etc
Sure, but the best thing I could do is deal 7. Which I guess is still the play, but I don't even think it really mattered in the end. We'd already turned the corner and exhausted the opponent's big plays and sweepers.
It goes to show that the list is part of the picture, but deck techs like on this channel are very helpful I am having a hard time finding the original decklist (not the one in the description but r8rak2's original post) Does anyone know where it is? They might have posted a description or something... where did we find this?
This makes me think they're like me on Snap winning with Shana: part of it is the average opponent wants the game to be fast and predictable but if you play something that makes them have to think and adapt on a longer game it just screws with their brain to the point most won't stay in. That plus the fact Dreadknight sort of says "Oh removal? That's cute." and forces them to waste energy and tempo trying to remove our threats only for us to bring them back. It's a weirdly simple but good list as well as a lesson in using what you got instead of following every meta can lead you to Mythic.
@@PowrDragn I mean swimming uphill is about how I would describe my current pioneer deck. Just stacking oil counters and hoping the next top deck is what I need. Though I do love beating the crud out of people with it all the more when they're doing Lotus Field Combo and I just 20 them in the face and smile. Then again I like any OTK deck that makes me work for it so I might be weird.
Looks like sunken citadel is just in the deck to fix mana if needed and to make man lands cheaper because it adds 2 mana for those abilities. Still a weird take on golgari.
Not really. Sideboard is included too if you want to check it out. Plus that would mean it would have to win an overwhelming majority game 1's to have the strategy work out. Would still be breaking the statistical norm against other quality decks.
I like fun-of's. But I at least like them to be worthy of the spot. And not play them over other better cards. They can get one of the 59th to 61st slots if there's nothing else I want more.
@@PowrDragn yeah its interesting, it seems to me that Izoni and Brawler are not impactful enough for 5/6 drops (unless you take a turn off to plot the brawler to get to buff another creature?). Preacher and Sentinel are pretty close in stats, but either one is superior to his Trespasser sideboard. I imagine Trespasser is there for graveyard hate. I like the Aloe Alchemist to give Glissa trample.
@@geoturcotte I don't have a problem with Trespasser, but to your other point, there's only even one Glissa, so you won't even get that interaction very often.
The amount of 1 copy spells in this list make me wonder how even a few more copies of any one them could change this decks structure. An interesting deck for sure.
The Deck is like it is, maybe because of the weight of the cards, wich is an MMR rating, so you get matched with mostly newer players or players not very good in this game? But i don't have a program to chek the deckweight of this one😅
I think some changes need to be made to make this game worth the money . If they (rope) let the timer run out they lose 500 gold for each counter. Next. One plain walker at a time.
![[PLAYTEST] EVE Vanguard - Groundbreak [Full Live]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mf2rd0lLbJo/mqdefault.jpg)
Golgari is better in BO3 than BO1 but I really don't think this was an optimized Golgari list. What was the sample size on that 90% winrate? I've brewed decks that had very high WRs for the first few games (just from a string of good luck) and then dropped below 50% with more play. Usually I need more than 20 games with a deck so get an idea of it's actual winrate. I do think you're right about low mythic most people just play their jank because they finished grinding for that extra pack at the end of the month. On the ladder the best decks seem to be the ones that get to the top numbered Mythic followed by the decks that rank people up from Diamond into Mythic.
It was a pretty high number of games, which is why I found it a bit odd and suspicious. That said, stranger things have happened. But so far, no I know that has tried this in BO1 or BO3 has had any better luck than with other versions of Golgari.
I didn't mind doing it as an experiment, but I wouldn't recommend the deck to most folks.
What is astonishing in these games is your selflessness in playing a deck that is obviously bad, without even showing the urge to change a single card.
Respect! And an interesting video for sure.
The original brewer had a plan, though that plan isn't obvious. A worthwhile experiment to try and figure it out, though perhaps it would be more efficient to find the person and ask them, or work off a list with a description
Oh, the urge was there. LOL
BNut for the scientific side of things, I had to play through a bunch of games with it to figure out interactions and try to understand why choices were made and/or what made them successful as a pile.
It's almost as if someone got drunk one night and on a bet said, "Hey, let's make the most ridiculously random deck ever and see how it performs"! My only gripe is that the deck needs more green cards. Thanks again for the analytical breakdown of the deck and lol's!
As a BO1 player who is starting to get into BO3, BO1 is just a Race. Dimir, and Golgari are probably the toughest match up’s in BO3. Very possible.
Don't get me wrong. I know there are differences, but even asking around, those number don't really make much sense if you're up against other good decks and comeptent players.
Edit: Also, If this were the way to go, why wouldn't more players be adopting it? People have jumped on way worse bandwagons.
@@PowrDragn idk. It’s it was just one lucky run that’s one thing but to consistently hit those numbers is wild.
I can't tell if this decklist is genius so advanced I can't make sense of it, or just a chaotic mess
I'm still trying to decide. There's a chance it's truly next level and I'm and idiot, but who knows.
Im gonna say the one-of’s are because he doesnt have the wild cards and hes working with what he has
Incorrect, the wild 1-ofs are explicitly because of the existence of the Pillage the Bog which when used for 10-16 cards in the lategame can find a "silver bullet".
But even then, why would there not be better "silver bullet" answers like Tranquil Frillback and such over something like Brawler?
There are still useful cards that are common and uncommon though.
I love this color pairing! I cant wait to try this deck
In game 1 you had the combo in hand. Caustic Bronco + Insatiable avarice to deal a lot of damage. I think the sunken citadels are for the manlands since that is the one of the few things this deck is playing a full playset of. You see a lot of people playing sunken citadels in formats where lands have activated abilities such as nykthos, Garenbrig, etc
Sure, but the best thing I could do is deal 7. Which I guess is still the play, but I don't even think it really mattered in the end. We'd already turned the corner and exhausted the opponent's big plays and sweepers.
It goes to show that the list is part of the picture, but deck techs like on this channel are very helpful
I am having a hard time finding the original decklist (not the one in the description but r8rak2's original post)
Does anyone know where it is? They might have posted a description or something... where did we find this?
It's the same list I have for download on the description.
This makes me think they're like me on Snap winning with Shana: part of it is the average opponent wants the game to be fast and predictable but if you play something that makes them have to think and adapt on a longer game it just screws with their brain to the point most won't stay in. That plus the fact Dreadknight sort of says "Oh removal? That's cute." and forces them to waste energy and tempo trying to remove our threats only for us to bring them back. It's a weirdly simple but good list as well as a lesson in using what you got instead of following every meta can lead you to Mythic.
I get it in concept, but all I can say if play it and see what I mean. Several games just felt like you were swimming up hill the whole time.
@@PowrDragn I mean swimming uphill is about how I would describe my current pioneer deck. Just stacking oil counters and hoping the next top deck is what I need. Though I do love beating the crud out of people with it all the more when they're doing Lotus Field Combo and I just 20 them in the face and smile. Then again I like any OTK deck that makes me work for it so I might be weird.
This is maybe testing their paper deck and there are lots of one offs because it s what they have?
Even if that's the case, it still doesn't acocunt for the inexplicable performance. I'm genuinely waiting to see what how it works out for others.
Looks like sunken citadel is just in the deck to fix mana if needed and to make man lands cheaper because it adds 2 mana for those abilities. Still a weird take on golgari.
I thought so too, but they lead to a lot of clunky draws.
My guess is he had a transformative sideboard and has the advantage in games 2 and 3 bc opp doesnt know how to side against him
Not really. Sideboard is included too if you want to check it out.
Plus that would mean it would have to win an overwhelming majority game 1's to have the strategy work out. Would still be breaking the statistical norm against other quality decks.
One ofs are the fun of way to play
I like fun-of's. But I at least like them to be worthy of the spot. And not play them over other better cards. They can get one of the 59th to 61st slots if there's nothing else I want more.
My guess is this odd build is somehow beating the matchmaking algorithm, like the computer has no idea what to put it against
That doesn't really exist on ladder, just the play queue.
Ahh i thought it was for all matchmaking, my apologies.
Was it a best of 3 deck?
Yes, but even then this is the first time I've played a BO3 deck that had this wide of a results gap in BO3. I discuss it all at the end of the video.
Maybe they are playing around Deadly Coverup and Kotose by putting one-of cards at the top end? This is clearly Bo3.
Mostly definitely BO3. But still wondering why there's not stuff like preacher for a copy or two over something like Breaker.
@@PowrDragn yeah its interesting, it seems to me that Izoni and Brawler are not impactful enough for 5/6 drops (unless you take a turn off to plot the brawler to get to buff another creature?). Preacher and Sentinel are pretty close in stats, but either one is superior to his Trespasser sideboard. I imagine Trespasser is there for graveyard hate. I like the Aloe Alchemist to give Glissa trample.
@@geoturcotte I don't have a problem with Trespasser, but to your other point, there's only even one Glissa, so you won't even get that interaction very often.
The amount of 1 copy spells in this list make me wonder how even a few more copies of any one them could change this decks structure. An interesting deck for sure.
I'm still wondering.
Maybe it's a toolbox deck with all the search. I can see how skeleton doesn't synergize with other copies of itself
The Deck is like it is, maybe because of the weight of the cards, wich is an MMR rating, so you get matched with mostly newer players or players not very good in this game?
But i don't have a program to chek the deckweight of this one😅
MMR only really matters in the play queue. Otherwise your rank and wins are prioritized on the ladder.
There's no way that deck can do 91% with all the monored swarming around
Yeah, but I've tested other builds of Golgari and they can still do better than 35%.
👌🦊
I think some changes need to be made to make this game worth the money . If they (rope) let the timer run out they lose 500 gold for each counter. Next. One plain walker at a time.