Subject: Subject: For Rob Hahn War College - re.Sideboard Date: 11 Dec 97 13:36:37 +0000 From: "David Eastman" To: fkusumot@ix.netcom.com, fkusumot@ix.netcom.com Before answering Keith Oullette's questions, I just note below the different categories of sideboarding that are usually considered for a tournament deck. -Density changes These are changes to the numbers of existing cards in your deck. This means that you are effectively playing with the same deck contents re-weighted for fighting different deck types. For example, against a creature sparse deck, you may expect (2xEarthquakes,1xTorch) to shift to (1xEarthquke, 2xTorch). Another example is going from (3 Pacificm, 1 Afterlife) to (3 Afterlife, 1 Pacifism) against a Tim style deck. -Redundancy changes. There are cases when an entire threat, or card type that you target does not exist in an opponents deck. Ideally, density changes will suffice, but sometimes a whole section of cards needs to go. A totally creatureless deck will mean that, for example, Wrath is redundant and Man o War will not be too useful. The sensible thing is to presume you will need to destroy or disrupt a different resource entirely. This may prove difficult for some decks. A white weenie facing a Pros Bloom deck needs to reomve the Pacifims, Wraths, etc for disenchants, Serenity etc. The worst aspect of this change is that your mana flow may be disrupted with cards of inappropriate casting costs appearing in slots vacated by the 'boarded card. -Effiency changes This is often confused with "I'll put in that neat new hoser". The idea is to replace an existing card with a closely cost matched card that better fits in with the current game. Simple examples: Quicksand->Wasteland(v Pos Bloom) Terror->Edict (v Black weenie, Centaur) Choking Sands->Rain of Tears (v Black) Wildcat->Scragnoth (v pure blue) Stupor->Coercion (v fragile combo decks) Torch->Disentigrate (v Ivory Gargoyle, Necrosavant) For a deck designed to run COP:Red as a main deck card, altering the COP is an efficiency change, not a redundancy change. This is because the COP is not being used as isolated disruption, but a necessary brick in the Citadel. To add a COP:Red to a deck that cannot defend against Armageddon would count as an 'Dubious change', which I don't recognise as category! -Extreme measure changes This is both the recognition of existing cards that totally throw your deck mechanics (eg Hall of Gemstones kills a Pros Bloom deck) and counter-strategies that you must prepare to counter in turn (Sligh will use disencahnt v COP:Red). These are the most punishing changes as they recognise that your opponent may have the vital card or tactics that will control the battlefield. In most cases it involves 'boarding in an isolated card to deal with a fatal threat. Conversely, you might use a card that threatens a particular deck more severely than that deck itself threatens yours. A minor example of this is the use of Jinxed Idol in Sligh 'boards. And as we all know, chances are you won't see the card anyway. -Morphing or surprise changes When a deck has confidently controlled the board in the first game, you may elect to emphasize this control by playing heavy permisson in the following games to focus the game around your vital cards. These are significant changes as your deck is using different content and tactics to achieve the same overall aim. Pure surprise is pretty rare for tournament decks, but it invloves cards that effectively re-channel your deck into doing something completely different. The battlefield equivalent is an ambush, using your main deck as bait. This category of changes will unbalance your deck by definition, and is rarely advisable. Onto the questions, and some ways of thinking about the answers. 1) Do you build a deck, then make the board defensive vs other deck types? Why not 15 COP's? At this point I would go and consult The Art of War for the right saying, but I don't have a copy to hand here. All I need to say is that the 'board allows your deck to continue doing whatever you designed it to do orignally. The first job is to recognise what built in weaknesses exist in your deck. Don't consider the curent meta-game decks, but simply on what are the worst existing cards / tactics for your deck. If there are too many tactics that beat your deck, guess what? Start again. If you can neatly produce a set of 20-25 card alterations based on the categories noted above, you are in business. It is at this point that you can zoom in on actual existing meta-games and popular decks to reduce down to 15 cards that work best against the likely threats. 2) Do you make the 'board aggro vs certain decks? Or a combo of the best cards? Take care here. If I give myself a blood infusion from the best magic players, I will not become better myself; I will likely die. Your deck cannot be hammered into shape between games, it has to start off right. Morphing only works when your original deck 'works' first time. You can use efficiency changes to increase aggro, the problem being that the implied speed increase may not be supportable by your deck. Aggressive decks can be pushed to the limit to increase the chances of a quick win. The Jackal pup may fit into this category. 3) Do you 'board cards straight in your main deck to cover the "meta-game"? What!!!! you play with a COP red?!?! Not quite; your main deck may include COP:Red beacuse it is the best way to counter a large set of threats. The COP:Red may then remain in the deck because of the number of red decks you end up playing against. You may start off building a deck 'to beat' other popular decks, but at the end of the process that deck needs its own internal logic. 4) Do you ' board vs deck archetypes or specific cards or both? You make denisty and efficiency changes against archetypes, and extreme measure changes against specific cards. 5) Is it wise to simply stregthen your deck with the 'board? "I'll add my 3rd Wrath and my 4th disenchant." These are density changes, and they should be your main source of strength as they rarely cause imbalance in your deck. Theres nothing worse than not recognising your deck in later games. 6) What do you take out?!?! You tune your deck and now your expected to alter the delicate color or mana ratios??!!!?? Indeed. So don't. Stick to density and efficiency changes when you can. Move to extreme measures only when faced with certain death. Do not alter your tuned deck because you had a bad start. Just hold onto your cojones. 7) How much do you commit? "OH, your running Sligh... I was ready for you, I'll 'board in 14 cards! Game 2 I'll win for certain" I don't call that ready. Thats a morph, and it means you (the Sligh player) are already winning. You may want to consider briefly exactly WHAT he will bring in but relax, things are going your way. 8) Should there be an exact system, or plan. "vs burn I remove my Pups and add my Keepers" You should know why all of your cards appear in the 'board. You should consider Pups and Keepers to be effeiciency changes for each other. It does need discipline to say "although I won this game, his burn is definitely a factor so I will 'board for it". David Eastman