​Robogoyle Ban or rework

    • VicMan wrote:

      Goliathus wrote:

      VicMan wrote:

      Goliathus wrote:

      adjust to LV when LV is still in standard" or "adjust to Titania's Majesty"
      Yes I agree Robogoyle and those two card are completly in the same power level... oh wait !

      Goliathus wrote:

      I can also say "you can adjust to Candle in Rock"
      And the problem is of course the same in another format.
      Not the same, but talking and bullshiting is easy, like you did.
      Let me develop a little.Robogoyle is a 3/3 fly that can maybe come turn one only if you mill turn 1 and if the card is on top and obviously after sideboard because I don't think someone "normal" would play that card maindeck.
      You compare that to Titania majesty who make game end turn 3 or 4
      And you compare that to Lazgar Vengance who just push aggro over the top in constructed and make a metagame polarized into aggro LV and hard control.

      So yeah I think you are ridiculous.

      Come with serious argument because until now there is none.
      Thats one way for a hate card to work it could also shuffle your entire crypt into the deck every time it goes to the crypt. Would you preffer that because i would accept that change to robogoyle personally.

      If free cards are always great you should play the mi'go mulch mill deck instead gets you lifegain and carddraw very good stuff as well as free troops.
    • Wolzarg wrote:

      Thats one way for a hate card to work it could also shuffle your entire crypt into the deck every time it goes to the crypt. Would you preffer that because i would accept that change to robogoyle personally.
      If free cards are always great you should play the mi'go mulch mill deck instead gets you lifegain and carddraw very good stuff as well as free troops.
      You mean if I bury and bury and bury and then if Robogoyle is buried(or killed from the field), the whole crypt goes back to the deck? Good bye to those decks that uses mill as their primary wincon. They might as well not win because the goyle can just infinite loop the crypt to oblivion -- like FRA Nulzaan. By that I would like to request "Aggrogoyle" that pops up from deck whenever someone swing in with 5 or more creatures and heal for 10 with. "Chargegoyle"(giving it a 1/1 body since it dealt damage) that pops up whenever someone use 7 more more charges in a turn and deal 1 damage per charge use. I mean, we are talking about rendering a whole archetype useless by 1 card, right? Those Aggrogoyle and Chargegoyle can be removed as well, seems fair. They are also free body and costs nothing, like Robogoyle. Maybe a Controlgoyle as well, maybe 2 or 3 interrupts a turn and it will pop up and interrupt the last interrupt. Oh, just to be fair, only 1 Goyle will trigger at one time, cuz I am a fair man and 4 at once would be ridiculous.

      But let's get back to Robogoyle. Using your proposal, I would be fine if Robogoyle first entered hand after bury and get a discounted cost. Again, I have emphasize this many times, make it cost something(1-3, whatever, just have a cost). Then if it is killed and entered crypt, THEN the crypt is shuffled back and the Robogoyle is voided(so you can't reshuffle crypt more than once per Robogoyle -- 4 Robo still gives you 4 shuffles, that's not too bad if you can keep it not killed early). Okay, this is cool. This means it costs something and I decide when to reshuffle the crypt. Also a lot of play decision because if I attack, opponent can sac Robogoyle with a block and yada-yada. So opponent might not want to blind-hit my face with a 3/3. Your proposal does increase the amount of decisions involved around Robogoyle and has reduced tempo to the current iteration. So, I am up for it. However, there's some problems with your proposal. Discarding a Robogoyle or interrupting a Robogoyle would shuffle the crypt, isn't that a little bit too OP? There are no hate card that will still do his job after being interrupted or discarded.

      Mi'go mulch seems great actually. I did not play Mi'go now because it's the era of control(so less troops to bury) and void(Winter's Grasp is the bane of Mi'go) and I am still thinking what kind of mill deck to fit it in. But I would point out that Mi'Go isn't free unless discarded(hey, maybe it's a good tech card against B/W-with-troop and mono-B). It costs 3 to cast initially. Mulch also costs 3 to put down onto the field and then 2 per activation. And again, you need Mulch and Mi'go in hand(so, draw them first or draw a crypt recursion card for Mulch). Robogoyle-popping-from-crypt needs not from hand and costs 0. Still some difference in cost.
    • I'm sorry, I was harsh (or brutal don"t know how to say) but I still think that "Robogoyle ban or rework" is a non-sense.

      First, yes I have a mill deck and ues I faced Robogoyle and I don't mind it, just because I made my deck capable to respond to it (Herofall) and to race the opponent with damage.

      Second, when I was talking about change your mainplan to adapt to robogoyle, I was reffering to this :



      Yes it's a video about MTG (oh my god ! he post a mtg video) but the subject is good and the same in hex. I advice you to Watch it. It basicly say that there is two level of sideboarding. Level one is to adapt to the deck you face and the level 2 is to adapt to the sideboard of your opponent.
      In your case adapt to Robogoyle means have sideboard card specifcly against robogoyle or like I say change your mainplan and let your opponent have a 3/3 flyer for 5 ressource and lose a card
      Because unless some poeple think, robogoyle cost something, because you put them in your deck instead of another card, that change a lot of thing.


      Like I say earlier control deck don't have a lot of way of killing you, if they lose that you win.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by VicMan ().

    • (a)I don't have extensive MtG knowledge to reply with technical proficiency, so pardon any mistake. But a simple google search of "mill vs emrakul" has given me a lot of answers, from Leyline of the Void(all card goes to void instead of crypt, anti-synergy with mill payoff card here though; although I would point out that Closed Coffin would be amazing and similar card here, except it is out of standard), Stifle(counter triggered ability. Well, we don't have counter-deploy card, if your idea is that 100% copy-paste is the way to go), Surgical Extraction(MtG's Brink of Madness, but better against Emrakul there because Emrakul actually has a trigger while Robogoyle does not. I would be so happy to mill a Robogoyle just so I can Brink away all of them, but I can't unless I kill it first, that's another card spent unless I Herofall it). Also, I see that in Legacy, there's an infinite mill deck with Painter + Grindstone, and it can beat Emrakul by forcing opponent to draw card while Emrakul's trigger is still on the chain. Well, can't do it here with Robogoyle, nor do we have the milling power to infinite-mill a deck away. I also find a competitive modern mill deck writeup and his conclusion is to not play mill deck in the modern competitive environment because it isn't good enough. If Emrakul is here, I would assume the same thing. Thus, Emrakul isn't a good hate card as you said, as it would completely neutralize the archetype like I thought it would. In his analysis, he also mentioned the same thing as I did like mill is already weak against aggro(the hate card merely further the disadvantage) and Emrakul in control deck renders the MtG mill deck useless, even post-board. As you see, Emrakul is too strong of a hate card in MtG, at least in Modern, and I don't expect his anti-mill power to be less effective in a much smaller environment like standard.

      (b)More importantly, a card there =/= a card should be here. Despite some similar mechanics, these are still two different games. I expect different thing to be good and bad in both games.

      VicMan wrote:

      I'm sorry, I was harsh (or brutal don"t know how to say) but I still think that "Robogoyle ban or rework" is a non-sense.

      First, yes I have a mill deck and ues I faced Robogoyle and I don't mind it, just because I made my deck capable to respond to it (Herofall) and to race the opponent with damage.

      Second, when I was talking about change your mainplan to adapt to robogoyle, I was reffering to this :

      Yes it's a video about MTG (oh my god ! he post a mtg video) but the subject is good and the same in hex. I advice you to Watch it. It basicly say that there is two level of sideboarding. Level one is to adapt to the deck you face and the level 2 is to adapt to the sideboard of your opponent.
      In your case adapt to Robogoyle means have sideboard card specifcly against robogoyle or like I say change your mainplan and let your opponent have a 3/3 flyer for 5 ressource and lose a card
      Because unless some poeple think, robogoyle cost something, because you put them in your deck instead of another card, that change a lot of thing.


      Like I say earlier control deck don't have a lot of way of killing you, if they lose that you win.
      I would be happy to check out your deck if you can share it via PM or a link. And yes, Herofall solves everything, doesn't mean it alone is good enough. I can also say "Day Rider solves Scouring Light" but I doubt the actual games are that simple and easy.

      Secondly, I understand proactive sideboard even without the video. I am so proactive that I had brainstormed lists of 75 cards for bait-and-switch like mill game 1 and not mill game 2(so opponent plays Robogoyle for nothing) or not mill game 1 and mill game 2(so opponent does not side in Robogoyle for game 2). However, I don't think this has anything to do with the topic. We are discussing whether "Robogoyle is or is not too strong of a hate card" here, not "how to deal with this card(no matter its strength). Again, I can also sideboard accordingly against Candle in Rock, which I did and I am sure everyone in Rock did, even the Candles themselves, but that does not stop Candles for being good because apparently they are too much. So from the Candle example, we can see that something can still be too strong despite proactive sideboard just because they are simply too darn strong. Also, I know I have to learn to play against Robogoyle, doesn't mean I think the card is fine just because I have to adapt.
    • I hope ToS doesn't admonish necro'ing treads.

      I posted about this today, virtually verbatim, which is not a coincidence. There is plenty wrong with Robogoyle, and it appears ITT and among the player base not many players have extensive enough experience playing bury/mill to understand.

      I want to thoroughly emphasize the current meta sans Robogoyle has mill reasonably balanced and in a good position. This make Robogoyle an unreasonable answer to mill. This has been thoroughly covered ITT, so I won't go over it again, except what hasn't been mentioned, which is it's effect too easily eliminates an important threshold for mill which is the 20 card mark in the opposing crypt. The card affords the opponent enough time to find other answers, or comfortably allows them to execute their strategy without fear of being milled out.

      I'm suggesting the card be errata'd or reworked to allow for more interaction. As the card is now, it is simply too difficult to answer without completely abandoning your main strategy. I repeat, mill is a balanced archetype in the current meta minus Robogoyle.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by RemoGaggi ().