The Top 5 Decks to Beat in Early Strixhaven Standard

The Top 5 Decks to Beat in Early Strixhaven Standard
Professor of Symbology Art by Jason Rainville

Hello everyone! Every set release puts the meta in a state of extreme flux, new tech being unearthed every day, decks being discovered and discarded, it’s an exciting time to be playing Magic. Even with the chaos, there will always be a subset of decks that stand tall above the rest, cementing themselves as the pillars of their early Standard formats.

Today, we’re going to be talking about the top 5 decks that fill this role perfectly, especially for the upcoming Standard Metagame Challenge. Mind you, this isn’t really a tier list rather than the top 5 decks I’ve been seeing on ladder in the order of how good I think each is. Let’s get into it.

5. MONO RED AGGRO

Hall Monitor Art by Forrest Imel
Hall Monitor Art by Forrest Imel

Strixhaven sandydog Monored 

Creatures
4
Fervent Champion
3
Fireblade Charger
3
Hall Monitor
2
Conspiracy Theorist
4
Robber of the Rich
4
Bonecrusher Giant
3
Torbran, Thane of Red Fell
Spells
4
Frost Bite
Artifacts
4
Embercleave
Enchantments
4
Anax, Hardened in the Forge
Lands
2
Castle Embereth
4
Faceless Haven
19
Snow-Covered Mountain
Cards (60)
Sideboard (15)
1
Blazing Volley
2
Redcap Melee
2
Roiling Vortex
2
Scorching Dragonfire
2
Phoenix of Ash
2
Soul Sear
2
The Akroan War
2
Ox of Agonas

It’s hard to put Monored down, and if you’re sandydog, they’d have to take Red out of Magic to make him stop playing it. Not only is Monored one of (if not the most) popular deck, but it’s slowly becoming better positioned with Adventures decks in decline and Sultai Ultimatum and Rogues on the rise (spoilers!) Sandydog has been using two new Strixhaven cards in his build to great success: Hall Monitor and Conspiracy Theorist.

Hall Monitor is not a card I would’ve thought was playable, but leave it to the Monored master to prove me wrong. The ability is a bit pricey, but the option to stop Lovestruck Beast or Elder Gargaroth from blocking can easily make the difference between winning and losing.

Conspiracy Theorist is another really innocuous inclusion, but seems really nice thinking about it more. Robber of the Rich has always overperformed in Monored as it gave you a source of tangible card advantage, and Theorist operates in a very similar manner. Sure, Theorist’s ability also costs mana, but you have agency over what card you can pitch and subsequently recast making it a sure thing that you can net a card for 1 mana. 

I slated Monored as number 5 on this list as I believe there are definitely better options, but for someone who famously hates Monored, I do like the look of this list.

4. BOROS WINOTA

Blade Historian Art by Cristi Balanescu
Blade Historian Art by Cristi Balanescu

Boros WINota 

Creatures
1
Reidane, God of the Worthy
4
Selfless Savior
4
Usher of the Fallen
4
Professor of Symbology
1
Seasoned Hallowblade
4
Bonecrusher Giant
4
Skyclave Apparition
4
Blade Historian
4
Winota, Joiner of Forces
2
Kenrith, the Returned King
Spells
4
Shatterskull Smashing
Artifacts
2
Embercleave
Lands
4
Furycalm Snarl
5
Mountain
4
Needleverge Pathway
9
Plains
Cards (60)
Sideboard (15)
2
Reidane, God of the Worthy
4
Giant Killer
3
Glass Casket
2
Roiling Vortex
1
Inkling Summoning
1
Spirit Summoning
2
Ox of Agonas

FINALLY. I’ve been preaching the good word of Winota ever since she came out (post Agent of Treachery ban of course, I’m not a monster) and it’s her time to shine. As I talked about in the deck guide, the deck finally reached a critical mass of good cards to properly support the extremely broken 4 drop. I won’t reiterate what I went over in the Winota article, but the deck has been putting up consistent and impressive performances on both ladder and in tournaments. 

Why do I slate it as number 4 then? It’s still a relatively unexplored archetype and it’s going to need time to find the optimal list. Although the deck has been performing well, it’s hard to match the brutal efficiency of decks that have been pored over by thousands of eyes for months. That being said, keep an eye on Winota because I truly believe she’s going to keep making a big splash in this Standard.

3. TEMUR ADVENTURES (OBOSH)

Obosh. the Preypiercer Art by Daarken
Obosh. the Preypiercer Art by Daarken

Nathan Steuer Temur Adventures 

Companion
1
Obosh, the Preypiercer
Creatures
4
Kazandu Mammoth
4
Edgewall Innkeeper
4
Bonecrusher Giant
4
Brazen Borrower
4
Lovestruck Beast
4
Goldspan Dragon
Spells
2
Mystical Dispute
2
Saw It Coming
4
Alrund's Epiphany
Artifacts
2
The Great Henge
Lands
4
Barkchannel Pathway
4
Cragcrown Pathway
4
Fabled Passage
2
Forest
2
Island
4
Ketria Triome
2
Mountain
4
Riverglide Pathway
Cards (60)
Sideboard (15)
1
Redcap Melee
3
Scorching Dragonfire
1
Crush the Weak
2
Klothys, God of Destiny
2
Mystical Dispute
1
Prismari Command
1
Obosh, the Preypiercer
3
Ox of Agonas
1
Vivien, Monsters' Advocate

Although I recently talked about my preferred flavor of Adventures, Temur is still going strong both on ladder and in tournaments (especially MTGO challenges). Temur is still the same deck we all know and love from last season, but most lists are playing Prismari Command in the sideboard now. I’m honestly unsure if they’re playing Command because they actually like it, or so people don’t think they’re lame for playing no new cards, it’s a toss up for sure.

Temur was easily the most dominant deck of Kaldheim standard, but with Strixhaven it’s grip on the metagame has definitely relaxed a bit. It has a solid matchup spread across the board, isn’t terribly hard to play, and it’s a relatively well positioned deck overall. My main contention with Temur has always been that it’s a rather clunky deck with a curve much higher than most of the other decks I gravitate towards.

With that, mulliganing becomes a lot more important as a lot of your hands that may look unkeepable for other decks are actually pretty reasonable for this one. Although I don’t believe the deck is too hard to play, it does require some real reps before performing well with it as you’ll have to get used to how a deck with a really high curve operates.

2. SULTAI ULTIMATUM

Professor Onyx Art by Kieran Yanner
Professor Onyx Art by Kieran Yanner

Strixhaven Juan Carlos Torres Sultai Ult 

Companion
1
Yorion, Sky Nomad
Planeswalkers
1
Professor Onyx
Creatures
1
Valki, God of Lies
2
Polukranos, Unchained
2
Elder Gargaroth
1
Vorinclex, Monstrous Raider
Spells
2
Jwari Disruption
1
Pelakka Predation
2
Sea Gate Restoration
2
Eliminate
4
Heartless Act
4
Cultivate
3
Mystical Dispute
2
Eureka Moment
1
Extinction Event
2
Shadows' Verdict
2
Alrund's Epiphany
4
Emergent Ultimatum
Artifacts
1
Esika's Chariot
Enchantments
4
Omen of the Sea
3
Wolfwillow Haven
1
Elspeth's Nightmare
3
Binding the Old Gods
1
Kiora Bests the Sea God
Lands
3
Barkchannel Pathway
4
Clearwater Pathway
3
Darkbore Pathway
4
Fabled Passage
2
Forest
2
Island
1
Ketria Triome
1
Necroblossom Snarl
2
Swamp
2
Temple of Malady
1
The World Tree
2
Vineglimmer Snarl
4
Zagoth Triome
Cards (80)
Sideboard (15)
3
Duress
2
Eliminate
2
Mazemind Tome
2
Test of Talents
2
Elspeth's Nightmare
1
Shadows' Verdict
1
Yorion, Sky Nomad
2
Koma, Cosmos Serpent

If you thought you could escape Sultai Ultimatum by introducing another set, you’re sorely mistaken. Sultai Ultimatum interacts with the rest of the metagame extremely well and has one of the most brutal end games in recent Standard history. No matter how far behind you are, an Emergent Ultimatum can undo all the work the other player was setting up. In that vein, it’s kind of like Ugin, the Spirit Dragon, but one mana cheaper and generally wins instantly where Ugin took a few turns after that. 

Although it seems like a very minor addition, Professor Onyx has been an extremely powerful addition to an already strong deck. First of all, her passive gave the deck much needed lifegain and another alternate win con option. There will be games where you never see an Emergent Ultimatum, so having more ways to win despite that is always welcome. The real reason for her inclusion is obviously her in Ultimatum piles! The deck didn’t have bad Ultimatum piles before, but it now has a new devastating option in Vorinclex, Monstrous Raider, Valki, God of Lies, and Professor Onyx. What this pile allows is you either get a 6/6 and a Planeswalker that can instantly ultimate or 2 Planeswalkers the other player will have to somehow grind through. Sometimes you don’t need a lot from the new set to improve an already powerful archetype.

What I really like against Sultai Ultimatum is that it has such a reasonable matchup spread across the board. Even in it’s bad matchups like Rogues and Monored, with some good sideboard options and configurations, you aren’t even that badly positioned against them. That being said, I still think there’s one deck that rules above all, but thankfully, I don’t think it’s so good it’s oppressive either.

1. DIMIR ROGUES

Soaring Thought-Thief Art by Lie Setiawan
Soaring Thought-Thief Art by Lie Setiawan

Strixhaven Rogues 

Companion
1
Lurrus of the Dream-Den
Creatures
4
Merfolk Windrobber
4
Ruin Crab
4
Thieves' Guild Enforcer
4
Soaring Thought-Thief
Spells
2
Agadeem's Awakening
1
Disdainful Stroke
4
Drown in the Loch
2
Eliminate
2
Heartless Act
1
Didn't Say Please
2
Mystical Dispute
2
Of One Mind
4
Into the Story
Lands
1
Castle Locthwain
4
Clearwater Pathway
4
Fabled Passage
6
Island
3
Swamp
3
Temple of Deceit
3
Zagoth Triome
Cards (60)
Sideboard (15)
2
Cling to Dust
2
Dead Weight
1
Negate
3
Skyclave Shade
2
Test of Talents
1
Lurrus of the Dream-Den
1
Mystical Dispute
3
Crippling Fear

This was true in Kaldheim and I think it’s still true now, Rogues is just an obscenely good deck that seems to be well positioned no matter what. Only really sporting two bad matchups in Monored and Cycling, Rogues is excellent at kicking in the teeth of any clunky deck daring to go against it. Despite receiving nothing from Strixhaven it’s particularly interested in playing, Rogues still has the power to cement itself in the top tiers of the Standard metagame.

Although I think Rogues is the best deck and it clearly sees a lot of play, I think this is one of the few examples of a healthy best deck. Why? It’s really good, but has foils to it that aren’t unplayable decks in other matchups (Monored and Cycling are both good decks). Furthermore, realistically most decks can beat Rogues if it really wanted to. If you happen to be playing a red deck and are struggling against Rogues, just add in a bunch of Phoenix of Ash and Ox of Agonas into the sideboard until it isn’t. You don’t want to go too hard on Escape creatures? Scorching Dragonfire is a versatile and excellent option against Rogues. Playing a deck with Black? Elspeth's Nightmare is cheap and backbreaking against Rogues in general. Shadows' Verdict exiles their entire board and prevents their Lurrus of the Dream-Den from netting anymore value than it needs to. How can you help your Verdict resolve? Duress is a great card in a multitude of matchups and shines against Rogues as well.

I know there’s a lot of general Rogues hate amongst the community and the deck can definitely be frustrating to play against, but I’ll take Rogues any day over past Standard’s best decks like Simic Oko, Jeskai Lukka, Jeskai Fires, Temur Reclamation, etc.

Thank you for reading! If you like this content and want to see more of it, you can check out the official Twitch! Have a great day!

DoggertQBones

Robert "DoggertQBones" Lee is a streamer and high ranked Arena player. He has one GP Top 8 and pioneered popular archetypes like UB 8 Shark, UB Yorion, and GW Company in Historic. Beyond Magic, his passions are writing and teaching!

31 Responses

  1. Mansonian says:

    “and if you’re sandydog, you’d have to pry it from his cold, dead hands to make him stop playing it”, I am a bit embarrassed by your comment here considering the situation of Sandydogmtg in real life.

    • DoggertQBones says:

      I was using it as a turn of phrase for how much he loves Monored, but I edited that section. Absolutely meant no offense to sandydog, he’s a master of his craft

    • John says:

      You’re just looking to start controversy. No one brought up Sandydogs condition until you did.

      The only thing embarrassing here is you.

  2. ugh says:

    “but for someone who famously hates Monored”
    Get over yourself. You’re not that famous.

    • DoggertQBones says:

      Think you’re reading into it a bit much. I don’t believe I’m at all famous, but I mention in a lot of my Standard articles that I don’t like Monored. If someone reads a lot of my articles they would probably see that pattern with me. Furthermore, why would someone who wants to be famous try to do that in Magic? Why would I voluntarily give up my screen name so I can use mtgazone on Twitch? You can have whatever opinion you want about me and maybe I’m writing in an unclear way, but I think you have the wrong impression of me.

    • BDH77 says:

      Wow came here for the great info and discussion in the comments. I found the great info but the discussion is toxic. where’s all the hate coming from? This article is well written and is full of good info for all players. I happen to have a large amount of disposable gold at the moment and a not to shabby win rate. So I plan on taking this info and applying it to my side board strategy. I hate mono red and rouges as well. But I’m not apposed to playing them in tournaments as long as they pull a decent win rate. But what I’m really looking for is that sweet off meta deck that will destroy all the meta net decks. maybe its something new like silverquill. Any one have any recommendations?

  3. Zlof says:

    Thank you for the excellent write up! Can’t wait to see where the Meta goes from here.

  4. FroggyStyle says:

    What’s with all the hate in the comment section?? This is a great informative article that DoggertQBones clearly took a lot of time to write, for the benefit of everyone (including the haters in the comment section). The only embarrassing thing I see are the people who are using this useful article as a forum to make rude, crass, and quite frankly untrue attacks towards the author, which have absolutely no holding or relevance in MTG, the MTG community, or the content in the article. One of my favorite quotes: “if you’ve got haters, that means you’re doing something right.”

    • Ugh says:

      Doggert has a pattern of awkwardly cramming every possible reference to his card preferences, past decks, and people he knows into his articles. You’re right, free informative content is a good thing and many of Doggert’s articles include some great info. I’ve said as much in past comments on his articles (though DoggertQThinSkin still deletes them). I’ve also acknowledged that he had seemed to be getting better on this front, until lately. Personally I just prefer when the author writes more about the game and less about himself.

      • FroggyStyle says:

        I can definitely respect that. I firmly believe everyone is entitled to their own preferences/opinions, and furthermore should be encouraged to voice them in the appropriate manner (as long as it’s not toxic and creating unnecessary controversy). And just like it is our prerogative to feel certain ways about authors’ writing styles, they have that same prerogative to write how they want to.

        PS my comment was actually not directed towards yours, I actually read your comment as more of a lighthearted joke/tease.

      • DoggertQBones says:

        If someone reads a lot of my articles, you’re establishing a relationship of sorts with the author. If I talk about my past card preferences and past decks (which is to help cross market my other articles and make then rediscoverable for anyone who wants to read them), then you get to know me better and understand where I’m coming from more clearly. Whenever I reference other people, it’s either I’m crediting them for decks and ideas or particularly referencing my friend Chris who has been the only reason I play competitive magic at all and has completely shaped the way I approach it. Next, I’ve never deleted a single comment, if your comments were deleted they violated our Terms of Service and were deleted by someone else. Feel free to disagree with me or call me out when you think I’m incorrect or out of line, but it’d be better for everyone if you did it in a more civil way.

  5. ugh says:

    Doggert, you write good articles and you brew some great decks. It’s true I’ve been a bit harsh in my criticism, but honestly there are some things about the way you write that rub me the wrong way sometimes. And based on the other (now deleted) comments on the Mystical Archive article, it seems I’m not the only one (by the way, that article was *much* better after the edits – maybe some of my criticism is getting through despite my lack of civility? Regardless, good work on the changes).
    I think the “cross market” term actually kind of hits the nail on the head in terms of what irks me. It just seems like you’re putting all this effort into establishing cred or building a brand, and it’s a brand that seems to include an air of superiority, whether you mean for it to or not. It comes off like you’re trying too hard, almost like you’re insecure about it (I don’t know if you *are* insecure about it, it just reads that way). You’re right, like you said above, I *don’t* know you and maybe I do have the wrong impression of you, but I do know you’re writing and that’s how it comes across. Or maybe it’s just a me problem, but that’s how I take it. But how your reader takes it does matter.
    Look, if you’re going to be the deck building guy around here (and like I said, you’re *killing it* on that front, all due respect) then making a lot of the guides you write all about how *you* were right about a certain card or how *you* came up with a certain archetype (Winota, 8 shark, etc… you get the point) makes them a lot less enjoyable. You gotta realize how much less fun it is to play somebody else’s deck when that somebody else is all about reminding us how *they* are the ones who came up with it. The thing is, in MTG, you’re never really the first one to do something. It’s a group effort. And that’s what irked me so much about the Mystical Archives article, it just really seemed like you were writing with a lot of disdain for the everyday player – your very audience, in fact (again, pre-edits. Post-edits I have very little issue with that article).
    It’s good to hear you’re not the one deleting comments. It was frustrating on that Mystical Archives article to see you reply, then craft out a response of my own only to see the original comment (some of which were mine, many of which were not) wiped. Also yeah, the name dropping Chris in a lot of your early articles is exactly what I was referring to, but it’s nice to see that’s died down a bit 😉
    I’ll try to be more civil, I really will. If I have criticism I’ll try to make it constructive, or just keep it to myself. I hope it’s clear that I do appreciate a lot of your content here. I also think there’s room for improvement. I’ll try to keep my frustration in check and my comments a bit more balanced from now on.

    • Ugh says:

      Also, kudos to you for editing the sandydog. I didn’t see the article prior to Mansonian’s comment, but it sounds like it was a completely innocent mistake. Still a good edit though.

    • DoggertQBones says:

      I really appreciate this response and this is something actionable I can work with. The Mystical Archives article was definitely phrased poorly and I did take what you and the others said about it seriously. At the time I was frustrated because they felt more like toxicity rather than criticism, but I even went to my Discord to try and figure out where I went wrong there. Once I identified the potential issue I went back to fix it because the last thing I want is the reader to feel that I’m talking down to them.

      I never personally thought of the cross marketing thing as problematic, but I definitely see your point there. To be honest, I was never trying to take all the credit or shove in people’s faces how I got there first, rather just wanted people to both: potentially read an older article that may interest them and help further promote mtgazone. I can see now how the line between me trying to promote mtgazone and looking like I’m trying to self promote is extremely thin. You could be right that I may be overdoing it there, but that’s my way of trying to give back to a website that took a chance on me when they had no reason to.

      Magic is absolutely a collaborative effort and I do my best to give credit to whoever inspired my ideas when I know the origin. Even with 8 Shark and UB Yorion I think I talked about what jump started the ideas as you’re 100% right, it’s not like I came up with them with 0 input from anyone else. GW Company as well I directly credited fireshoes for the base which I never would’ve thought of if I didn’t see him do it first.

      I’ve talked about this on stream before a good amount, but I firmly believe I am completely naturally talentless at this game. Only through time, patience, guidance from Chris, and help from the community was I ever able to become a decent player to begin with. I’m more than convinced I was worse than nearly any other Magic player at one point and I feel like I really understand the climb to improve from someone who can’t play to someone who has a little bit of success at Magic. Now, all I’m trying to do is be the person I wish I had access to all the years before I had Chris’s help. I do best with direct and concise information so that heavily influences my writing style, but there’s a thin line between being direct and being a jerk, a line I certainly crossed accidentally a few times.

      I’ve been frequently asking the people around me to check the tone of my articles since the Mystical Archives one so I’m trying to make improvements there. To be honest, nobody else has really seen it the same way as you have (from my circle), but that doesn’t mean nobody does. In fairness, they’re viewing it through the lens of how they perceive me through streaming and not knowing me just from my writing. I will work to improve how I’m conveying the information because the absolute last thing I want to be thought of is condescending or self-important. I hope I haven’t put you or anyone else off my articles or mtgazone in general with improper tone. If I haven’t, I hope for you to keep me honest in the future because I still have so many things I can improve on and perfect. Thank you for taking time to engage with me, I appreciate it a lot more than you probably realize.

      • Ugh says:

        Cheers, Doggert (Bob? Robert? DQB?). I appreciate you engaging with me as well and I think I see you better now. I was way too quick to judge, something I’ve been guilty of plenty of times I’m sure — the internet makes it easy to do, but that’s no excuse and it’s something I need to keep working on. Basically, I had some minor frustrations with some of your early content that mostly went away as you became more comfortable here and found your sea legs, but then it all boiled over with that one article. I definitely let that article get under my skin more than it should have though, and that’s on me (okay, I think I’ve mixed enough metaphors for one paragraph tyvm).
        Giving back to the website – that makes sense! I never looked at it like that but now that you put it that way, I’ll buy it, definitely. It is a thin line, and one to be aware of, but I’ll try to be a bit more forgiving now that I see the other side of it.
        Naturally talentless? If that’s true then props to Chris for getting you to where you are, and to you for being willing to learn – you’re a far better player than I ever will be. Your brewing is inspired and I genuinely do appreciate your deck guides. I think I’ll be able to enjoy them more now that we’ve had this chance to understand each other better. As for thin line between being direct and being a jerk, well, from this response it’s clear you’re not one, not really. And I’m sorry for being one myself.
        Some of my critiques still stand, but my tone was uncalled for, as were any toxicity, personal jabs, etc. If I have any suggestions to offer in the future I promise I’ll play nice. And I’m sure I’ll find some positive things to say here and there, too!

        • DoggertQBones says:

          Thank you so much. Chris is absolutely insane and he’s a better teacher than he gives himself credit for. I was legit dumb as a rock and he had to mold me into a decent player which was a miracle in itself, but I guess its not too bad when you’re one of the most naturally gifted players ever (he’s been insane since he was a kid). I reference him so often because I’m so thankful he was willing to invest time in me rather than “look at me! I know an MPL player!” I really appreciate you trying to help me out and make me better, I want to always be 100% proud of everything I put out and I can only do that if I’m honest about my faults and look to improve. I take everything that people say very seriously and I hope I can implement these changes so I don’t convey the wrong tone again. Please keep on top of me with ways I can improve and I’ll always take it into consideration.

  6. Good Game says:

    Thank you
    Thank you
    Thank you .
    I’m relatively new to magic and had many victories up until recently. This article has been really helpful in showing me why I’ve suddenly lost most of my matches on MTGA. I’m going to take your advice here about side-boarding- altho i don’t really know how side boarding the works…. guess I’ll find out!

  7. Guilherme says:

    It’s very interesting how you guys keep ignoring Jeskai Cycling

    • DoggertQBones says:

      I wouldn’t say ignoring it! Honestly I had Jeskai in the original 5 but I was torn on how I would juggle the last two spots with Winota, Monored, and Cycling. I’ll admit my bias probably made me opt for Winota, but I think Cycling is a great choice as well.

      • Guilherme says:

        Hahahah got it :p

      • Alfy says:

        Mmmhhh, I think you let your wishful thinking get the better of you. I honestly don’t know how good Winota, for the simple reason I have yet to play against it. On the other hand, there’s plenty of cycling out there, and it remains a dangerous deck. If we’re going by decks “to beat”, I would see cycling in and Winota out.

        Of course, that might change shortly.

        • DoggertQBones says:

          You very well could be right. My rationale is that this was decks to beat rather than a tier list. With that, if there’s a high incidence of decks I’ve been seeing on ladder then that’s something you need to be capable of beating. If this was a top 5 standard decks right now then I would agree that putting Winota at number 4 would probably be a mistake, however its a new deck so a lot of people are playing it. Personally I’ve seen a large amount of Winota both for me and a lot of the streams I follow, but not as much cycling

  8. Matt C says:

    This is a very helpful article for us folks who don’t have time to study all the new cards and play a bunch of games.

  9. IzzetLife says:

    Informative article for someone like me who has been taking a break for the past few sets.

    Ignore the haters in your comment section. Writing how you personally feel about the cards makes it feel like part of a conversation instead of sterile statistics, and I appreciated it.

  10. Mathiue says:

    I like how people that are coming here for information are talking shit lol as somebody that likes to build decks and play magic you are kinda proud when you build a good winning deck. My old team and I built a PPTQ winning deck that I piloted and we were all proud of it. Fucking do something in life yourself other then wallow in your own failure and you might respect this man more!!

  11. Just a guy says:

    Comment section has shown that the worst fans of magic the gathering are its players.

    Needless to say, great view of standard decks

  12. Critic says:

    Anyone who can honestly write that their okay with Rogues being the top deck obviously isn’t worth listening too.

    • DoggertQBones says:

      Why do you think that? There’s always going to be a best deck and although Rogues can be very frustrating to play against, there’s definitely a reasonable amount of counterplay and decks that are good against it. Maybe in a historical sense Rogues is a frustrating best deck, but if we’re taking the past few years into account, this is a lot better than most other situations.

      • Ugh says:

        I too have been annoyed with rogues at times, but reading your writeup actually helped me come to terms with the deck a bit. Your point about there being a lot of different counterplay and rogue-hate options, both in terms of decks (red and cycling) and cards (ox, dragonfire, etc) available is a good take, I think.

  13. Guile McFernis says:

    Thank you for your view of the top-level on the format. Unfortunately for me (and I think many people), Eldraine still infects standard. That being said, I also fret its disappearance (along with TBD) – since so many of its (their) cards keep Rogues in Check.

    When rotation happens, based on current meta, Rogues will take over the format. I have gotten tired of Wizards making cards that reward you for just playing Magic. When Zendikar brought back Landfall, I was very much turned off from the game. At least Teferi’s rotates as well, so people stop getting rewarded for having a draw step.

    Now, with it apparent that nothing in Kaldheim nor Strixhaven will effectively keep rogues in Check, I just have to “Enjoy” (barfs in mouth) Eldraine a little longer.

    • DoggertQBones says:

      Completely understandable. However, once Eldraine rotates Rogues will lose Thieves’ Guild Enforcer, Drown in the Loch, and Into the Story which is their 3 best cards. I can’t imagine that the archetype will survive without all those. That being said I don’t blame anyone for being burnt out with Eldraine, it’s warped the format since day 1 and has felt like we’ve been playing the same cards for years (because we kind of have). I think the Standard format is healthy as it stands, but Eldraine is definitely overbearing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *