I HATE Triumph of the Hordes

[3drinks]

Wow, are Dirk and I actually on the same page? Hell has officially frozen over.

Look, Infect is a pretty fair mechanic because if you build into it, you are stuck with some very overcosted and underwhelming creatures (no one is calling for a Flensermite ban, naitch), and so if someone is going into Triumph, it's a stand alone. Meaning all you have to do is block it down to 9 damage. A Marsh Gas adjacent card can do that, I'm pretty sure there's a few of those at instant. Scars of the Veteran|all can invalidate a big part of the attack if you even have a single Scryb Sprites to block one, and costs no mana. That's all it takes because there's often no further infect support (proliferate can be seen coming and takes time + mana to get it going, which can handily be interacted with). Ultimately, this makes Triumph just bad Overrun without any further support, you're just salty because you read the word "infect" on the card and want to blame something "unfair".

If any infect were overpowered, it'd be Tainted Strike anyway which quite literally comes from nowhere at next-to-no cost. I'd be understanding of some salt coming from that angle, sure. But this four mv overrun-lite effect? You got beat man, just accept it as a lesson learned for next time. It's not the end of the world. It's not like we're on the Pro Tour playing for a six figure purse...

[DirkGently]

Wow, are Dirk and I actually on the same page? Hell has officially frozen over.

I don't think it's THAT uncommon tbh. I seem to remember you saying the same quip once or twice before.

We do agree on the big picture, but I do have a few quibbles on the finer points.

A Marsh Gas adjacent card can do that, I'm pretty sure there's a few of those at instant.

While that's true, I don't think it's all that helpful to point out unplayed cards as solutions. Teferi's Protection, maybe Moment's Peace, those are answers that someone might actually play. It doesn't matter if there are 500 variations of marsh gas, nobody is going to play marsh gas.

Scars of the Veteran|all can invalidate a big part of the attack if you even have a single Scryb Sprites to block one, and costs no mana.

Trample can go over the top of damage prevention on the creature. The attacker is not obligated to assign more than 1 damage to the scryb sprites, no matter how much damage prevention is on it.

Also, nobody plays scars of the veteran (except me in 2002 before I knew wtf I was doing).

You don't need to reference terrible, unplayed cards though - Force of Negation is a good 0-cost answer obviously, as is Snuff Out or Obscuring Haze. And of course there are many 1-cost removal spells that can easily throw off the combat math.

(proliferate can be seen coming and takes time + mana to get it going, which can handily be interacted with)

Yeah, I definitely don't agree with this. How are you going to interact with Experimental Augury, Brokers Confluence, Tezzeret's Gambit, Karn's Bastion, etc?

That said, if they're not playing an infect deck, but just using triumph as an overrun-type wincon in an aggro/midrange deck, probably they don't have proliferate just to synergize with their 1 infect card.

If any infect were overpowered, it'd be Tainted Strike anyway which quite literally comes from nowhere at next-to-no cost.

Getting through 9 damage from a single creature is, I would argue, a fair bit tougher than an overrun effect. People tend to pay attention to creatures with 9 power. Being an instant isn't terribly relevant since it's all happening on an opponents turn either way (it does allow for an assisted kill, but in terms of the defender's interaction options it's the same difference - really the defender has much better interaction since presumably one removal spell solves the entire issue, whereas an overkill attack from triumph might overpower removal). It matters insofar as you won't know what's happening when assigning blockers, but people tend to block 9-power attackers even if they don't have infect.

[yeti1069]

Ultimately, this makes Triumph just bad Overrun without any further support, you're just salty because you read the word "infect" on the card and want to blame something "unfair".

Ignoring the tone of your response, I disagree that Triumph is a bad Overrun--as I said earlier, normally you need to be getting in for somewhere between, say 60 and 120 damage over blockers for an Overrun to end the game, assuming there has been no life gain. Triumph needs 30 damage over blockers. It also costs 1 less than Overrun does. Now, sure, Overrun provides an additional +2/+2, but starting from full life, you're looking at requiring 1/4 the damage compared with 3x the buff.

While Triumph doesn't come up super-frequently, I see it often enough to be annoyed, and in nearly every case that I have seen it, it has won the game or taken out a player or two in a way that most other Overrun effects wouldn't have.

If any infect were overpowered, it'd be Tainted Strike anyway which quite literally comes from nowhere at next-to-no cost. I'd be understanding of some salt coming from that angle, sure.

If I saw Tainted Strike regularly, I might have an issue with it, too. I've made a conscious decision not to include it in some decks that could easily knock out the table with it.

[illakunsaa]

I think fogs are very underrated. I've been playing various kinds of turbo fog lists and I've had great success with them. Most decks primary wincon is combat dmg and if you take that out they kinda have nothing left.

[pokken]

I think fogs are very underrated. I've been playing various kinds of turbo fog lists and I've had great success with them. Most decks primary wincon is combat dmg and if you take that out they kinda have nothing left.

Tis true that Constant Mists has a disproportionate winrate. I have been wondering if maybe this is too much of a meta call.

I'm debating rebuilding a Purphoros, God of the Forge adjacent deck personally because people have really been going hard on combat hate lately, WOTC as well

[RxPhantom]

I'm tired of being tired of things. Sure, Triumph can be annoying, but at least we can shuffle up, play a new game, and know what's coming.

[NZB2323]

I think fogs are very underrated. I've been playing various kinds of turbo fog lists and I've had great success with them. Most decks primary wincon is combat dmg and if you take that out they kinda have nothing left.

Tis true that Constant Mists has a disproportionate winrate. I have been wondering if maybe this is too much of a meta call.

I'm debating rebuilding a Purphoros, God of the Forge adjacent deck personally because people have really been going hard on combat hate lately, WOTC as well

Yeah, I feel like every combat deck should have an answer to fogs. Every color has an answer in Purphoros, God of the Forge, Gray Merchant of Asphodel, Counterspell, Grand Abolisher, or Dosan the Falling Leaf. Just like how every color has an answer to Triumph of the Hordes. Settle the Wreckage, Teferi's Protection, Counterspell, Sudden Spoiling, Starstorm...um, I guess green doesn't really have an answer unless I'm blanking on a card.

So I guess you have 3 options for deckbuilding. You could build a super aggressive deck that has no answers and tries to kill everyone. Like Edgar Markov, and you race to kill people before they can kill you with Triumph of the Hordes. And you don't care about fogs because of Purphoros, God of the Forge, Impact Tremors, Sanctum Seeker, Malakir Bloodwitch, Blood Artist, Cruel Celebrant, Throne of the God-Pharaoh, and Goblin Bombardment. People don't really like playing against these decks.

Or you could build a control deck, but people don't really like playing against those either. Nymris, Oona's Trickster, Sarulf, Realm Eater, board wipe tribal, ect. but people don't really like playing against those.

So the third option is a middle ground. Battlecruiser, but with interaction. This is where I try and land with deckbuilding. Like my cleric tribal deck is primarily an aggro/midrange deck, but to overcome fogs it has Elas il-Kor, Sadistic Pilgrim, Skemfar Shadowsage, and Sorin Markov. It can be annoying losing to poision, but against Triumph of the Hordes it does have instant speed removal, board wipes, Yawgmoth, Thran Physician, Grave Pact, and Battletide Alchemist, which I guess is kind of like a fog.

Some people complain about Grave Pact, but I feel it's necessary to have it as interaction, especially against hexproof, indestructible creatures, or a just a scary board state. There was one time I was playing against a Galea, Kindler of Hope deck that scooped to my Grave Pact, but I didn't feel bad because I feel like Bant should have an answer, the guy has beaten me with infinite combos before, and he's my friend. I did power down afterward though. Some people, in general, complain about Tymna the Weaver, but I'm running her with another Orzhov commander in a cleric tribal deck with no infinite combos, no mass land destruction, no extra turns, no stealing people's creatures, ect. If people really hate my deck I can power down to my Neheb, the Worthy minotaur tribal/discard deck, which is battlecruiser with some control, and if people really hate that I can power down to my Edric, Spymaster of Trest commons only in the 99 deck, which is aggro with some answers.

[Avacyn Believer]

I haven't read the whole thread (too many posts to catch up on ) so don't know if someone took the devil's advocate position but I felt like sharing my experience with infect. I used to dislike it but in recent years came to appreciate that it is one of very few mechanics that does consistently finish games, which means time for more games! That said I do prefer when the player with infect uses it to finish the game, not just eliminating one person, that can be frustrating for sure and I'd make a case its not really in the spirit of casual play.

If the card is a problem in a playgroup I always advice to talk to the people in the playgroup to come to a better solution than everyone building decks to counter each other.

[Moxnix]

Lots of my decks kill with hoof and typically if I'm doing devastation over 10 its getting hoof to double down on the effect. I feel like its one of the more fair optimized ways I win as opposed to just jamming reservoir into every deck and colorless tendrils killing everyone. I feel like hoof and these kinds of cards are mostly for me at least used so much do to how good lanowar elf + gaes cradle shell is. Its good to ramp mana turn 1 and when green has tons of llanowar elves and cradle I feel like these strategies will always feel strong but if I lose I'm laying it at the foot of cradle and elf over the hoof because it doesn't matter if that's followed by rift or hoof or triumph the issue was how fast they flooded and abuses mass bodies on the field. I think people don't pack as many wrath of gods anymore and they should. Turn 4-5 wrath used to be a common thing a deacde ago im not quite sure why I see so much less now but ironically the boards is see are more creature infested than ever I'm surprised I don't see more instead of less. I also think players are greedier with removal as well much lower spot removal counts for creatures they still pack 1cc removal for sol ring but I don't see dorks getting sniped turn 1 nearly as often anymore. I put gollums bite in my sons smeagol deck and killing the mana dork turn 1-2 has been pretty damn good when we have played.

[yeti1069]

Lots of my decks kill with hoof and typically if I'm doing devastation over 10 its getting hoof to double down on the effect. I feel like its one of the more fair optimized ways I win as opposed to just jamming reservoir into every deck and colorless tendrils killing everyone. I feel like hoof and these kinds of cards are mostly for me at least used so much do to how good lanowar elf + gaes cradle shell is. Its good to ramp mana turn 1 and when green has tons of llanowar elves and cradle I feel like these strategies will always feel strong but if I lose I'm laying it at the foot of cradle and elf over the hoof because it doesn't matter if that's followed by rift or hoof or triumph the issue was how fast they flooded and abuses mass bodies on the field. I think people don't pack as many wrath of gods anymore and they should. Turn 4-5 wrath used to be a common thing a deacde ago im not quite sure why I see so much less now but ironically the boards is see are more creature infested than ever I'm surprised I don't see more instead of less. I also think players are greedier with removal as well much lower spot removal counts for creatures they still pack 1cc removal for sol ring but I don't see dorks getting sniped turn 1 nearly as often anymore. I put gollums bite in my sons smeagol deck and killing the mana dork turn 1-2 has been pretty damn good when we have played.

Hoof is 8; Devastation is 12. And they need to get you to somewhere between 90 and 120 damage, usually. This is 4, and you only need to get to 30 damage.

As for picking off dorks...I find it hard to commit removal to a minor tempo play when there are 2 other opponents to worry about. A 1 for 1 trade in commander should have more of an impact.

[Moxnix]

The way I see it is I assume they run cradle and green decks need big mana to go off if I'm not in green sniping the dork should set them back a turn but not me. As far as mana cost I'm aware they cost more but when I can make a deck that consistently kills you t4 with hoof due to the nature of green tutors mana dorks and cradle why am I afraid of a card that's only tutored with non green cards when they amount of bodies they need on field already makes cradle pump to win off any of the other cards? Practically both cards kill on the same turn and one is super easy to find even in mono green. The other one is randomly drawn which is why its played less its randomly useless then not Tutorabale when you need it the lower mana cost doesn't even seem to be relevant in any of the decks that want to kill that way. Lets say they do have a tutor with 5 bodies on the field early and its black I still want them to grab triumph and get blown out by a counterspell. Sure it can kill people for small mana but at what cost maybe it feels bad to receive but I can't see trading the consistency of slaming hoof off any number of creature tutors when one of the main enablers is Zediker anyway as the guy trying to win that way it doesn't even seem good to me.

[yeti1069]

The way I see it is I assume they run cradle and green decks need big mana to go off if I'm not in green sniping the dork should set them back a turn but not me. As far as mana cost I'm aware they cost more but when I can make a deck that consistently kills you t4 with hoof due to the nature of green tutors mana dorks and cradle why am I afraid of a card that's only tutored with non green cards when they amount of bodies they need on field already makes cradle pump to win off any of the other cards? Practically both cards kill on the same turn and one is super easy to find even in mono green. The other one is randomly drawn which is why its played less its randomly useless then not Tutorabale when you need it the lower mana cost doesn't even seem to be relevant in any of the decks that want to kill that way. Lets say they do have a tutor with 5 bodies on the field early and its black I still want them to grab triumph and get blown out by a counterspell. Sure it can kill people for small mana but at what cost maybe it feels bad to receive but I can't see trading the consistency of slaming hoof off any number of creature tutors when one of the main enablers is Zediker anyway as the guy trying to win that way it doesn't even seem good to me.

I'm rarely playing at tables that are running a reserved list $1000+ land in every green deck, nor with the expectation of a turn 4 win.

Also, if the green deck is closing in on 8 mana with a field full of attackers, then yeah, that's a clear and present danger, even if there are few threatening attackers. Again, though, Hoof needs a wider board, more mana, and has to climb a steeper hill. In half the situations where I've died to Triumph, Hoof wouldn't have done the job/was unavailable due to mana constraints.

[Moxnix]

Well I'm 34 not only am i in a stage of life where cars and home remodels worry me more than magic cards but when I got all these cards when they didn't cost nearly so much my time twister was a birthday present when it was still 250$ also I play a lot on MTGO and most those cards are like 10$ Also in paper we allow proxies in fact half my decks are all proxies not because I don't own the cards but because I don't want to move them about or play the expensive ones and damage them. Even if I put myself on a budget I could consistently kill people turn 5 with hoof if I really wanted to I think it would be much harder with triumph as I would pretty much have to use black or blue tutors to find it. Even from a casual players perspective the ability to get to the card when you need it is infinitely more valuable than the low mana cost of the infect card as situations when its better from my experience paying the format since 2007 are rare and what are then odds you just have it then? I don't think I've lost a single game ever to this card I cant remember the last day I played on mtgo and didn't see craterhoof end a game. Maybe the card is more scary in your specific meta but I have never seen it do anything. Also likewise if its a lower power meta i bet you end up winning more games doing things like jamming more mana elves or staples than trying to go for cheesy wins with this. Then again maybe mtgo has bias me with people tagging games casual and killing you with lions eye Diamond loops on turn 3 XD. Which socially is interesting people never have an issue with sol ring if cradle was 2$ I'm betting it would be played just as much based on my mtgo experience. Also creatures can get cheated out more easily Natural order is hoof at 4 reanimates exist etc. I just legit think its a way stronger card.

[yeti1069]

Well I'm 34 not only am i in a stage of life where cars and home remodels worry me more than magic cards but when I got all these cards when they didn't cost nearly so much my time twister was a birthday present when it was still 250$ also I play a lot on MTGO and most those cards are like 10$ Also in paper we allow proxies in fact half my decks are all proxies not because I don't own the cards but because I don't want to move them about or play the expensive ones and damage them. Even if I put myself on a budget I could consistently kill people turn 5 with hoof if I really wanted to I think it would be much harder with triumph as I would pretty much have to use black or blue tutors to find it. Even from a casual players perspective the ability to get to the card when you need it is infinitely more valuable than the low mana cost of the infect card as situations when its better from my experience paying the format since 2007 are rare and what are then odds you just have it then? I don't think I've lost a single game ever to this card I cant remember the last day I played on mtgo and didn't see craterhoof end a game. Maybe the card is more scary in your specific meta but I have never seen it do anything. Also likewise if its a lower power meta i bet you end up winning more games doing things like jamming more mana elves or staples than trying to go for cheesy wins with this. Then again maybe mtgo has bias me with people tagging games casual and killing you with lions eye Diamond loops on turn 3 XD. Which socially is interesting people never have an issue with sol ring if cradle was 2$ I'm betting it would be played just as much based on my mtgo experience. Also creatures can get cheated out more easily Natural order is hoof at 4 reanimates exist etc. I just legit think its a way stronger card.

Hoof is a stronger card, but I don't think it's feels as bad as Triumph for all the reasons I've mentioned. Also, MTGO is a cesspool.

I don't have a really regular meta, but in games at the LGS and dozen or so games I play/week on Spelltable, Cradle shows up almost not at all outside of specifically high-powered tables, and if someone goes for a win before turn 6, there's going to be some serious conversation happening about relative power-levels. I get some salty looks when I drop Hoof to finish the game in my Kadena deck, but I usually have 10+ morphs out that no one has tried to remove (or, occasionally, have tried, but were stopped. It would be rather trivial to knock one player out by turn 6 with Triumph, whereas Hoof isn't going to even dot hat so early, usually.

[Moxnix]

Maybe I'm out of touch with a meta that casual even when I first started playing back before around 2007 we were getting turn 6-8 kills and I didn't own any power then though I did ramp into and tutor tooth and nail to win as soon as possible. I still think I can kill a single player in my mono white human tribal deck on turn 5 playing no expensive cards and just playing 1 human a turn hitting one guy if no one wraths and they don't play many creatures I consider that a casual deck. I just don't think its a good card in any setting and if that's too good then I can think of 1000 other things that are worse they could be doing. I've seen hordes less than you've seen cradle which I guess goes to show nothing is universal in this format. I cant argue with it feeling bad but to me it also feels bad just a different kind of bad which maybe is unfair its maybe one of the only playable overruns in the format but when hoof is so much better when you own any staples it just doesn't see any play. I legit see hoof every day I play in paper with my buddies or online. Also I think budget and causal are separate things but for younger players I think they are linked in their minds. On mtgo even if I'm getting smashed budget players hate seeing me play money cards even if they are no good in current board state or their decks is generally better than mine. I Dunno maybe it sucks in your meta but I don't even see it cast. Ironically since I own all the powerful cards it would cost me more to build a budget deck than play with power. I also disagree that its trivial you have to find the card green cant tutor for it so now you need black or blue better with both. Now you need a high creature count token goes wide type cards backed by mana dorks then you have to get them on field have no one kill them get the kill card and have it not get countered all while not dying to whatever everyone else is doing. Even then say I'm playing mono white human tribal if dropped rick turn 5/6 I have a wall of huge blockers I'm not dying so easy. Like it just doesn't seem that good to me.

[Treamayne]

May I ask your native language?

Maybe I'm out of touch with a meta that is casual. Even when I first started playing, back around 2007, we were getting turn 6-8 kills; I didn't own any power then (though I did ramp into and/or tutor for Tooth and Nail to win as soon as possible).

I think I still can kill a single player with(?) my mono white Human Tribal deck on turn 5, without playing expensive cards - just playing 1 human per turn and hitting one guy, if nobody Wraths and that player doesn't play many creatures. I consider that a casual deck.

I just don't think it's (Triumph of the Hordes? - pronoun missing antecedant) a good card in any setting; and, if that's too good, then I can think of 1000 other worse things that they could be doing.

I've seen hordes less than you've seen Gaea's Cradle, which I guess goes to show that nothing is universal in this format. I can't argue with it (TotH, Cradle or Hoof?) feeling bad. However, to me, it also feels bad (just a different kind of bad) which maybe is unfair. It (TotH?) may be one of the only playable Overruns in the format; but, when hoof is so much better if you own any staples, it just doesn't see any play. I legitimately see 'hoof every day I play, both in paper with my buddies and online.

I think budget and causal are two separate things, but I think they are linked in the minds of younger players. On mtgo, even if I'm getting smashed, many budget players hate seeing me play money cards - even when those cards are not good in the current board state or when their decks are generally better than mine. Ironically since I own all the powerful cards it would cost me more to build a budget deck than play with power.

I dunno, maybe it sucks in your meta, but I don't even see it cast. I also disagree that it's trivial to find a card that Green can't tutor; so now you need black or blue (better with both). Now you need a high creature count (token goes-wide type cards backed by mana dorks) then you have to get them on the field, have no one kill them, get the kill card, and have it not get countered - all while not dying to whatever everyone else is doing.

Even then say I'm playing mono white human tribal if dropped rick turn 5/6, I would have a wall of huge blockers and I'm not dying so easily. Like, it just doesn't seem that good to me.

Sorry for the SPAG check, but after a few readings I still couldn't quite unravel your points without editing. I'm still not sure I interpreted all of the points correctly, If I am understanding correctly, you are saying that you think Triumph of the Hordes isn't a threat because it requires a go-wide strategy and Hordes is not a card for which Mono-G can tutor? You also say that you don't think it is a good Overrun variant (possibly because you do not play it, nor do you see it played)?

I don't think anybody is trying to say that TotH is better than Craterhoof Behemoth, and I cannot speak for others in this thread (have you read all of the first page? - your comments imply you have not) - but one of the problems with TotH is that it does not need a large board presence (tall is as-good or better than wide in this case). A few trampling fatties are enough to eliminate one or more players out of nowhere because of the nature of Infect as a mechanic. While Craterhoof is overplayed (but generally stronger), TotH feels worse because it can come from nowhere with a non-threatening board-state. As far as tutoring is concerned - I cannot think of many decks that would try to make this "Plan A" (maybe Fynn, the Fangbearer?) so it's not a matter of somebody tutoring for it - which only adds to the "out of nowhere, anti-climatic ending" feel.

And if you have not seen Triumph of the Hordes often on MTGO, then you likely drop early in many games or have a caln or circle of friend to play with often. While I would not say I see it "often," I do see it regularly on MTGO, and have most months since the card debuted. Not a staple by any means, but common enough in the crowd of people advertising games as "casual," "5-7," or other nonsense that the pubstompers use to decide what games to target for their ego-propping behaviour.

[Moxnix]

No most of them wrong but that makes sense I'm terrible in text I'm a speaker I've never typed very well. the first is just "that casual" as in even when I was a complete noob my tables killed faster and used better cards curves etc. Almost any of the edits make what I was saying different so no its pretty much all off XD. Maybe that's why I don't really play at the 5-7 tables even if I play what I think is casual those players are always salty if I own more expensive cards and even my casual decks IMO are closer to 7 based on what the people on mtgo tend to think that more often means . Maybe its because 5 is really 1-2 since no one ever posts 1-5 and the metric is just random and arbitrary every time XD. I've played thousands of games on mtgo I can't remember losing to that card a single time. I don't think it comes out of nowhere at all it requires on board things to work that can be interacted with and it can be interacted with and its not easy to grab at the time you want it. If I have creatures I block if I swords I kill if I have counter I counter. Tall seems much worse than wide and then just a general infect gripe as then its just a terrible tainted strike. I feel like even when I'm trying to come up with made up scenarios I struggle to make the card any good. Like if I don't have creatures like they do to block and I don't play instant removal or counters or wipes what have I been doing all game while they set up the one shot?