Well! It seems people actually enjoyed my first article! I may just make a habit of writing these, though I do hope this warm feeling isn’t heartburn . . .
One of my friends (who only plays Magic infrequently) was wondering why, in my previous article, I took lands over actual cards in the last few picks of each pack. The answer to this question is really part of a larger issue concerning signaling and defensive drafting, but is rather simple in itself: I take the land because I would rather see my opponent play the non-land card than a basic land. In other words, in a deck of 23 spells and 17 lands, any of the cards I had passed would be worse than an 18th land. They’re just so bad that they aren’t worth playing, so it’d be more in my opponent’s interest to hit their land drops than to cast those almost-last-pick spells. Giving an opponent an opportunity to make their deck worse, even if most players will never consider playing those awful spells, is often to my advantage. Since I am giving my opponent(s) a chance to disadvantage themselves, it is like I’m drafting defensively.
Another reason to take basic lands over poor spells near the end of a draft pack stems from my belief that the presence of a color in one’s picks constitutes a signal, even if the cards themselves aren’t playable. Players will still have an unconscious impression of the availability of that color. Of course, this effect is probably negligible, but there’s almost no risk involved; good players won’t play these cards, and players bad enough to include them in their decks shouldn’t give one trouble to begin with.
A third reason is that, in some cases (such as the full-art lands in Zendikar and Worldwake), the lands are actually more valuable than the commons by a fair margin.
So there you have it: draft lands.
The Drafting!
I’ve been thinking of the possibility of playing blue in Infect. The real reason to do so is the new Control Magic, which we were lucky to have passed to us fairly late. We decide to run it with the help of a Spellbomb, choosing the power of the card over the consistency of a more stable mana base. Since none of our cards have many green mana symbols in the upper right, we can afford to do so.
Notes on the Deck
As you’ve surely noticed by now, O Reader, I have a habit of playing more than 40 cards. This has less to do with my inability to cut than it does with an attempt to achieve a better land/spell ratio. In this deck, since our curve is relatively low, we really want to play sixteen lands. Unfortunately, if we’re going to be greedy with the Corrupted Conscience (we are), we really need that extra bit of sturdiness in our mana base. 24/17 is a compromise between 23/17 and 24/16.
Looking back, I think it was a mistake to not run Flight Spellbomb. Cycling effects are always playable, and Flight is most potent on the splash in Infect, for the added reach it provides at such low cost.
Another thing: Flensermite > Phyrexian Digester. As fragile as the ‘Mite is, Digester is an artifact creature with a toughness of 1; in other words, it is the most vulnerable creature in the set. The only way it could be hit by more removal would be if it had flying, but then it’d actually be good. In contrast, Flensermite occupies the all-important 2-drop slot, avoids the plethora of artifact removal, and has Lifelink (life gain is usually at its worst ever in this format; however, since most tables only support two to three Infect decks, the player with the Flensermites is much less likely to play against Infect than a damage-based deck).
The Fighting!
Round 1, Game 1
-We’re on the play.
-We keep. This is a fine hand, if a little land heavy. Our deck doesn’t need more than four lands to win a game, but we do have all our colors, and 2-drop into 3-drop with removal is too good to throw away.
-We come inches from winning several times, but our opponent topdecks answers and we topdeck lands. It happens.
-There’s nothing to board in, but we think about cutting land. If the trend continues, we certainly will.
Round 1, Game 2
-We’re on the play.
-We keep another fine hand, this time with considerably more reach in the form of life gain, removal, card advantage, tough creatures, equipment, and a perfect mix of lands. Not bad at all.
He never had a chance.
Round 1, Game 3
-We’re on the play.
-We mull, 6 lands.
-I don’t love this hand, especially on the play, but it’s still better than a random five. Hopefully we’ll find a Swamp and Rot Wolf will give us some advantage.
-We win with Untamed Might for exactsies with 0:17 on the clock
Cha-ching
Round 2, Game 1
-We’re on the play.
-We snap keep so hard, while the other guy (OG) tanks for 3 minutes . . .
We have an interesting decision here, and one that should be familiar to any Infect aficionado: which 2-drop do we play first? We can eliminate the option of playing Mamba first, as its value rises as the game progresses when we can afford to regenerate it. On the one hand, Stinger is less likely to be blocked, but we’d much rather Flensermite eat any removal. If I knew my opponent’s colors, the decision would be simple (if blue/red, Flensermite since those colors have burn and flyers to deal with Stinger), but being that a forced re-log precludes us from the benefit of replays, we opt for the more conservative play: playing Flensermite first.
The game progresses, as we build up the board with Mimic Vat, Heavy Arbalest, and assorted creatures. The game shouldn’t have been close, but OG had a little surprise for us:
This is a problem.
Nevertheless, OG is forced to block our Lifestaff’d Stinger with the second Demon, which in turn gets shot with the Heavy. OG draws and concedes.
Something we need to keep in mind: one copy of a bomb suggests we play around; two demands it. In order to win this match, we need to make certain that we can handle at least one Carnifex Demon at any point past Turn 6. Concordantly, we’ll be evaluating our hands with that particular goal in mind. We board in a few Islands and a Fuel for the Cause as another answer to stupid, stupid Demons, and out with the mana-greedy Mamba.
Round 2, Game 2
-We draw.
-This is not a great hand, but keepable. It fulfills our prerequisite of Demon killing, with the Heavy Arbalest. We really, really want to draw a Swamp by Turn 2, but it won’t cripple us to draw any other land.
-We lose from a winning position to flyers and a well-timed Exsanguinate. I guess people actually play the card (this isn’t quite fair of me. Fireball is Fireball, and one of my pet cards from Rise is Suffer the Past. Admittedly, that card is an instant and has other applications, but Rise is better in general. ;)? ).
Round 2, Game 3
-We’re on the play.
-We keep — light on action, but all our colors and value cards, including the all-important Arbalest.
We gain the advantage against his weak draw, but pause when this situation comes around:
Uh-oh.
Luckily, it’s just a Neurok Invisimancer he was tapping for. He equips the 2/1, and passes. We untap and draw land. We immediately equip the Heavy to the ?Mite to kill his Invisimancer, but what to do next? Specifically, do we use Wing Puncture to clear his blocker, or save it for his bomb? In either case, the correct play is to equip Lifestaff to Cystbearer, either in order to limit his blocks, or to avoid waiting for Septic Rats‘s trigger to resolve for shooting the flyer. Let’s assume he does play the Demon next turn, and, just to be safe, let’s assume he’ll have another land for activation. If we save Wing Puncture, he’ll be at 5 Poison, with a 2/2 flyer (if he uses the activation, we Puncture off Cystbearer in response. We’ll deal 3 damage, he’ll ‘prevent’ 1). However, if we shoot down his Spy now, we leave him at 8 Poison, putting him in the almost impossible situation of having to deal with almost every non-land permanent on our board, and Carnifex Demon won’t do that by itself. We go with that plan.
He untaps, plays his ‘bomb’ (as expected), passes and takes some Heavy in the face.
On Splitting: I’ll always take the split if offered politely; however, I’ll only occasionally offer it. Part of why I enjoy draft is because I get to play decks I create, unique to that event, so the more I play, the better. Games of Magic are, after all, what one pays for. The exceptions are the times I need to run off somewhere, and sometimes my deck won’t be all that strong. This isn’t one of those times, and besides, I want to cast Corrupted Conscience, dammit!
OG is playing RG Dino with Meliras Keepers as a problem and Thrun, the Last Troll as not much of a problem at all.
Round 3, Game 1
-We play.
-We keep a mediocre hand with all three colors and a few removal spells. Now, I want to point out why it’s only mediocre; though it contains all our land types, alongside some powerful spells, this hand does absolutely nothing to win the game. If we don’t draw a creature with infect, and soon, then we’re going to be in a fair bit of trouble. I wouldn’t fault anyone for sending this hand back (in retrospect, I believe doing so would have been the better move).
-We putter out, drawing lands while he plays dinos. After he hits a Lead The Stampede for five, we decide we’d rather risk losing the round in two games than time out.
Round 3, Game 2
-We’re on the play.
-We keep. It’s missing Forests but we might not need them to win. Our opponent shows us the first mull of the draft.
The game progresses with a fair back and forth, leading to this game state. We’ve just drawn Corrupted Conscience for the first time in eight games. There’s a whole lot of fat just waiting to stomp us; what do we do?
The question is really, what do we play around? I’ll explain: if we play the Conscience this turn, we become vulnerable to any enchantment removal he may have. I’d much rather save it to remove a blocker (if we do cast it, the correct target is the Juggernaut; tapped creatures don’t block very well, but neither does Juggernaut — he’ll just equip the Keepers and swing, forcing us to chump). We need to cast Spread the Sickness this turn on one of his creatures, killing the Molder Beast. Between his ability to cast any of the large creatures in his deck, and the presence of a Contagion Clasp on his side of the board, we’re under quite a bit of pressure to win quickly. We decide to kill Big Juggs, allowing us to get in and put him at a crucial 8 poison. If we were to destroyed the Keeper, we’d have to leave an extremely vulnerable blocker, and we’d lose to Predatory Instinct as well (a high pick for this deck). This way, we’re not at all open to removal, as any creature can be a lethal threat, especially with the Heavy. In fact, there’re only two non-rares in the format that win it for him (Kuldotha Flamefiend and Untamed Might). Unfortunately, he’s got one of them:
Oh well.
So. Did we punt the draft? In order to answer that, I have to talk a little about poker. In that other card game of Finkel’s, there’s a phrase: “decisions, not results.” Basically, in any given situation, there is a Correct Decision, based on the entirety of information available at the time. Since one can’t know all the information (the other hands at the table, the order of the deck, etc.), the Correct Decision doesn’t always win. However, that doesn’t make it any less Correct; one will win more often with the statistically correct course of action than with trying to guess. If there is a 10% chance of drawing the Swamp I need to make a given hand playable, I should mulligan. If there so happens to be three Swamps on top of my deck after I make that call, so be it? — that doesn’t make the mulligan any less the Correct Decision. This is why many players refuse to look at their top card when mulliganning; it just doesn’t matter, and will only lead to outcome bias (when one’s brain only remembers a certain set of outcomes, and uses that as a basis for future decisions. Babe Ruth may have hit the ball where he pointed, but who remembers all the times he didn’t? Likewise, I ‘called it’ the time I opened Jace, The Mind Sculptor, the same way I probably ‘called it’ the twenty times I didn’t. The point is, I don’t remember those failings, but I do remember the success, and I still believe I’m half psychic).
Given the information available, we’ve effectively reduced his odds of winning as optimally as we could have done; this, that he won anyway, has no bearing on that. We might have gotten lucky if we made the oversight of ignoring the statistics, but one should never expect to get lucky when Magic is involved. It makes for bad habits, and gets in the way of good ones.
Like winning 
Happy drafting!
Oh, and some notes:
-Bombs are most powerful when the board state is best affected by their effects (including, sometimes, Infect). Just as a good control player plays to his strengths, one can also play against those of the opposition. Sometimes all one needs to beat a deck is to beat a card.
-Playing Blue in Infect is certainly a valid strategy. Having a few Spellbombs helps, but any excepting the most aggressive decks should be able to support a splash, and Control Magic certainly warrants at least that.
-Untamed Might is stupid. By this, I really do mean to say that it’s an idiotic card: It’s completely overpowered in Infect, and the way the format is structured almost precludes its play in other decks. It just comes out of nowhere. Fireball should not be common.
I would have taken the Myr for first pick. You really commited yourself with the rats. Of course that would have made a completely different deck. The one pick I really don’t understand is Tel-Jilad Defiance over Infiltration Lens. You didn’t even put it in your main deck! Infiltration Lens practically makes any one of your creatures unblockable or provides a huge card advantage.
I gained respect for Tel-Jilad Defiance as a high-value sideboard card recently; with living weapon (or the general power of equipment in MBS), it can have a very substantial effect on the board state!
I tried to use it a few times and I always had to waste it. On the other hand, Infiltration Lens was always awesome or annoying when my opponents had it, especially in infect. Especially if you have repeatable proliferate, then it is awesome. The opponent waits till his turn to kill Flensermite with a sorcery instead of blocking it, and then you have the very important first poison counter in.
I also think that Infiltration Lens is a very good equipment in an infect deck. It forces your opponent either to block, resulting in amazing card advantage or let your creature pass which is obviously also a desired result attacking with rather small critters.
Nice walkthrough, keep them coming.
I feel like TJD provides an opportunity to blow out an opponent that’s simply lacking with Infiltration Lens, but I would’ve been on the fence between these two cards, as well.
@ milegyenanevem:
I wouldn’t fault anyone for picking the Myr out of preference, but it really is the weaker card. I believe that the greater part of flexibility is the willingness to switch commitments, and not the unwillingness to commit at all. Thus, I’ve no troubles whatsoever taking an early gamble, because I can always switch out later. Scars, more than most formats, supports this style of drafting, because so many decks share the same cards, and five cards constitutes a main color. I’ve won an 8-4 Draft handily after being logged off for the entire first pack.
As for Infiltration Lens, the card is just bad. It doesn’t have any immediate effect (or really any at all) on the board, it doesn’t make the creature any more difficult to kill, and it does, and I cannot stress this enough, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING from a defensive position. It’s a card that is only effective when its controller is already in an attacking position, which, in Infect, is almost always a winning position. Also, most Infect decks will want to attack with multiple small creatures, so it’s no trouble to just block the unequipped ones. Lens is actually far more potent in Dinosaurs, or at least in Infect builds with Vatmother, Hydra, or Tangle Angler, and I didn’t have any of those.
Proliferate, while a great support mechanic for the Infect archetype, should not be one’s primary game plan, at least in the aggressive decks that are (seemingly) interested in Lens. I have seen a (very) few Infect-Control decks, however, but those have no interest in the Equipment since they rely on evasion, removal, and card advantage.
Tel-Jilad Defiance, on the other hand, is _always_ playable as a cantrip. Furthermore, as ChrisKool has pointed out, it can be quite the blowout against equip-heavy and Metalcraft decks.
Great walkthrough sir! I’ve been talking up the little mite now for weeks as people have been hating on it hard. 2 drop infect 1/1 is fine, lifegain? Sure, why not? The way I explain it is if you go first and play it on turn 2 and swing, bing! 1 poison. They play mana myr, you swing and no one wants to trade their mana myr for that guy! Bing! 2 poison. If they do trade, great, it took a 1/10th of their life total and killed an important mana duder. Slap an equipment on that guy like a Claw and now he’s a crazy threat. I’m also not a fan of Lens for the same reasons you said, I like TJD much more as it’s a combat trick much of the time that draws me a card.
Keep em coming, you are much better at these than I was.
@ oma:
*tips hat* Thankee-sai.
You should remove that bit at the beginning about taking a land and passing “bad” cards, that’s terrible advice, especially in Scars.
This is a format where people audible drafts late and sometimes have difficulty finding enough playables, and sending someone a late gift instead of a land can make or break a deck. This is especially true since almost no cards are unplayable (except echo circlet), I’ve run caustic hounds, golden urns and rally the forces to great effect. What card in p1p1 is unplayable?
@ drn:
My argument wasn’t that the cards I pass are useless, just that the consistency provided by a higher land count would be better for the deck. I apologize if that wasn’t clear.
I agree with most of what you said. Septic Rats is great in an infect deck, the Myr is good in – well, in any other deck basically. So I see your point in picking it. Also agree that proliferate should not be the first plan, although it is always good that whenever you proliferate, you are closer to finishing the opponent.
But still, Infiltration Lens is great in any infect deck. If you have plenty attackers, then it doesn’t really help, but then you win anyway. It is great at the beginning, when you don’t have too many creatures (you can be in an attacking, but not winning position easily at the beginning of the match). But it is best when both players have many creatures. Normally nothing would happen, if you attack, then you just trade a creature. But with the Lens! You attack with one of your creatures, so you don’t even risk too much. If he blocks, that’s 3 for 1. And it’s not useless when you are in a defensive position. If you attack, the opponent probably blocks because he is afraid of an Untamed Might. With some bluff you can have two chances to topdeck the card you need.
@ milegy
Doubtlessly, Lens is better against weaker players; but that isn’t exactly a compelling argument in its favor. True, it will push through stalemates, but that situation is all too rare in Infect match-ups. Usually, if one deck stops attacking, the other starts. Hmm. An example, perhaps: Whenever I see an opposing Lens, I’m almost always fine with ignoring it. It just means my opponent has one less card I have to worry about. If I’m Infect, all I have to do is use that +1 card advantage to establish an earlier alpha force, putting my opponent on defense and nullifying their Equipment. If I’m non-Infect, I’ll just race anyway, killing the equipped creature when necessary.
The card is best when one’s opponent wants to block, to preserve their life total. This implies that they can’t afford to take the damage and swing back, which in turn means one is already winning. A card that is best when one is already winning is not one I value highly.
I wasn’t gonna answer again, since there is no point in repeating the arguments, but one thing caught my attention. You say Lens is better against weaker players. I suppose you are talking about my bluff idea. But that’s not how bluff works. If they think it is a bluff, then they lose in other situations when it is not.
Suppose you are in a defensive position, your opponent just tapped out to put more threats to the battlefield, you have 3 infect creatures and an Untamed Might in your hand, he has 5 creatures. You attack with a Plague Stinger. He will gladly block it with his Glint Hawk. You can use your Untamed Might to kill it and save your creature, and that’s it. Now if you have Lens equipped, you have two chances to draw the blockers/removal you need. If he thinks it is a bluff, it’s even better: you win. If the non-weak opponent always thinks it’s a bluff, then the card reads: equipped creature is unblockable. Pretty good, huh?
Of course there are many assumptions for this scenario. If the opponent has mana and instant speed removal, then you are doomed, but then you are doomed anyway.
If you play aggro and dont want to block anyway, then of course it is useless for your opponent. But if you do want to block, you won’t, and that’s pretty good from such a cheap card.
Hello everyone,
while I usually try to stay out of heated discussions (not sure why, actually….) I would like to add my two cents to the “Infiltration Lense” debate. I consider myself a decent drafter and have played my fair share of Mirrodin block drafts. Not as much as I would like but I do think I have a good grasp of the format. Personally I will usually play one Infiltration Lense in a poison deck if I don’t have everything chock full of bombs and removal- which happens rarely. The reasons for me are mostly:
1. Infect creatures are usually small and love the ability to stay unblocked.
2. Opponents often make the mistake to block equipped creatures to early/late.
3. If you have Tangle Angler along with multiple blockers it’s usually game over.
4. The disadvantage of not being very useful in a defense position holds true for many cards in the formats.
I like Tel-Jilad Defiance as it is often a very flexible card with many applications but I do feel I would have played the Lens. I can understand that players have different preferences which makes it so much more interesting.
Keep up the good work
@ milegy:
I guess I wasn’t understanding your points very well. I apologize.
Still, thanks for commenting!
@ Plejades:
Your points are good, concise, and cogent. I appreciate the contribution, but would you mind deliberating on the fourth one?
Lens is insane in infect, and all of the 1-drop equipment should be reasonably high picks if you are in the archetype. Darksteel Axe is obviously the best, followed by both lifestaff and lens, and then copper carapace is solid but unspectacular.
Because the infect curve includes no 1 drops (ignoring vector asp) you want 2-3 of these equipment to allow you to curve out. Lens and Lifestaff are also fantastic due to low equip cost, so you can play another 2 drop on 3 when you equip and still increase your board presence. Lens’ cheap cost to play and equip and infects lack of evasive creatures makes it an auto-include in these decks.
People tend to vastly overrate cantrips. TJD is decent filler or a good sideboard card, but not something I would strive to play.
Also, I just went over your picks, what was the thought process behind lifestaff P2P2 over Rust Tick? Not only is Lifestaff common and likely to show up later, but Rust Tick is just a better card, it can play defense or tap down multiple artifact defenders/lock down problem artifacts. I have never cut Rust Tick from my 40.
@ drn:
Why do you say cantrips are overrated?
Lifestaff was the better card for the deck. I will never be unhappy with a Lifestaff in my 7 (or even two or three of them, so if I get another later, great!), but Rust Tick requires that the opponent control an artifact worth tapping. While that condition isn’t uncommon at all in this format, it is still a restriction, where Lifestaff simply needs a creature to hold it.
I don’t believe I’d cut Rust Tick from the deck either, but I wouldn’t pick it over Lifestaff while drafting Infect. In that deck, the ‘Staff almost becomes Bonesplitter with a bonus, and I can never have too many of those.
I don’t know what to tell you, Rust Tick is a power uncommon, allowing you change targets and get problem artifacts under control in any color combination. It is usually a 1-3 pick, especially in decks that do not have a lot of artifact removal, like yours, just 1 Sylvok Replica.
Sylvok Lifestaff is a mediocre common, made slightly better in an infect deck trying to race a non-infect deck. Lifestaff is also playable only in aggressive decks with lots of low cmc creatures, Rust Tick is playable in literally every deck in the format, all the time. The two cards aren’t very close. Darksteel Axe (bonesplitter) is a much more defensible pick over Rust Tick, and probably correct in infect.
As far as cantrips, I just think people overplay useless spellbombs/TJD/Wellsprings even when they have no upside as useless filler, etc, when they could be playing impact cards. It may be right to side out Lens for TJD against a super aggressive metalcraft deck, but playing TJD over lens in infect is wrong far more than it is right.
@ drn:
Shall we agree to disagree? My goal here isn’t to convince anyone – I’m just trying explain my reasoning, and I hope I’ve done that at least.