Pillow Talk MtG 18: All About Aggro

Welcome to Pillow Talk, the official competitive Magic the Gathering podcast of Team Pillow Fort! This week, Austin, Michael, and Josh talk about all things aggro. It's not the mindless archetype that people want you to believe! Check it out and see if you learn a thing or two. Thank you as always for listening!

Team Pillow Fort's Twitter: https://x.com/TPillowFortMTG 

Game Knight TN: https://gameknighttn.com/

Michael's (AKA cntrlfreak) Socials:
Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/the_cntrlfreak
Twitter: https://x.com/FetchAndShock
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/cntrlfreak.bsky.social

Transcript

SPEAKER_03 0:14

Welcome to Pillow Talk, the official podcast of Team PillowFort MTG. My name is Austin Walker, and with me today. What's up everybody, Michael Killerly. Alright, Michael. We got you joining us today, and we also have somebody else uh from the team that is going to be helping us talk a little bit about aggro. We're continuing our uh our mini-series that's all about the different archetypes, and today is aggro. So with us we have Josh Ayer. What's up, guys? Alright, Josh. So start start off by telling us how uh DC went for you.

SPEAKER_01 0:50

Uh well, uh DC didn't go good overall. Um I finished three and four, so I dropped out of round seven. Um deck I picked was uh the Momo aggro deck, and I felt great about my deck choice. Unfortunately, I kinda hit the the bad side of the matchup spread. Um was really hoping to play against a lot of prowess, the Mardu discard deck, even some landfall I found to be a very navigable m matchup, but uh yeah, I just played against a lot of blue-black, spellamentals, and other stuff that just stopped me. So good experience overall, but it was uh not a good result for me.

SPEAKER_03 1:35

Yeah, I wish I could have given you uh some of my matchups, but I I played against Prowess, the mirror. I was on Prowess 2, but I played against the mirror three times and lost all three times, so apparently I was not the best prowess player in the room.

SPEAKER_02 1:47

Yeah, I learned very quickly testing for Cincinnati that those uh those thunderflocks are no joke on the Momo side. Yeah, I hear that.

SPEAKER_03 1:56

Um so yeah, we're uh we're gonna be talking all about aggro today. Uh Josh, you've got some experience playing some aggro, yeah. I think I think every RC that I've seen you play almost, you've been playing some type of aggro deck, right? Yeah, definitely.

SPEAKER_01 2:10

In fact, up until probably just a few months ago, I had essentially played nothing but red aggro in standard for the past, I'm gonna say, three, maybe almost four years.

SPEAKER_02 2:22

That's more aggro than I've had in my system the last like 15 years.

SPEAKER_03 2:28

Please teach me your ways. What switched you off of the red-based aggro decks in standard?

SPEAKER_01 2:34

Well, the uh good red cards kept getting banned, that was one thing. Um there was a period of time there where we had some very, very good, efficient, uh, frankly overpowered red cards that um definitely needed to go. So that that was a factor, but it just kind of turned into you have a lot of decks with things like lightning helix, for instance, in the four-color control deck, which seems fairly innocuous. It's just uh three damage, gain three life for two mana, but it's things like that when they become very popular that are pretty hard for something like a red aggro, especially when it's been powered down to deal with. Like, ideally, you though those types of cards are always going to exist in any given meta, like efficient removal spells that have some sort of extra effect, but you don't have to worry about it at the scale that you have to worry about it right now. And um then the the biggest factor for me, kind of the final nail, was actually the Momo deck and other decks playing Sage of the Skies are really just white in general. There's a big uptick in those type of decks, and things like Sage of the Skies are just an absolute nightmare to try to deal with. And uh probably the other big linchpin, I guess I would say, would be the uh Eddy Merck Crab. Um it just turned what used to be a very solid strategy against those blue spells type of decks where you can board in like a mage bane lizard into you could have three mage bane lizards in play and it doesn't matter because they played three Eddy Merck crabs and still killed you.

SPEAKER_02 4:07

It's uh it's kind of crazy going through some of the standard deck lists and seeing like four copies of Sage of the Skies in the sideboard of the Selesnia landfall decks and uh ran like random four-color control decks and stuff like that. That card definitely seems like a nightmare for anybody really trying to push through damage to to kind of power through in the mid-game.

SPEAKER_01 4:29

It absolutely was a very slow car crash to watch happen, but when when the wreck finally occurred, it was it was big and I decided it was just time to hang it up for a little bit.

SPEAKER_03 4:41

Well, if I know wizards, I know that they're gonna push some more red cards soon, so hopefully we'll uh we'll we'll get some some good red aggro cards back in the mix.

SPEAKER_02 4:50

Lightning bolt and standard 2027. You heard it here first. I'm ready, I'm ready.

SPEAKER_03 4:56

Alright, so uh tell us about what aggro is. Like how would you define what the archetype aggro is?

SPEAKER_01 5:03

For me, aggro is uh all about consistency. So it's if you compare it to like historically a lot of other decks, it's generally gonna be just a bunch of four of put into a deck, mostly creatures, and then low mana curve with creatures that might be considered lower in quality overall compared to some of the other creature options that you have in any given meta, but their stats are solid and they can come down early and start attacking early as well, and that's kind of kind of the thing. Is it's just classic. Your opponent starts at 20, and your game plan is get him from 20 to 0 as quickly as you can using cheap, efficient creatures.

SPEAKER_03 5:48

So, where do you think the line is between aggro and mid-range? Because I I think that sometimes those lines can kind of bleed into each other a little bit. Um, so where where would you say a deck stops being an aggro deck and starts becoming a mid-range deck?

SPEAKER_01 6:02

I think the biggest difference is generally an actual true aggro deck is gonna have a very hard time not putting creatures on the board very early in the game, and there's of course gonna be some corner cases like there always is uh versus certain matchups, but you know, if I were to use mono red as an example, if you start your first two turns, two or three turns by doing nothing but playing a burn spell to kill a creature, and then playing another burn spell to kill a creature, that might seem good, but if you're not able to develop a board at the same time, because your creature quality generally is lower overall compared to something that say a mid-range deck would be able to play, you're just by the time you start putting creatures into play, you're kind of inherently behind because yeah, you killed two of your opponents' things, and then now you have a 2-2 on the board on turn three, it just doesn't really add up.

SPEAKER_03 6:55

Gotcha. And this this one might be a little bit harder to define or delineate, but what about a tempo deck? Like if I play uh 1-1 for one with prowess on turn one, and then on turn two I play a boomerang basics, and then play another one, and now I'm attacking for three, seems a whole lot like I'm attacking with aggressively costed creatures, right? So I I think that you know we would consider prowess a tempo deck, but what what is kind of the difference and and how would you differentiate between the those two archetypes?

SPEAKER_01 7:24

I guess for me the biggest difference would be in a in a tempo deck, you can do something that doesn't permanently answer something that got put on the board. So I guess to bounce off your example using like boomerang basics, if you play a cheap creature and then you bounce a similarly cheap creature, a tempo deck can fight through that. Something like a red or white aggro deck might not necessarily be able to keep winning from that scenario because they just replay the creature and then there's the creature again, and the tempo deck can kind of live through that by doing things like drawing extra cards, for instance, or still bouncing and getting the extra effect from whatever it is that they're they're playing for creatures, and an aggressive deck is gonna have a hard time dealing with that because they they need to get through the blocker somehow, but for the most part, like a true aggro deck is not gonna have a lot of uh card advantage spells available to it. So in a blue tempo aggro deck, you can do the thing where you play a creature and bounce their creature, and then you can draw some cards to kind of make up for the disadvantage, and red is or white even is just kind of stuck like alright, well I guess I just put more creatures on the board, and if your creature can trade with mine, it's not very profitable.

SPEAKER_03 8:41

Gotcha. So is it sounds like the the tempo deck is uh on average is gonna have a lower threat density? Do you think that's a a fair a fair assessment?

SPEAKER_01 8:51

Yeah, it can it can certainly win with fewer threats by making up with the the the variety of cards it's able to play versus an aggro deck is pretty linear.

SPEAKER_03 9:00

Just throw in a bunch of creatures at the board and hoping that enough of them will get your opponent dead. Yep. So if if you were building an aggro deck, what are some of the things that you're looking for? As far as like curve, as far as number of threats, as far as burn, all of that. Like what it what is a typical aggro deck look like if you were to just map one out?

SPEAKER_01 9:19

For me it's a curve that mostly stops at three and kind of caps at four, and in very rare cases five, but pretty much the cap will be four. And you're looking at creatures that, like I said earlier, they may be weaker overall, but they're not completely understatted. Like, for instance, you wouldn't generally play a creature that is a 1-1 for two mana, unless it had a very spectacular secondary effect of some kind. You're still playing something that's maybe a 2-2 for 2 mana, which these days is, you know, kind of the bare minimum for stats, but it usually has some just little tiny thing extra tacked onto it that can kind of make up for that. And what else makes up for it is the fact that you can just keep playing those 2-2s for two or keep playing a 2-1 for one. And when you're developing at that rate early in the game, those understatted creatures become a lot more effective because you're just adding a lot more of them to the board. Uh, you know, the a classic example for again, I'm gonna be talking about red a lot because that's just kind of my thing, but for for a red deck would be I play a uh one drop, you know, a hired claw on turn one, and then I untap and I play another hired claw, and then I play a burnout bastronaut, like those creatures' power are not great for the mana costs these days. You know, there's commons and uncommons that have two power for one mana, but the fact that you're able to put three of them into play by turn two gives you a big advantage against a lot of matchups because it's just hard for decks to keep up with that speed.

SPEAKER_02 11:00

So, just out of curiosity to kind of follow along with that point, when you're building your 75 as an aggro deck, do you find yourself gravitating more towards like undercosted creatures as opposed to spells? Like if you want, say, a sideboard card for the control matchups, do you find yourself gravitating more towards like what's the new guy that won in a red, can't counter my stuff, pings you if you target everything, even if it's like not the most hexing-hexing squelcher. Yeah, hexing squelcher, even if it's not like the most imposing creature or the most lights out effect, just the fact that it can attack. You find yourself like leaning that way a lot of the times.

SPEAKER_01 11:46

Yeah, absolutely. And to me, that's kind of the marker of like when an aggro deck is capable of being good is when it has sideboard cards like that. And again, Red is pretty well known for having those um you know hate bear type effects where it's it's generally gonna be like a two-mana, two-power thing that does something extra, like Razor Kin Needlehead, or um going back uh you know longer than that, something like um the 2-2 for two mana that uh made damage turn into minus one, minus one counters instead, like that sort of thing. Like it's it's fairly innocuous just kind of by itself, but when you add that it's uh 2-2 for two, which is perfectly fine even in modern magic, and then it has that incremental advantage tacked onto it, it makes a big difference, and then you have that's just kind of Red's thing. Like Mage Bane Lizard again for a while was an especially effective sideboard card, even though it was only a one power creature for two mana, the effect that you got off of it for what you were sideboarding it against was hugely effective, and it kind of had um you know the opposite of what you're looking for was high toughness versus higher power, but that was good in those matchups because it was harder to kill, and then the effect that was tacked onto it just made it so much more worth it to play an underpowered creature uh because it was so good against what you're boarding it in. So absolutely I I look for those kind of hate bear cards, and I certainly look at cards that aren't creatures that could give similar advantages. It's usually gonna be some type of card advantage generation because that's something that the aggro decks typically struggle with. But yeah, those are kind of the two things I'm I'm looking at mostly when we're talking about a total 75 card build is are the creatures good enough? And when I sideboard, can I still be an aggro deck but be better against the things that I'm bad against?

SPEAKER_03 13:39

How do those sideboards look? Do you find yourself typically with uh, you know, 4443 or is it a lot of one-ofs or kind of a mix?

SPEAKER_01 13:48

Usually very few one-ofs, because again, when when I'm thinking of an aggro deck, I'm I'm thinking about consistency. So generally I'm looking for a sideboard card that can be just a straight in and out and not go down on say a creature count. Like one thing I hate doing is sideboarding out a creature for something that's not a creature. Does it still happen? Sure, but I don't like doing it, and that's why I think the the creature part of the effective sideboard card is usually very important. And if it's not going to be a creature, it better be something that helps you get more creatures. Like um, Case of the Crimson Pulse is um a three-man enchantment, which thinking about in an aggro deck, a three-man enchantment that doesn't do anything really inherently like sounds awful, but it lets you pitch a land and draw some extra threats, and then when you get down low, which an aggro deck will by just continuously playing things, it puts you in a position where now it's generating your card advantage, which is big because usually what you're sideboarding against are decks that are very effective at killing creatures at more of a than a uh one-for-one raid.

SPEAKER_03 14:55

So, what are your good matchups as an aggro deck? Like what what types of metas are you looking for if you're looking to pilot uh an aggro deck in a big event?

SPEAKER_01 15:04

So generally it's gonna be uh decks that aren't playing creatures that are uh similarly aggressively costed than you with um better stats. So, like to use the recent example, the um Sage of the Skies is just at a huge amount of both power and toughness for three mana that also has lifelink, and that's just not something that generally you're gonna be able to fight through as an as an aggro deck that kind of operates on this like you know razor's edge already. Um so you're looking for decks that are taking time to set up. So certain control decks, it really depends on you know what the flavor of control deck is at the time, but certain control decks can be favorable just because they they generally take a lot of setup to do anything. And then certain combo decks also, because it's kind of in the same vein, like they're they're getting to an endpoint, but they usually need time to get to the endpoint, and that's when an aggro deck has an advantage because they're having to maybe make two land drops before they cast their card draw spell, where again you might already have three creatures in play, and they're just they're you're you're proposing questions to them that they have to answer as soon as the game starts, and for a deck that needs time to get to where it needs to be, that's not always possible for them to navigate. So you're looking for decks that need time to get to where they're going. That's usually where an aggro deck will shine.

SPEAKER_02 16:33

What's like the big draw to being an aggro deck? Like you've talked about getting to put pressure on some of these decks with aggressive creatures, uh, some of the things you want to like stay away from. What kind of makes you want to be an aggro player? What about the deck really speaks to you?

SPEAKER_01 16:51

It's usually the consistency. You'll be playing an aggro deck in a meta that maybe is operating on some other decks that are three or more colors, and they have to worry about a lot of different things. Like, are they gonna make the right land drops? Uh, is a big one. You know, generally in an aggro deck, you're not worried about your mana. Uh it's usually mono-colored or max it's two colors, and generally it's gonna be easy enough to get the mana that you need to operate, even if you don't have your second color right off the bat. And uh, an aggro deck is something that gets punished a lot less by something like missing a land drop because if your curve stops at three, even if you miss your third land drop, well, guess what? Your deck is still pumped full of one mana creatures and two mana creatures, and you can keep playing those creatures while missing land drops. Something like uh a combo deck or a control deck, if it misses a third land drop or a fourth land drop, it's usually a pretty catastrophic scenario for them in in most circumstances, and an aggro deck is perfectly capable of operating through those restrictions. So consistency and just really not having to worry about as much going right for uh the deck to be able to win. And of course that comes with some disadvantages, you know, there's if a control deck misses its third land drop or fourth land drop, you know, you usually have maybe a two-turn window before they probably are playing something like a sweeper, which is something you have to think about. But um, if they miss that land drop twice in a row, it's usually kind of it where an aggro deck can survive through that.

SPEAKER_03 18:25

What do you have to say to all the naysayers who uh who say that the aggro decks are mindless and that anybody can pilot an aggro deck?

SPEAKER_01 18:32

I I understand where people think that, but I also I definitely disagree. I I think you have to make a lot of decisions in an aggro deck that aren't going to be completely intuitive for people. A classic example for me would be like, I guess, um, I don't want to call them bad attacks, but I guess that's kind of what they are. Like an attack that under normal circumstances you just wouldn't make. Like you attack your two 2-2s into their 3-3 and they trade off with your 2-2 and you deal them two damage, and generally that's gonna be considered an an unfavorable combat for you. But when you think about your route to victory in the long term for something like an aggro deck, that that two extra damage can make a huge amount of difference in whether you're gonna be able to win against a certain matchup. Because at the at the end of the day, if a deck could play a 3-3 against your 2-2s and that's all it took, then an aggro deck would never win because that's that's a situation that presents itself all the time. So uh it involves a lot of understanding of the deck you're playing and how what looks like maybe a classically bad attack could be, even if it might not be the best, it's still favorable in the long run because for your your end game, you that two damage might be what you needed to turn on four to eight top decks that you have where it's a burn spell that can kind of finish off the last bit of damage that you need to win that game.

SPEAKER_02 19:54

See now, I've always been told that uh the very first week of a new set dropping is the only time that aggro is viable. Do you agree? I assume not, but since I'm I'm gonna go ahead and jump the gun and say you you say otherwise, how do you find yourself kind of adapting as the meta progresses? Like you have the week one meta, things change, your card pool for red aggressive decks doesn't really get to to change all that much. You kind of know in day one what's good, what's bad. How do you find yourself shifting like your mentality over the course of a meta?

SPEAKER_01 20:34

The big thing is just accepting that through the course of understanding whether a deck is going to be good or not as changes happen, that like you're you're going to lose, and taking the losses as learning experiences. I know that sounds kind of cheesy almost, but you know, you can I've had days where I've I've sat at my computer and I've played Magic Online or Magic Arena for you know eight hours straight, and maybe I got two match wins out of dozens of matches, and for most people that's gonna be tiresome and it's not gonna feel good, and myself included, but uh those kind of steps are necessary to really getting to like you know, is this deck really gonna be good enough? And I feel like especially with with Red Aggro, there are a ton of points before I kind of got to where we're at right now with standard, anyways, speaking specifically about current standard, where I decided it was time to just kind of jump ship from it, where you know I felt maybe a little bit disheartened about the archetype being able to win, but then I just kept playing it, and as I grew to understand these matchups more, it's like alright, well, this isn't gonna be a blowout every time, but this matchup certainly is something I can navigate now. And if you just let you know losing kind of get in the way of you coming to that understanding, then you're putting yourself uh you're doing a disservice to yourself. So um again, kind of like a after school special type of message, but uh take take your loss. As learning experiences, and it's not always gonna mean that you're gonna crack some code and figure out that, yeah, all I needed to do was solve the mystery and the deck's great. Sometimes the deck's not great, but uh you gotta you gotta just keep jamming to get there.

SPEAKER_00 22:14

Okay, gamers. If you're into tabletop gaming and you're anywhere near middle Tennessee, you need to check out Game Night in Columbia.

SPEAKER_03 22:22

Yeah, this isn't just a shop with cards on a shelf. They're hosting real events, and they're hosting big ones. Uh their largest tournament actually hit 120 players, and they're just getting started. So whether you're playing Magic, Pokemon, Lurcana, Riftbound, Gundam, Warhammer 40k, or if you're rolling dice in DD, there's a seat at the table for you.

SPEAKER_00 22:44

And here's the thing instead of waiting on shipping or sending your money across the country, you can grab what you need locally.

SPEAKER_03 22:50

They've got singles, sealed product, they offer pre-orders, event tickets on their website. It's all right there.

SPEAKER_00 22:57

Their full event schedule, updated every month, and you can see everything happening at gameighttn.com.

SPEAKER_03 23:03

That's game night in Columbia, Tennessee, where the community actually shows up. So we have kind of a default, it sounds like, of I want to play dudes and I want to turn them sideways. Uh that's that's kind of your your plan A. Um, what happens when plan A doesn't go well for you? Uh is it just I I pick them up and hope that things go well next game, or are there some tips and tricks that you have that can kind of help you recover a game that has gone kind of sideways?

SPEAKER_01 23:32

Well, I would say, you know, without being able to think of any specific examples, uh, a big thing is just understanding what positions any given deck is capable of winning from. Um if I could think back to, you know, the past few red archetypes that have played in standard over the years, having something in the deck like a man land, like a Soulstone Sanctuary, you know, there could be draws that are made or broke by your ability to draw something like a Soulstone Sanctuary, and there's been plenty of times where uh contrary to what you think the deck might be trying to do, you could play a Soulstone Sanctuary on turn four and do nothing and pass because you know that your opponent is going to sweep your board, but you automatically have a way to spend all your mana and regain a creature right off the bat, and then you untap and you play another creature. So it's it's needing to know that the deck is capable of recovering from those situations, because it if it's not capable from ever recovering from that, then it's probably not something that is gonna be very smart to play for the most part. Um and then understanding what matchups there are and knowing that just it's it's the nature of magic that you're gonna get paired up against some things that are just not gonna be very winnable for you, uh, and deciding if uh aggro is the type of deck that can be played in this meta, which generally it is, um, and you know, just kind of going from there. So it's tough because it really depends on what cards we're seeing play. You know, they're making new cards feels like every five minutes now. Uh, but building yourself a deck that you feel comfortable trying to come back from a disadvantage because for the most part, Aggro's playing cards that are just uh overall not as as good on power level as what you're able to play in any given format.

SPEAKER_02 25:24

How much of your deck would you say on average is kind of reactive versus proactive? Because I know when it comes to tempo and mid-range decks, there's always a lot of debate and back and forth because at the end of the day, 50% of the deck is fairly dependent on what's going on around you. But when you're playing an aggro deck, you're usually trying to like take the initiative, get out on the front foot. So, kind of what percentage-ish of your 75 would you say is typically devoted to reacting to something problematic or answering something that you might otherwise lose to?

SPEAKER_01 26:04

Um, I would say probably it's gonna be a pretty low percent, maybe a 15 to 20%, and generally your reactive cards are gonna be cards that can also uh be proactive in certain situations, like um with red, generally your reactive cards are gonna be burn spells, and so they're either gonna be a burn spell that can actually target your opponent and help with that goal of getting them down to zero life, or they're gonna be uh a creature damage spell that's going to deal damage kind of above the rate of the cost of the card, like flame slash, for instance, is a card that can't hit your opponent, but for one mana you can deal four damage, and that's that's a really good rate on a removal spell for red. Uh, then kind of on the other side of that you have things like shock. Like shock by all means right now in in magic with power level is a very underpowered card. But shock has seen a ton of play in standard over the past year and a half or two years or so, simply because it can do both. It can react to opponent's creature, or it can be that top deck you need where you got to that stage of the game where you played a bunch of creatures and they all got answered and your opponent's at four life, and now you're two draws away from winning because your your reactive spells can also kill your opponent. So um it's gonna be a low percentage because at the for for the archetype to work, it's gonna be mostly creatures. You know, you're talking usually pretty low on mana, you know, 18 to 21 lands, and then 25, 30 plus creatures, and then you kind of fill in the rest with uh what's good that isn't those two things.

SPEAKER_03 27:48

Uh so one thing that you've talked about a couple times is sweepers. And obviously, sweepers are a huge problem for a deck that wants to play, you know, a bunch of small creatures on turns one, two, three. And it seems like we've gotten some pretty aggressively costed sweepers recently uh with Pinnacle Starcage, and before that we had temporary lockdown. Uh right now we have Day of Judgment in standard, um, and then of course like Slagstorm is also very popular right now as a sideboard card. So how do you know like when you should be sandbagging your threats so that you can, you know, try to push through extra damage post-sweeper and when you should just jam everything and hope your opponent doesn't have it?

SPEAKER_01 28:29

Definitely it's gonna take um an understanding of how the deck that you're facing is trying to win. If you know that they're trying to win with a five-mana creature and four is when they're gonna try to play their sweeper, then um you know you you wanna be able to be able to recover from that, but not hindering your plan of being able to win if they skip the four mana sweeper and then play the five-mana creature, you know? Because if you don't play creatures hoping to not play into a sweeper, and then they never play the sweeper and just play the big finisher instead, well that can be bad. And if you run out a bunch of creatures into the sweeper, that can also be bad. So it's really assessing the board, and if they sweep my board right now, do I have enough resources to recover from that? Or if they play the big thing, do I have enough resources to attack through that? So it's kind of a tough question to answer because I feel like a lot of it goes off of I guess what I'll call like vibes and intuition, but it's it's just knowing, like, you know, is this enough to win right now? And if the answer is yes, then you're usually pretty safe just holding on to some creatures, then sometimes it's not possible. Uh, it's a little bit easier, honestly, with cheaper sweeper spells because generally they're gonna want to also play those earlier. That's why they're playing cheaper ones, and it's easier to come back from a three-mana sweeper because you might have only played out three creatures versus a four-mana creature where you might have played a or four-mana sweeper rather, they you might have played out five creatures or six creatures, so um it's it's complicated, but it again it just takes understanding and having played aggro enough to have that understanding of is this enough to win right now? Can I pump the brakes? Because you also, if you do nothing, especially with um the high quality spells that they print nowadays, like uh memory deluge was one, and now we have things like consult the star charts, like if you just do nothing hoping like alright, well here comes a sweeper, but they still spend the end of your turn paying four mana, drawing two cards, that's a disaster. So you want them to constantly be reacting to you in whatever way you can make them. And um, yeah, it's I I could ramble on about it, I guess, because it is very complicated, but um can can I do I have enough to win right now? I guess is a simple way to put it.

SPEAKER_03 30:51

Yeah, that makes sense. Any other like less common tips or tricks or things that you're thinking about throughout the course of the game, depending on the matchup, um, that really help you get an edge in the aggro matches?

SPEAKER_01 31:03

Uh I think I go back to the the bad attacks. Like you really just need to know when it's acceptable to start trading off creatures because you can't just always suicide a creature to deal some extra damage because that that plan's just not always gonna win, but sometimes a plan is going to win, so it's really just accepting that the creatures that you play generally are gonna be underpowered compared to a lot of other creatures, and uh just navigating the combat that's a big thing because you ideally just always want to be attacking if you go multiple turns without attacking, that's usually gonna be bad, especially with something like a red deck. So it's it's really just assessing your attacks, I guess, is is the biggest tip. Um can I smash this 2-2 and a 3-3 and it'd still be profitable for me in the long run? Um, you know, that's up to the deck that you're playing, but thinking about combat is what you should always be thinking about. How can I attack? Can I attack? If I can't attack, is my deck set up to be able to take that one or two turns off and accumulate something to be able to make up for that ground you lost by not attacking? And it's not always as simple as just always turn them sideways, um, but you also need to be able to uh understand when you can't not turn them sideways, and sometimes that's gonna involve some disadvantaged situations for you.

SPEAKER_03 32:28

Yeah, one thing that I think about when I am uh piloting an aggro deck and I'm trying to do some combat math is the example that you use, let's say I have two 2-2s and my opponent has a 3-3. Uh one of the things that I think about, and it sounds very easy when you when you verbalize it, but it's not necessarily intuitive while you're in the moment, is Am I willing to give my creature the text, sacrifice this creature to deal two damage to the opponent? Right. And if in and if I think that that is an acceptable trade, like if I think that I can just sacrifice a creature to deal my opponent two damage, uh then then you know that's that's an attack that I'm willing to make. If my opponent is still obviously high enough and I would rather have a body than an extra two damage burn spell, um then you know I'm gonna hold it back, try to develop my board a little bit. Um but you know, it's just kind of a different way of looking at the the combat math and using your creature basically as a burn spell that's just a one-shot dealing this much damage and then it's it's gone.

SPEAKER_01 33:31

For sure, and definitely there's some some mental steps that you're making your opponent take because you know maybe you are just making that suicide attack, and you know, you're willing to lose a creature for just a punch through two damage, but maybe you do have that burn spell, and it's not only gonna punch through two damage, but the creature that you lost is gonna allow your shock to finish off their creature that they're putting on blocking the next turn. So then it becomes for them, is it worth it for me to even block? And making your opponent think about things like that is usually good, and you know it's it's uh it takes a lot more thinking than people think. So I I would encourage people who maybe are a little low on aggro to really look at the people who play aggro, and sure there's gonna be some stereotypes mixed into it, but you're always gonna find some really good magic players that are long time magic players that are always on aggro, and maybe that's just their style, but there's a reason why that's their styles, they're they're making it work, and that doesn't happen by playing a deck that uh doesn't make you or your opponent think.

SPEAKER_02 34:34

Who is it, Ken Yuki Hiro that just won a pro tour not too long ago? Long time aggro player, and definitely shows that you can play aggressive red decks at the highest level of magic and be successful. Absolutely.

SPEAKER_03 34:48

What would you say is your favorite aggressive deck that you've played through all of your time of playing magic?

SPEAKER_01 34:54

Oh man, the whole time playing magic, it's tough. I mean, for I have a soft spot for like onslaught block era goblins. It's gonna age myself a little bit, but um, that was definitely kind of like I don't want to say the awakening for me, but it definitely was a big moment because that was uh one of the first times where I was playing my cheap little red guys that I felt like, geez, these things are like actually like really powerful. Like this isn't just me, you know, hee hee, I attack for two. This is like, you know, this goblin pile driver is a is a real problem, and it felt good to be able to play what I wanted to play and and start seeing creatures that were that much better within those archetypes, because before you were looking at things like, you know, you were playing uh uh Jackal Pup, which you know at the time was a great creature, but you know, it's a it's a 2-1 that starts killing you for for one mana that's pretty easy to deal with, and then you have things like Goblin Pile Driver that was just straight up unanswerable for some things, and it kind of ticked multiple boxes of like this thing smashes, but this thing also has uh that ability tacked onto it that is insane against certain matchups, and that's definitely when things like that started to click for me way back then is like these kind of you know innocuous but unique effects can make a huge difference in an aggro deck. Um so definitely goblins and um you know I all all the Monstrous Rage haters might want to plug their ears, but uh kind of the peak mono red of the last couple years with Screaming Nemesis and Heartfire Hero and Monstrous Rage, that was we were living the good life while that was happening. I was enjoying it quite a bit.

SPEAKER_02 36:36

Screaming Nemesis, especially, pretty good card.

SPEAKER_01 36:41

That that honestly might be one of my all-time favorite red cards. Like it just had it just had everything. Like, you know, I I don't think I need to talk about how good Screaming Nemesis is, but that was like that's that's peak red right there. I don't think we're we're gonna get much better than that.

SPEAKER_03 36:54

Yeah. Michael, do you have any uh aggressive decks that you've played that uh that strike a chord?

SPEAKER_02 37:01

Uh surprisingly, I do. Uh I first got started like right around Lorewind Block, and I played mono red elementals in Lorewindblock, and there were some pretty aggressive starts with like Flamekin Brawler and Nova Chasers 10-2, and like it definitely hits a pretty sweet spot when you're like, Alright, I'm just gonna double strike my 10-2 trampler and kill you, and it's turn four, or I'm just gonna throw five two ones on the board the first three turns and just like smash your face in. It uh it gets those endorphins flowing. What about you? You got a favorite aggro deck?

SPEAKER_03 37:45

Yeah, uh, when I was first getting back into competitive magic, it was around RTR block, and Naya Blitz was just such a drug, man. Uh you play turn one, champion of the parish, that uh you get a 1-1 counter every time you play a human, and you just play all the burning trees into a lightning mauler and just attack for a million on turn two, and man, that was that deck was so much fun. I I definitely won quite a bit with that deck. Had a blast.

SPEAKER_02 38:11

Uh I also played some Naya during that time, but it was like experiment one into fleece main line, into uh Boon Seder and Advent of the Worm. Oh, yeah. Basically aggro, but a little more less human-y, more I'm gonna throw cats and worms and whatever else we can pick out of the forest at you for a little bit.

SPEAKER_03 38:33

Yeah, that was that was a little bit after uh because that was when we had Theros and uh and Inistrad rotated, so so that was kind of like the the successor to the Nia Blitz deck, but yeah, that that deck was also very cool. Alright, well, it is closing time, and as is customary on Pillow Talk, uh we have to choose a deck to take home in both standard and modern. So we'll start with our guest Josh. Josh, what are you taking home for standard? What are you taking home for modern? Like right now. Right now. You've got an event this weekend.

SPEAKER_01 39:08

I I think for standard, I'd definitely be running Momo back. I I loved that deck. I was winning a lot with it online, and again, I just felt like I I kind of had a spat of bad luck with my matchups. I think the deck's still real good. Um, you know, unfortunately, where we're at right now, I might be in for a few more mirrors than before just because of it um doing so well over the past weekend, but definitely be running back Momo. And in Modern, honestly, I have not played much in Modern other than Eldrazi Ramp pretty much since MH3 came out. So we'd be we'd be sticking with Eldrazi Ramp.

SPEAKER_03 39:42

Michael, what are you thinking?

SPEAKER_02 39:44

Uh for standard right now, I'd probably be picking up the four-color control deck, the tablet control. That deck looks really sweet and it's got a bunch of really awesome lines, and you get to solve like the only problem that Jess Guy Revelation ever had, which was having to wait until turn seven to cast it. So I'd pick up that deck for standard. For modern, this is probably gonna hurt some people's souls because I I want to say Demir Frog every chance that I get, but we just had some test matches uh Boris Energy. The new Boris Energy is still really, really good. Yeah. So I would not fault anybody for picking that deck up. Like a Johnny Goblin Bombardment is still a heck of a drug. Go try it out if you haven't since the ban, but it it impressed.

SPEAKER_01 40:36

Yeah. Yeah, that might actually be my number one most asked question recently, or re really over the past uh year and a half, two years, is why aren't you playing Boros in Modern? Everyone knows I love aggro, and um, you know, I won't gab on about it too much, but I do like a nice ramp deck here and there too. So Eldrazi has been great for me there, but uh who knows, maybe it's time. If I can't play uh red aggro in standard, maybe I'll play uh, you know, it's not really red aggro, but it's red enough in uh modern with some uh some Boros.

SPEAKER_02 41:08

Yeah, I mean ramp is just aggro with uh a different end goal. You're aggressively putting more mana into play than your opponents. See, you you and I think exactly the same way on that.

SPEAKER_03 41:19

Uh Boros is definitely a lot more uh aggressively slanted and less mid-rangey now that we've lost Flagge. So uh maybe maybe if you tried it out, you you might enjoy it a little bit more than you thought you would. Uh I think for this weekend, if I had to pick two decks uh for standard, I I don't think I would run back prowess. I played it, like I said, over the weekend in DC and didn't have a great time. And so I'd probably just pick up the blue-white Momo deck again. I think that that deck is really great. Either that or I do really like the Jesguy Revelation deck. Uh sorry, the the Jesguy uh lessons deck that plays you know all of the the lesson package but has a top end of Jesguy Revelation, uh also plays the pa the the tablet as well. Um I think that deck is is really really great. Had a great win percentage, so I could see that deck you know being a major player moving forward for as long as people still care about standard. Uh and then as for modern, uh I thought that I was gonna be super into prowess, but um really just hated the the last few matches that I played with that. And so I think that I would probably be looking at either if if I wanted to take something seriously, I think that I would probably be on Affinity. Uh, but if I was just looking to have a good time, probably look at one of the four-color Omnath decks just because I think they're super fun. I love playing them, and uh typically the meta around here leans more toward the the decks that Omnath is good into, so I wouldn't mind jamming that at some RCQs just for kicks. Alright. Well, Josh, thanks so much for joining us and talking to us all about aggro. Uh hopefully um people have learned some some different things about what it takes to be a good aggropilot. Yeah, great to be on.

SPEAKER_01 43:03

I love listening to it, so it's a good opportunity to uh be a part of it. And um, yeah, anyone who might be listening, if you ever want to uh uh talk about aggro, um I love doing it, I love playing it. So whatever you want to do, play, talk, I'm available. Let's let's turn some creatures sideways.

SPEAKER_03 43:21

I love it. Alright, well that wraps us up. Thank you for coming to our Pillow Talk.