Are Vanguards going to be essentially unkillable against Greg?
Why would they be unkillable?
Regular gem destruction from StV or green gem changers will plow through them. I’ve also been playing Angrath’s Rampage in Standard TG so that it can kill that random vanguard but still have value against the 90% of decks that will have no vanguards. River’s Rebuke should do the trick, too. There are options.
I don’t think RR will work, as Vanguards need to be explicitly included to be targeted, but if you read the card, Vangaurds would be non-land supports…
I’d like to see Shatterstorm vs Vanguards
Cards that used to kill “supports” will not work on Vanguards; River’s Rebuke, Demolish, etc.
There are options, but will they see a lot of play? I ask because I just faced down a full power NB1 in ToA (Prism Array, StV, the works) with a single Ral copying all kinds of jank like Casualties of War and Enter the God Eternals while i was mastering cards.
Right, but this is MTGPQ. Have you actually tried any of those cards yet? I’m betting the number of cards that don’t work as stated is a non-zero number.
Based on the tutorial Greg will self-destruct his Vanguards using their abilities.
So no need to worry much!
Most Vanguards should survive with one shield after you deplete the activations. But that should be easily removed with a simple match.
I’m not sure how he handles the vanguard supports that can increase shield count rather than just deplete
this is apt to decide if this type was a game maker or a game breaker, leaning towards breaker honestly with the limited ways to get them and the difficulty of destroying them
There’s a disappointingly narrow number of useful Vanguard destruction spells. Angrath’s Rampage will do the job, and not be dead in your deck if you face an opponent not playing Vanguards (even if it is a little on the expensive side), but most Vanguard killers are woefuly underpowered. “*An opposing Vanguard support loses X shield, where X is your first creature’s power”. "*Drain 8 mana from the first Vanguard support in your opponent’s hand."
We’re already talking about cards which are a subset of a subset of a card type, locked behind a jewelled paywall. The chances of a Vanguard killer in your hand being the right answer to a threat your opponent is playing are miniscule.
It’s call “The Elderspell”
now new players having that card and the chances are even lower, and even with veterans guess what already full decks need van killers as a default.
If you’re playing answers you need an answer to vanguard supports and to non-vanguard supports; that’s two cards.
One thing I hate about the latest phase of MTGPQ design is the decision to subdivide supports into subtypes. What, am I going to play FOUR different answer cards in my ten card deck? No, I’m going to play Demolish. Print as many cards that affect Enchantments or Artifacts as you like; I’m still just going to play Demolish.
Yeah, I’ve always felt that demolish… demolishes… the competition
I can attest that Greg fizzled two Demolishes against my Vanguard. They cast, and appeared, but then disappeared without destroying the support or triggering the gem block destruction.
I had the this happen also, where Greg played Demolish when I had a Vanguard out, and it didn’t do anything. I didn’t have any regular supports on the board either.
And you guys thought I was kidding!
I will just “Destroy All The Gems!”
To the contrary, I thought your post was great and wish they’d listened. Or hired you. =)
According to official rules, are support killers (like Demolish or Smash To Smithereens) supposed to kill Vanguards or not? I’d surmised that they weren’t, but is there an official ruling on this?