(Originally published in my other blog http://www.polarnest.blogspot.com/)
A tournament's coming up, so you've scoured the Net and found the deck that fits your playing style like a glove. That deck had just won a recent Grand Prix so you know that it just had to work. You copy the deck card-for-card down to the sideboard. You practice the deck and know its strategy by heart. But coming into the tournament, you realize that you forgot to add a sideboard card against certain decks that have just become popular. And that decks were redesigned to beat your deck. You walk out of the tournament empty-handed despite having the best deck money could buy. You didn't do your assignment. You weren't prepared against the local metagame.
"Metagame" means using out-of-game strategy in-game. As used in Magic parlance, it loosely refers to what decks to expect in a coming tournament. "Metagaming" is preparing for popular decks either by (1) using a deck that can handily beat such popular decks, or by (2) adjusting certain card choices in a your main deck and/or sideboard in order to give you an edge against such popular decks.
Unfortunately, not many of us have the resources to change decks at a whim. Many of us own a limited supply of Magic cards with which we can assemble only one or two tournament-level decks. Magic cards aren't cheap after all. To the rest of us who aren't blessed with an endless supply of cards, we can still do metagaming. We can simply adjust certain card choices in our existing deck. We can replace the "X" card with other more relevant cards depending on the metagame.
The "X" card is that card in a deck that even if replaced with a similar card would not affect the deck's strategy. In algebraic terms, the "X" cards are the variables, all other cards the constants. Even if we replace the "X" card, the deck would still function just the same. An example is in order.
The strategy behind snow-based Mana-Ramp decks is to use mana acceleration early in the game in order to play powerful high-casting cost creatures at the mid-game, while using cost-efficient creature-kill against weenies. It is a mid-range deck. For me, Garruk, Into the North, Skred and Harmonize are "constants"; replacing any of such cards would affect the integrity of the deck. I used to think that Bogardan Hellkite and Siege-Gang Commandos were constants, until many players replaced either of them with Cloudthresher. Built-in Pyroclams were replaced with instant-speed Sulfurous Blasts which can also kill oft-played Wren's Run Vanquishers. Knowing that faerie and elf decks were going to show up in large numbers, Mana-Ramp players replaced the "X" cards with more relevant cards without sacrificing the deck's strategy. That's metagaming. In the future, if ever Mono-Black decks become popular again I'd go for Chameleon Colossus instead; if Gaddock Teeg shows up more than usual, I'll revert back to Pyroclasm.
In a faerie deck I would happily replace Oona's Prowler, which underperforms against Reivellark and the mirror match, with Oona's Blackguard and go semi-Rogue for even bigger faeries with bonus disruption. In GB elf decks, I'd rather use Wrens Run Packmaster than Chameleon Colossus as the former is more efficient against the mirror match and Reivellark decks. (Heck, you can't even use your own Profane Command for the fear ability on your own Colossus!)
Needless to say, all sideboard cards are "X" cards. But integrating the "X" card theory in your main deck gives you the advantage as early as Game One. So whatever deck you show up in a tournament with, do your assignment by researching the current local metagame, lest you want to go home empty-handed despite having the best deck money could buy.
Tags: Strategy
