Been playing sealed M15 and DTK-FRF and while I think I have a solid 2 color deck, 45%/55% color split, good curve, 3-4 power rares...I get consistently out drawn by 3-color "wonder decks" and usually without the use of even Evolving Wilds. It just seems I try my hardest to refine my deck down to what should be optimal and give me a noticeable edge against more ambitious 3-color decks but somehow on turn 5 I am missing a second red or black while my opponent is juggling 3 colors effortlessly.
In my short lived experience with 3 color decks I have been screwed so severely that the memories are still vivid and the trauma still a deterrent...but it seems to be the meta in sealed? Am I actually at a disadvantage going only 2 colors in these formats? I mean of course the power of 3 colors and essentially access to more synergy is a huge plus but it seems like the drawbacks of having a more chaotic/inconsistent mana pool aren't a concern for most in sealed.
i personally love the /feeling/ of the tension when playing 3 colours (omg, will i draw my splashed land?), where it's exciting if i do and amusing if i don't.
but i don't know what's correct from a "i'm here to try to win" perspective. i see, for example, Marshall [i think?] talk about how he doesn't like Evolving Wilds in this format because a come-into-play-tapped land can really slow him down when (say) he needs his fourth land for a critical four-CMC play and he topdecks Evolving Wilds. but then, i see other channelfireball drafters splash tap lands in without much worry over them?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
----------------------------
Goblins have poor impulse control. Don't click this link!!
some of my favourite flavour text:
Wayward Soul "no home no heart no hope"
—Stronghold graffito
Raging Goblin He raged at the world, at his family, at his life. But mostly he just raged.
I mean... it really depends. How ambitious are you talking here? Sunscorch Regent in a B/R deck, or Dragonlord Silumgar in the same B/R deck? Are these decks your playing straight 3 color or are they just splashing 1-3 cards? Cause if its the former, I'd say they're in the wrong and your just getting unlucky, but if its the latter, then its probably reasonable. I wouldn't splash something with no fixing whatsoever, but it just takes 2 or 3 sources of fixing to make a small splash reasonable.
Some of this might be results bias. When a 3-color deck works, you take notice. When it doesn't work -- it looks like a bad 2-color deck because the mana didn't work out and you don't realize you won because you built a more consistent deck.
I'm reading many replies that assume he's talking about draft when he's asking about sealed.
In a sealed pool your are more likely to have lands to help fixing and more likely to have bombs spread over multiple colors. I remember reading pros saying just this: in sealed, you splash all your bombs because the format is slower. (Of course, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy amongst people who all think alike; there's less likelihood that you'll encounter a tuned aggro deck if few aim for it.)
In sealed 2 color with a splash is what I usually plan on playing, because I feel it's usually very important to play as many bombs as reasonably possible. Even if I have no fixing whatsoever, if I have a high cost bomb I can splash for and my deck does not specifically rely on the speed of 2 colors (which is not often in sealed anyway), I am glad to splash for it though I would much rather have at least a bit of fixing.
In draft I often see pros in draft videos selecting a high cost bomb even on a splash and even if they have no fixing yet.
Splashing for a double-color card, though, is something I rarely see and would not want to do even for a bomb.
I like Evolving Wilds even in a fully 2 color deck, unless the deck specifically relies on speed, and in a deck with 3 colors I can't imagine ever not playing Evolving Wilds if I have one in my pool.
I love splashing in this format, and I tend to do so at most opportunities. I'd say probably 75% of my non-aggro decks have some variety of splash. You get a heap of power from the splashable red and black removal like Sarkhan's Rage and Reach of Shadows/Death Wind/Flatten, and the format isn't so fast that you can't play some taplands and whatnot.
I have splashed for Citadel Siege in a UB deck before, off two Evolving Wilds, two gainlands and an Ojutai Monument as well as some cycling blue dudes and an Enhanced Awareness. Don't try this at home, folks.
I don't play much sealed, but when I do I try and maximize power. Sealed is a slower format than draft anyway, so you can afford to stuff about with slow lands and dead cards and then take over the game with your big bombs anyway. I'm generally sad if my sealed deck doesn't have at least three rares/mythics in it, because it means I'll probably lose on power to the guys that do.
I don't think that you should assume that playing 2 colours is just the way to do things. In draft, that's often the case, but in sealed there's no cost to picking up mana fixing and it often works out that you can splash a third colour with little cost. I'd say that over half of sealed decks should be playing more than just two colours, so it's really not surprising that you are losing to these decks.
- Format is slower. You are less likely to be punished for stumbling on your third color early.
- In draft, there is a cost to picking nonbasic lands -- you have to pick them over spells. In sealed, the nonbasic lands are in your pool no matter what, so you might as well play them.
Still, even in sealed, you should strive for a 2 colors + splash deck and not a three-color deck evenly split among all three colors.
Abzan did have mana problems only one dual land... Splashing black for removal and white for bolster trying to punch through with huge green creatures died to flyiers.
Naya and Bant were the Dragon decks and they were sweet.. but had a weakness to the fast aggro decks, not quite enough removal. Naya was green based and Bant was blue based. Both decks had rare dragon lands, but only had the one dual land but played a monument and the other was heavy on the ramp meantioned above.
The first two didn't work.. the dragon decks though are very good I went 2-1 twice. You need to have late game power, don't try to be aggressive, just find enough removal to survive then slam bombs and a three colour deck works great. but dash is scary D:, hopefuly that gets over drafted at the table.
In sealed you're basically playing goodstuff. You play the best cards you get, because odds are you aren't going to construct a coherent strategy. If you can slow the game down enough to play 3+ colors go ahead.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In my short lived experience with 3 color decks I have been screwed so severely that the memories are still vivid and the trauma still a deterrent...but it seems to be the meta in sealed? Am I actually at a disadvantage going only 2 colors in these formats? I mean of course the power of 3 colors and essentially access to more synergy is a huge plus but it seems like the drawbacks of having a more chaotic/inconsistent mana pool aren't a concern for most in sealed.
He is the only one who sees the patterns in the overlapping maps and conflicting reports.
i personally love the /feeling/ of the tension when playing 3 colours (omg, will i draw my splashed land?), where it's exciting if i do and amusing if i don't.
but i don't know what's correct from a "i'm here to try to win" perspective. i see, for example, Marshall [i think?] talk about how he doesn't like Evolving Wilds in this format because a come-into-play-tapped land can really slow him down when (say) he needs his fourth land for a critical four-CMC play and he topdecks Evolving Wilds. but then, i see other channelfireball drafters splash tap lands in without much worry over them?
Goblins have poor impulse control. Don't click this link!!
some of my favourite flavour text:
Wayward Soul
"no home no heart no hope"
—Stronghold graffito
Raging Goblin
He raged at the world, at his family, at his life. But mostly he just raged.
In a sealed pool your are more likely to have lands to help fixing and more likely to have bombs spread over multiple colors. I remember reading pros saying just this: in sealed, you splash all your bombs because the format is slower. (Of course, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy amongst people who all think alike; there's less likelihood that you'll encounter a tuned aggro deck if few aim for it.)
Also, memory bias.
In draft I often see pros in draft videos selecting a high cost bomb even on a splash and even if they have no fixing yet.
Splashing for a double-color card, though, is something I rarely see and would not want to do even for a bomb.
I like Evolving Wilds even in a fully 2 color deck, unless the deck specifically relies on speed, and in a deck with 3 colors I can't imagine ever not playing Evolving Wilds if I have one in my pool.
I think it's your brain playing tricks on you.
I have splashed for Citadel Siege in a UB deck before, off two Evolving Wilds, two gainlands and an Ojutai Monument as well as some cycling blue dudes and an Enhanced Awareness. Don't try this at home, folks.
I don't play much sealed, but when I do I try and maximize power. Sealed is a slower format than draft anyway, so you can afford to stuff about with slow lands and dead cards and then take over the game with your big bombs anyway. I'm generally sad if my sealed deck doesn't have at least three rares/mythics in it, because it means I'll probably lose on power to the guys that do.
Draft it on Cubetutor!
- Format is slower. You are less likely to be punished for stumbling on your third color early.
- In draft, there is a cost to picking nonbasic lands -- you have to pick them over spells. In sealed, the nonbasic lands are in your pool no matter what, so you might as well play them.
Still, even in sealed, you should strive for a 2 colors + splash deck and not a three-color deck evenly split among all three colors.
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own
I have played Jund, Abzan, Naya and Bant. decks.
Jund was a red based with Decent of the dragons leaned a little too hard on that card and failed. was playing map the wastes and explosive vegetation.
Abzan did have mana problems only one dual land... Splashing black for removal and white for bolster trying to punch through with huge green creatures died to flyiers.
Naya and Bant were the Dragon decks and they were sweet.. but had a weakness to the fast aggro decks, not quite enough removal. Naya was green based and Bant was blue based. Both decks had rare dragon lands, but only had the one dual land but played a monument and the other was heavy on the ramp meantioned above.
The first two didn't work.. the dragon decks though are very good I went 2-1 twice. You need to have late game power, don't try to be aggressive, just find enough removal to survive then slam bombs and a three colour deck works great. but dash is scary D:, hopefuly that gets over drafted at the table.
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own