I tried something like this, problem is when you don't draw architect your deck is full of bad cards. And even when you do - Architect is extremely fragile. You must at least have some beatdown backup plan - but your creatures are not really suited for this.
I tried something like this, problem is when you don't draw architect your deck is full of bad cards. And even when you do - Architect is extremely fragile. You must at least have some beatdown backup plan - but your creatures are not really suited for this.
I actually believe the other variants are more reliant on architect, without it you have a bunch of etherium sculptors, chief engineers, etc.
With this build, not only are you able to chord quickly and efficiently for architect, you can also play the ewit/command gameplan.
I actually believe the other variants are more reliant on architect, without it you have a bunch of etherium sculptors, chief engineers, etc.
Who, in truth, also help you cast your big stuff.
Quote from isei8388 »
With this build, not only are you able to chord quickly and efficiently for architect, you can also play the ewit/command gameplan.
Witness-command is fine, but not superb - you still pay 4 mana each turn for a half of command (other half is always bounce witness), so you can either tap their attackers, or counter their spell. How is this winning a game? What is your actual finisher?
By big stuff you mean ballista? Usually, which only really works with architect out (unless you're talking about some obscure number of wurmcoil engines and myr superions). Same thing with this deck, you can go down for some value ballista.
Finisher is grand architect/pili pala. Thought I was clear on that.
It aims to control with cryptic ewit recursion (eternal command), while flooding the board with walls/oracles/skites. It then threatens combo with chord.
Can win T3 without disruption and T4 through disruption, eg.
T1: Vial
T2: Vial on 1, Wall of Roots/Coiling Oracle -> Land
T3: Many Options: Vial on 2, Grand Architect -> Skite/Pili Pala, Hold up Cryptic, EOT Chord for 2 for Pili Pala/Skite
T4: Win
Once you hit infinite mana, following cards help you win:
Ballista - infinite dmg
Trinket Mage - Ballista
Chord - Trinket mage - Ballista
Ewit - Bring back cryptic for infinite draw loop. as well as any of the above.
Sideboard is just a toolbox since Chord can grab you Trinket Mage can grab you anything.
There's an older thread GA + Pili that has lists very similar to yours that you might want to check out; it's dedicated to the combo specifically.
By big stuff you mean ballista? Usually, which only really works with architect out (unless you're talking about some obscure number of wurmcoil engines and myr superions). Same thing with this deck, you can go down for some value ballista.
Finisher is grand architect/pili pala. Thought I was clear on that.
Ok, suppose they surgical your architect or put a stony silence. What's next?
By big stuff you mean ballista? Usually, which only really works with architect out (unless you're talking about some obscure number of wurmcoil engines and myr superions). Same thing with this deck, you can go down for some value ballista.
Finisher is grand architect/pili pala. Thought I was clear on that.
Ok, suppose they surgical your architect or put a stony silence. What's next?
So we're in g2/g3 and I haven't brought in any sideboard cards myself?
Cryptic Command answers any permanent effect including stony silence.
Surgical extraction on architect (which involves having it discarded from hand as I don't normally play it unless I'm going off or making a value ballista anyways) means I only have a bunch 2/1's, 1/1's, 0/5 walls, small ballista's on the field.
Seems pretty dire, but hey if we're talking about decks that are disrupting my hand (ie. bgx/shadow), I think it would be grim for both versions of the deck so I don't really see your point. It's almost as if you believe the chief engineer, etherium sculptor, 1/1 fliers deck doesn't rely on grand architect to go off. Those decks run a bunch of crewable vehicles, equipment slots, everything that gets exponentially worse in the face of creature removal/discard.
Grand architect is 100% the pay off card for both decks, so I'm not really seeing your whole point unless it's "gg surgical extract architect. Grand architect sucks, game over."
In that case, why are you even here?
Instead of arbitrarily voicing out haphazard scenarios, how about you propose a worthy build and I'll list out the comparative pros and cons between your list and mine?
By big stuff you mean ballista? Usually, which only really works with architect out (unless you're talking about some obscure number of wurmcoil engines and myr superions). Same thing with this deck, you can go down for some value ballista.
Finisher is grand architect/pili pala. Thought I was clear on that.
Ok, suppose they surgical your architect or put a stony silence. What's next?
So we're in g2/g3 and I haven't brought in any sideboard cards myself?
Cryptic Command answers any permanent effect including stony silence.
Surgical extraction on architect (which involves having it discarded from hand as I don't normally play it unless I'm going off or making a value ballista anyways) means I only have a bunch 2/1's, 1/1's, 0/5 walls, small ballista's on the field.
Seems pretty dire, but hey if we're talking about decks that are disrupting my hand (ie. bgx/shadow), I think it would be grim for both versions of the deck so I don't really see your point. It's almost as if you believe the chief engineer, etherium sculptor, 1/1 fliers deck doesn't rely on grand architect to go off. Those decks run a bunch of crewable vehicles, equipment slots, everything that gets exponentially worse in the face of creature removal/discard.
Grand architect is 100% the pay off card for both decks, so I'm not really seeing your whole point unless it's "gg surgical extract architect. Grand architect sucks, game over."
In that case, why are you even here?
Instead of arbitrarily voicing out haphazard scenarios, how about you propose a worthy build and I'll list out the comparative pros and cons between your list and mine?
Looking forward to your response.
Well, but i did. You can check my list several posts before. I even run pili-pala myself, and no chief engineers =)
Considering realism of my examples - i deliberately chose examples where combo just doesn't work. But in reality, they don't have to permanently shut down the combo - they could just kill/discard him (or even pili-pala) and execute their gameplan before you could find another.
An example of a good deck would be Death shadow - these decks are surely win a lot of their matches via their namesake card, but they don't fold on the spot if they lose it.
By big stuff you mean ballista? Usually, which only really works with architect out (unless you're talking about some obscure number of wurmcoil engines and myr superions). Same thing with this deck, you can go down for some value ballista.
Finisher is grand architect/pili pala. Thought I was clear on that.
Ok, suppose they surgical your architect or put a stony silence. What's next?
So we're in g2/g3 and I haven't brought in any sideboard cards myself?
Cryptic Command answers any permanent effect including stony silence.
Surgical extraction on architect (which involves having it discarded from hand as I don't normally play it unless I'm going off or making a value ballista anyways) means I only have a bunch 2/1's, 1/1's, 0/5 walls, small ballista's on the field.
Seems pretty dire, but hey if we're talking about decks that are disrupting my hand (ie. bgx/shadow), I think it would be grim for both versions of the deck so I don't really see your point. It's almost as if you believe the chief engineer, etherium sculptor, 1/1 fliers deck doesn't rely on grand architect to go off. Those decks run a bunch of crewable vehicles, equipment slots, everything that gets exponentially worse in the face of creature removal/discard.
Grand architect is 100% the pay off card for both decks, so I'm not really seeing your whole point unless it's "gg surgical extract architect. Grand architect sucks, game over."
In that case, why are you even here?
Instead of arbitrarily voicing out haphazard scenarios, how about you propose a worthy build and I'll list out the comparative pros and cons between your list and mine?
Looking forward to your response.
Well, but i did. You can check my list several posts before. I even run pili-pala myself, and no chief engineers =)
Considering realism of my examples - i deliberately chose examples where combo just doesn't work. But in reality, they don't have to permanently shut down the combo - they could just kill/discard him (or even pili-pala) and execute their gameplan before you could find another.
An example of a good deck would be Death shadow - these decks are surely win a lot of their matches via their namesake card, but they don't fold on the spot if they lose it.
Yeah I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that Death Shadow's deck is the premier meta deck at the moment over Grand Architect. I mean after all, that's why we're here in the Deck Creation subforum and not in Tier 1.
As for your deck, I feel it is trying too hard to do many little things that you may just end up drawing some disjointed part of your deck with no cohesion.
Along the same lines of logic as yours, it is also very susceptible to stony silence and uh surgical extraction
Sword/Thopter combo takes up too many slots and doesn't even guarantee a win, feels bad imo. Gets worse when you're playing random one of artifacts to fuel whir to get part of the combo or pili-pala?
Anyways, I don't think it's really constructive just saying things like "nah I've tried this deck, it doesn't work, loses to death's shadow and gets hosed in X scenario". Cause then we'd just spend the rest of the time picking apart the flaws in each other's decks without providing meaningful, insightful feedback.
By big stuff you mean ballista? Usually, which only really works with architect out (unless you're talking about some obscure number of wurmcoil engines and myr superions). Same thing with this deck, you can go down for some value ballista.
Finisher is grand architect/pili pala. Thought I was clear on that.
Ok, suppose they surgical your architect or put a stony silence. What's next?
So we're in g2/g3 and I haven't brought in any sideboard cards myself?
Cryptic Command answers any permanent effect including stony silence.
Surgical extraction on architect (which involves having it discarded from hand as I don't normally play it unless I'm going off or making a value ballista anyways) means I only have a bunch 2/1's, 1/1's, 0/5 walls, small ballista's on the field.
Seems pretty dire, but hey if we're talking about decks that are disrupting my hand (ie. bgx/shadow), I think it would be grim for both versions of the deck so I don't really see your point. It's almost as if you believe the chief engineer, etherium sculptor, 1/1 fliers deck doesn't rely on grand architect to go off. Those decks run a bunch of crewable vehicles, equipment slots, everything that gets exponentially worse in the face of creature removal/discard.
Grand architect is 100% the pay off card for both decks, so I'm not really seeing your whole point unless it's "gg surgical extract architect. Grand architect sucks, game over."
In that case, why are you even here?
Instead of arbitrarily voicing out haphazard scenarios, how about you propose a worthy build and I'll list out the comparative pros and cons between your list and mine?
Looking forward to your response.
Well, but i did. You can check my list several posts before. I even run pili-pala myself, and no chief engineers =)
Considering realism of my examples - i deliberately chose examples where combo just doesn't work. But in reality, they don't have to permanently shut down the combo - they could just kill/discard him (or even pili-pala) and execute their gameplan before you could find another.
An example of a good deck would be Death shadow - these decks are surely win a lot of their matches via their namesake card, but they don't fold on the spot if they lose it.
Yeah I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that Death Shadow's deck is the premier meta deck at the moment over Grand Architect. I mean after all, that's why we're here in the Deck Creation subforum and not in Tier 1.
As for your deck, I feel it is trying too hard to do many little things that you may just end up drawing some disjointed part of your deck with no cohesion.
Along the same lines of logic as yours, it is also very susceptible to stony silence and uh surgical extraction
Sword/Thopter combo takes up too many slots and doesn't even guarantee a win, feels bad imo. Gets worse when you're playing random one of artifacts to fuel whir to get part of the combo or pili-pala?
Anyways, I don't think it's really constructive just saying things like "nah I've tried this deck, it doesn't work, loses to death's shadow and gets hosed in X scenario".
I don't understand why you are seeing all my comments in such an aggressive light.
Death's shadow was only an example on how a deck can have plan B and plan C. No one was talking power level here.
As for my decklist - yes, it kinda sucks against stony, but i have a sideboard plan for it (and, well, every deck has its weakness) It is completely surgical-proof though, as i don't rely on one combo.
Disjointed part? Such as? I guess Fatal push can be dead in some matchups, and maybe drawing foundry in multiples can be bad, but that's it. In my opinion, playing trinket mage without playing his silver bullet package is not a good deckbuilding.
Thopter-sword does not guarantee a win? Well, nothing is. But it just wrecks a lot of decks - for example burn, death's shadow, and is simply good in attrition matchups. Compared to this, pili-pala combo is faster, can beat infinite life, but requires a third piece(!) and easily disrupted, so i rely on in against non-interactive decks. And there is third plan in flyers beatdown, which actually gives me at least a third of my wins. My deck is not all-in combo and i can tune it after sideboard. I even consider Jund(not Abzan) a good matchup in general. Bad matchups for me are Tron and stony silence, but i'm working on these too.
Ok, suppose they surgical your architect or put a stony silence. What's next?
So we're in g2/g3 and I haven't brought in any sideboard cards myself?
Cryptic Command answers any permanent effect including stony silence.
Surgical extraction on architect (which involves having it discarded from hand as I don't normally play it unless I'm going off or making a value ballista anyways) means I only have a bunch 2/1's, 1/1's, 0/5 walls, small ballista's on the field.
Seems pretty dire, but hey if we're talking about decks that are disrupting my hand (ie. bgx/shadow), I think it would be grim for both versions of the deck so I don't really see your point. It's almost as if you believe the chief engineer, etherium sculptor, 1/1 fliers deck doesn't rely on grand architect to go off. Those decks run a bunch of crewable vehicles, equipment slots, everything that gets exponentially worse in the face of creature removal/discard.
Grand architect is 100% the pay off card for both decks, so I'm not really seeing your whole point unless it's "gg surgical extract architect. Grand architect sucks, game over."
In that case, why are you even here?
Instead of arbitrarily voicing out haphazard scenarios, how about you propose a worthy build and I'll list out the comparative pros and cons between your list and mine?
Looking forward to your response.
Well, but i did. You can check my list several posts before. I even run pili-pala myself, and no chief engineers =)
Considering realism of my examples - i deliberately chose examples where combo just doesn't work. But in reality, they don't have to permanently shut down the combo - they could just kill/discard him (or even pili-pala) and execute their gameplan before you could find another.
An example of a good deck would be Death shadow - these decks are surely win a lot of their matches via their namesake card, but they don't fold on the spot if they lose it.
Yeah I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that Death Shadow's deck is the premier meta deck at the moment over Grand Architect. I mean after all, that's why we're here in the Deck Creation subforum and not in Tier 1.
As for your deck, I feel it is trying too hard to do many little things that you may just end up drawing some disjointed part of your deck with no cohesion.
Along the same lines of logic as yours, it is also very susceptible to stony silence and uh surgical extraction
Sword/Thopter combo takes up too many slots and doesn't even guarantee a win, feels bad imo. Gets worse when you're playing random one of artifacts to fuel whir to get part of the combo or pili-pala?
Anyways, I don't think it's really constructive just saying things like "nah I've tried this deck, it doesn't work, loses to death's shadow and gets hosed in X scenario".
I don't understand why you are seeing all my comments in such an aggressive light.
Death's shadow was only an example on how a deck can have plan B and plan C. No one was talking power level here.
As for my decklist - yes, it kinda sucks against stony, but i have a sideboard plan for it (and, well, every deck has its weakness) It is completely surgical-proof though, as i don't rely on one combo.
Disjointed part? Such as? I guess Fatal push can be dead in some matchups, and maybe drawing foundry in multiples can be bad, but that's it. In my opinion, playing trinket mage without playing his silver bullet package is not a good deckbuilding.
Thopter-sword does not guarantee a win? Well, nothing is. But it just wrecks a lot of decks - for example burn, death's shadow, and is simply good in attrition matchups. Compared to this, pili-pala combo is faster, can beat infinite life, but requires a third piece(!) and easily disrupted, so i rely on in against non-interactive decks. And there is third plan in flyers beatdown, which actually gives me at least a third of my wins. My deck is not all-in combo and i can tune it after sideboard. I even consider Jund(not Abzan) a good matchup in general. Bad matchups for me are Tron and stony silence, but i'm working on these too.
I don't view this as an aggressive at all. Just baseless, sorry if you feel that way.
Yeah many decks have multiple plans, but they usually play into each other. This is one of the reasons I believe my build is so resilient, chord feeds into combo pieces as well ewit recursions. It can also search out trinket mage for sb plans and ballista finisher. Vial fits into the ewit/cryptic command plan. Cryptic plan fits into wall of roots stall, which fits into the whole plan B. The entire deck is so synergistic where I just don't see that in yours.
Many combos once assembled guarantee wins: ad nauseum, storm, scapeshift, tooth and nail, my build. Thopter/sword doesn't unfortunately.
Please don't feel that what I say is aggressive as I'm simply stating that so far your opinions haven't come with much logical consistency.
Ad nauseam, storm(at least old one) and scapeshift have a strong point in that they dodge creature removal. Your list does not.
You say that my statements are baseless and illogical, but they all come from playing games against real opponents, and a lot of them with tiered decks. Can you state what matchups you consider favorable?
Ad nauseam, storm(at least old one) and scapeshift have a strong point in that they dodge creature removal. Your list does not.
1) You switch your argument from "no combo is a guaranteed win" to "well those combo's don't die" to creature removal"
2) To further your own point you decide to mention outdated storm build. Gifts storm is currently tier 2 and trending up.
3) To further your own point, you disregard tooth and nail. Lucky I didn't even bring up abzan coco right?
You seem to have just bait and switched your arguments by not acknowledging your previous logical fallacy and continuing on with some new line of thought. I wouldn't be surprised if you completely disregard the above and bring up some new angle of approach. This is what I mean by baseless and illogical.
You say you've tested against real opponents with tiered decks, but then so can anybody - do you have any published results of similar decks on mtggoldfish or mtgtop8?
That's like me saying - I've tested your deck against real opponents with tiered decks, and it's been a failure.
I realise that it's probably hard to change your stance when you're so publicly exposed - even on the internet. Easier if we just pm each rather than flood these boards with circular rhetoric. Otherwise it's pretty hard for me to justify anymore time conversing with you.
1)Nothing, and i mean NOTHING guarantees you a win. Every win condition can be countered in one way or another. You seem to be emotionally attached to winning "on the spot", without having to attack with creatures, but Magic is a game where you need to deal 20 damage to opponent and that's it. Not 20 billion. Not in one turn. A win is a win, and in this light thopter-sword "guarantees" you maybe even more wins, because it is less fragile.
2)Well, they traded some of unfairness for consistency. Nothing is wrong with that. Still less fragile than pili-pala combo though.
3)I intentionally disregarded Tooth and Nail because it is bad. It has no tournament results, or even popularity. Abzan company, by the way, has a backup for two of their three pieces, and can decently attack without assembling combo using gavony township. It is not an all-in combo deck.
That's like me saying - I've tested your deck against real opponents with tiered decks, and it's been a failure.
Did you? If so, maybe you are right. But i only see theories about how two combos do not complement each other.
Published results? It's a deck creation forum, if this deck had some results, i guess it would be at least in developing competitive.
You are saying that i say random stuff just to win the argument, but you ignored my main point too. What are good and bad matchups for your list? Why is it superior compared to other versions?
I'm thinking about throne of the god-pharaoh. We do tap our stuff a lot with chief engineer and grand architect, or just from attacking. Could provide extra reach and extra clock we could use. Too bad its legendary but still?
I'm thinking about throne of the god-pharaoh. We do tap our stuff a lot with chief engineer and grand architect, or just from attacking. Could provide extra reach and extra clock we could use. Too bad its legendary but still?
I too considered this card, but don't quite feel it's right for my build. I could see it working in your deck though, since it looks to be very aggressive. Maybe just as a two of, since it's legendary as you said.
I'm thinking about throne of the god-pharaoh. We do tap our stuff a lot with chief engineer and grand architect, or just from attacking. Could provide extra reach and extra clock we could use. Too bad its legendary but still?
Was thinking about it as well, would like to hear how it works for you.
Whelp, ended up going 3-2 again. Not great, but good enough to keep free rollin' the league.
I went into my history and I am 24-11 (65-35 in games) since first posting my deck on 4/8/17. Just noticed that is exactly 100 games, so 65% winning percentage, yeah!
The deck has changed subtly since then, most notably taking out the Trophy Mage package for Trinket Mages instead.
For this tournament, I added Thalia, Guardian of Thraben in place of Thorn of Amethyst. It was fine, but I lost a couple games due to damage from lands. Ah the days of fetchless mono blue. I'll still play this or something very similar again tomorrow. I am not so gungho to find a replacement for Sage of Epityr anymore either. He was MVP tonight, helping me set up some sick sequences of plays. He has so much value beyond stacking your draws too, since this deck wants creatures on the battle field to tap for mana with Architect/Engineer or fly Smuggler's Copter etc.
...For this tournament, I added Thalia, Guardian of Thraben in place of Thorn of Amethyst. It was fine, but I lost a couple games due to damage from lands. Ah the days of fetchless mono blue...
To be honest I think eight fetchlands in a 20 land deck is too much, especially if you aren't running Aether Vial or mana-dorks. I'd recommend going down to 4 fetches max and switch out the others for fastlands like Seachrome Coast.
Also as just a sidenote, Path to Exile is anti-synergistic with Lodestone and Thalia when it comes to taxing your opponent. Hatebears can run it because of cards Leonin Arbiter and Aven Mindcensor. I ran a build one time with delve cards like Murderous Cut and Logic Knot since they could get around Lodestone Tax...but it did require atleast 6 fetchlands for delve fodder...
...For this tournament, I added Thalia, Guardian of Thraben in place of Thorn of Amethyst. It was fine, but I lost a couple games due to damage from lands. Ah the days of fetchless mono blue...
To be honest I think eight fetchlands in a 20 land deck is too much, especially if you aren't running Aether Vial or mana-dorks. I'd recommend going down to 4 fetches max and switch out the others for fastlands like Seachrome Coast.
Also as just a sidenote, Path to Exile is anti-synergistic with Lodestone and Thalia when it comes to taxing your opponent. Hatebears can run it because of cards Leonin Arbiter and Aven Mindcensor. I ran a build one time with delve cards like Murderous Cut and Logic Knot since they could get around Lodestone Tax...but it did require atleast 6 fetchlands for delve fodder...
I totally agree with you on the fetches. I went down to 6 and got a couple Seachrome Coasts. I also agree Path to Exile is a nombo with they whole tax theme, but it has still been really good for me. I did go down to two Paths in the sideboard because I had to add someChalice of the Voids I'm borrowing.
The Chalices seem really solid. I tried one in the main as a Trinket Mage target, and liked it. It still has utility mid-game, such as removal protection for important creatures or cutting off a key spell CMC etc. Dunno what the correct configuration is between main an side, but I have liked the 1-3 spit so far.
Here's what I have ran to 6-4 in my past two MTGO Leagues.
I actually believe the other variants are more reliant on architect, without it you have a bunch of etherium sculptors, chief engineers, etc.
With this build, not only are you able to chord quickly and efficiently for architect, you can also play the ewit/command gameplan.
Who, in truth, also help you cast your big stuff.
Witness-command is fine, but not superb - you still pay 4 mana each turn for a half of command (other half is always bounce witness), so you can either tap their attackers, or counter their spell. How is this winning a game? What is your actual finisher?
Finisher is grand architect/pili pala. Thought I was clear on that.
There's an older thread GA + Pili that has lists very similar to yours that you might want to check out; it's dedicated to the combo specifically.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/deck-creation-modern/221245-deck-grand-architect-pili-pala-infinite-combo
Ok, suppose they surgical your architect or put a stony silence. What's next?
So we're in g2/g3 and I haven't brought in any sideboard cards myself?
Cryptic Command answers any permanent effect including stony silence.
Surgical extraction on architect (which involves having it discarded from hand as I don't normally play it unless I'm going off or making a value ballista anyways) means I only have a bunch 2/1's, 1/1's, 0/5 walls, small ballista's on the field.
Seems pretty dire, but hey if we're talking about decks that are disrupting my hand (ie. bgx/shadow), I think it would be grim for both versions of the deck so I don't really see your point. It's almost as if you believe the chief engineer, etherium sculptor, 1/1 fliers deck doesn't rely on grand architect to go off. Those decks run a bunch of crewable vehicles, equipment slots, everything that gets exponentially worse in the face of creature removal/discard.
Grand architect is 100% the pay off card for both decks, so I'm not really seeing your whole point unless it's "gg surgical extract architect. Grand architect sucks, game over."
In that case, why are you even here?
Instead of arbitrarily voicing out haphazard scenarios, how about you propose a worthy build and I'll list out the comparative pros and cons between your list and mine?
Looking forward to your response.
Well, but i did. You can check my list several posts before. I even run pili-pala myself, and no chief engineers =)
Considering realism of my examples - i deliberately chose examples where combo just doesn't work. But in reality, they don't have to permanently shut down the combo - they could just kill/discard him (or even pili-pala) and execute their gameplan before you could find another.
An example of a good deck would be Death shadow - these decks are surely win a lot of their matches via their namesake card, but they don't fold on the spot if they lose it.
Yeah I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that Death Shadow's deck is the premier meta deck at the moment over Grand Architect. I mean after all, that's why we're here in the Deck Creation subforum and not in Tier 1.
As for your deck, I feel it is trying too hard to do many little things that you may just end up drawing some disjointed part of your deck with no cohesion.
Along the same lines of logic as yours, it is also very susceptible to stony silence and uh surgical extraction
Sword/Thopter combo takes up too many slots and doesn't even guarantee a win, feels bad imo. Gets worse when you're playing random one of artifacts to fuel whir to get part of the combo or pili-pala?
Anyways, I don't think it's really constructive just saying things like "nah I've tried this deck, it doesn't work, loses to death's shadow and gets hosed in X scenario". Cause then we'd just spend the rest of the time picking apart the flaws in each other's decks without providing meaningful, insightful feedback.
I don't understand why you are seeing all my comments in such an aggressive light.
Death's shadow was only an example on how a deck can have plan B and plan C. No one was talking power level here.
As for my decklist - yes, it kinda sucks against stony, but i have a sideboard plan for it (and, well, every deck has its weakness) It is completely surgical-proof though, as i don't rely on one combo.
Disjointed part? Such as? I guess Fatal push can be dead in some matchups, and maybe drawing foundry in multiples can be bad, but that's it. In my opinion, playing trinket mage without playing his silver bullet package is not a good deckbuilding.
Thopter-sword does not guarantee a win? Well, nothing is. But it just wrecks a lot of decks - for example burn, death's shadow, and is simply good in attrition matchups. Compared to this, pili-pala combo is faster, can beat infinite life, but requires a third piece(!) and easily disrupted, so i rely on in against non-interactive decks. And there is third plan in flyers beatdown, which actually gives me at least a third of my wins. My deck is not all-in combo and i can tune it after sideboard. I even consider Jund(not Abzan) a good matchup in general. Bad matchups for me are Tron and stony silence, but i'm working on these too.
I don't view this as an aggressive at all. Just baseless, sorry if you feel that way.
Yeah many decks have multiple plans, but they usually play into each other. This is one of the reasons I believe my build is so resilient, chord feeds into combo pieces as well ewit recursions. It can also search out trinket mage for sb plans and ballista finisher. Vial fits into the ewit/cryptic command plan. Cryptic plan fits into wall of roots stall, which fits into the whole plan B. The entire deck is so synergistic where I just don't see that in yours.
Many combos once assembled guarantee wins: ad nauseum, storm, scapeshift, tooth and nail, my build. Thopter/sword doesn't unfortunately.
Please don't feel that what I say is aggressive as I'm simply stating that so far your opinions haven't come with much logical consistency.
You say that my statements are baseless and illogical, but they all come from playing games against real opponents, and a lot of them with tiered decks. Can you state what matchups you consider favorable?
1) You switch your argument from "no combo is a guaranteed win" to "well those combo's don't die" to creature removal"
2) To further your own point you decide to mention outdated storm build. Gifts storm is currently tier 2 and trending up.
3) To further your own point, you disregard tooth and nail. Lucky I didn't even bring up abzan coco right?
You seem to have just bait and switched your arguments by not acknowledging your previous logical fallacy and continuing on with some new line of thought. I wouldn't be surprised if you completely disregard the above and bring up some new angle of approach. This is what I mean by baseless and illogical.
You say you've tested against real opponents with tiered decks, but then so can anybody - do you have any published results of similar decks on mtggoldfish or mtgtop8?
That's like me saying - I've tested your deck against real opponents with tiered decks, and it's been a failure.
I realise that it's probably hard to change your stance when you're so publicly exposed - even on the internet. Easier if we just pm each rather than flood these boards with circular rhetoric. Otherwise it's pretty hard for me to justify anymore time conversing with you.
1)Nothing, and i mean NOTHING guarantees you a win. Every win condition can be countered in one way or another. You seem to be emotionally attached to winning "on the spot", without having to attack with creatures, but Magic is a game where you need to deal 20 damage to opponent and that's it. Not 20 billion. Not in one turn. A win is a win, and in this light thopter-sword "guarantees" you maybe even more wins, because it is less fragile.
2)Well, they traded some of unfairness for consistency. Nothing is wrong with that. Still less fragile than pili-pala combo though.
3)I intentionally disregarded Tooth and Nail because it is bad. It has no tournament results, or even popularity. Abzan company, by the way, has a backup for two of their three pieces, and can decently attack without assembling combo using gavony township. It is not an all-in combo deck.
Did you? If so, maybe you are right. But i only see theories about how two combos do not complement each other.
Published results? It's a deck creation forum, if this deck had some results, i guess it would be at least in developing competitive.
You are saying that i say random stuff just to win the argument, but you ignored my main point too. What are good and bad matchups for your list? Why is it superior compared to other versions?
Nice!
Twitch: gamerchamp
Modern: UGrand Architect, UBTezzeret Control, UBWRG Bridge From Below (Dredge)
Legacy: UWGTrue-Name Bant
I went into my history and I am 24-11 (65-35 in games) since first posting my deck on 4/8/17. Just noticed that is exactly 100 games, so 65% winning percentage, yeah!
The deck has changed subtly since then, most notably taking out the Trophy Mage package for Trinket Mages instead.
For this tournament, I added Thalia, Guardian of Thraben in place of Thorn of Amethyst. It was fine, but I lost a couple games due to damage from lands. Ah the days of fetchless mono blue. I'll still play this or something very similar again tomorrow. I am not so gungho to find a replacement for Sage of Epityr anymore either. He was MVP tonight, helping me set up some sick sequences of plays. He has so much value beyond stacking your draws too, since this deck wants creatures on the battle field to tap for mana with Architect/Engineer or fly Smuggler's Copter etc.
4 Grand architect
4 Etherium Sculptor
4 Chief Engineer
4 Sage of Epityr
4 Mausoleum Wanderer
4 Lodestone Golem
4 Walking Ballista
3 Trinket Mage
2 Wurmcoil Engine
1 Spellskite
1 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Smuggler's Copter
1 Basilisk Collar
Land
4 Misty Rainforest
4 Flooded Strand
7 Island
2 Ghost Quarter
2 Hallowed Fountain
1 Plains
3 Path to Exile
3 Fragmentize
2 Relic of Progenitus
2 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
1 Ghost Quarter
1 Wurmcoil Engine
1 Pithing Needle
1 Hangarback Walker
1 Spellskite
Also as just a sidenote, Path to Exile is anti-synergistic with Lodestone and Thalia when it comes to taxing your opponent. Hatebears can run it because of cards Leonin Arbiter and Aven Mindcensor. I ran a build one time with delve cards like Murderous Cut and Logic Knot since they could get around Lodestone Tax...but it did require atleast 6 fetchlands for delve fodder...
Twitch: gamerchamp
Modern: UGrand Architect, UBTezzeret Control, UBWRG Bridge From Below (Dredge)
Legacy: UWGTrue-Name Bant
I totally agree with you on the fetches. I went down to 6 and got a couple Seachrome Coasts. I also agree Path to Exile is a nombo with they whole tax theme, but it has still been really good for me. I did go down to two Paths in the sideboard because I had to add someChalice of the Voids I'm borrowing.
The Chalices seem really solid. I tried one in the main as a Trinket Mage target, and liked it. It still has utility mid-game, such as removal protection for important creatures or cutting off a key spell CMC etc. Dunno what the correct configuration is between main an side, but I have liked the 1-3 spit so far.
Here's what I have ran to 6-4 in my past two MTGO Leagues.
4 Grand architect
4 Etherium Sculptor
4 Chief Engineer
4 Sage of Epityr
4 Mausoleum Wanderer
4 Lodestone Golem
4 Walking Ballista
3 Trinket Mage
2 Wurmcoil Engine
4 Smuggler's Copter
1 Basilisk Collar
1 Chalice of the Void
Land
2 Misty Rainforest
4 Flooded Strand
7 Island
2 Seachrome Coast
3 Ghost Quarter
2 Hallowed Fountain
1 Plains
3 Chalice of the void
2 Path to Exile
2 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
2 Fragmentize
2 Relic of Progenitus
2 Spellskite
1 Wurmcoil Engine
1 Hangarback Walker
https://www.reddit.com/r/ModernMagic/comments/6985d7/decks_you_didnt_know_you_wanted_to_play_in_modern/