>this is the exact turn 3 i would like to avoid. We typically play two mana leaks and i feel therefore cannot reliably expect that senerio. My ideal line t3 would involve
You're really missing the point I was trying to make. I was stating that looking at an opponent's hand, leaving them with a spell, then holding 2 mana at a later point telegraphs that you have mana leak-whether you do or not. My typical turn 3 doesn't look like that either, but was just an example of what I was trying to say.
>Yes modern is a fast format, but it is undeniable that we are a control deck and therefore must be at peace with the concept that we will inevitability be playing from behind at times...
Again, we are saying different things. Discard, counters, and removal are all an early game proactive plan to keep my opponent from operating efficiently. My plan to win certainly develops later, as do most control decks, but I am not catching up from behind-I am securing a stable position from the first turns of the game. If I am suspending AV and casting serum visions, that is not proactive as I meant it, as in interacting with the opponent. Obviously your discardless list has interaction, but the draw cards detract from that plan imo.
>Spellstutter sprite and bitterblossom ALONE are not better quality cards than goyf, bob, arch-bound...
Neither is AV or serum visions...of course every deck plays with synergies, and you actually sort of prove my point that AV and SV are not synergistic with the deck, itself, just pieces to help you dig for more synergy pieces. My whole point is why not fill every slot with a synergistic card?
>On Mistbind, Copter, and Sword dilemma
Mistbind is great i really do not mind him eating removal as much as youd think...
I'm actually astounded you play Mistbind in a list without discard. Maybe you always wait for vclique to see if it's safe, but imo one of the most important aspects of MBind is being absolutely sure she'll resolve and be able to swing. I have played MBind on upkeep into a terminate, and I lost on the spot. Sure, he didn't get to do anything else with his turn, but what had I done with my last turn? What am I doing with my next turn?
>Swords, my biggest issue i guess is exactly what turn is the prime turn to play them.
Never tap out for swords(or ever) unless you know you can get thru and deal damage, or if you actually need the lifegain on Solas. Optimally I drop it turn 5 and leave up 2 mana for interaction, then suit the next turn.
>You're really missing the point I was trying to make. I was stating that looking at an opponent's hand, leaving them with a spell, then holding 2 mana at a later point telegraphs that you have mana leak-whether you do or not.
It is widely expressed by magics greatest players that bluffing is no where near as powerful as players think and that it is good technical plays that win games. For this reason I am totally fine with the opportunity cost that comes with the draw spell in the sense I lose this turn 3 line and would rather dig with serum visions for VERY important lands removal and/or counter.
>Again, we are saying different things. Discard, counters, and removal are all an early game proactive plan to keep my opponent from operating efficiently
I agree that is a very proactive plan for sure but honestly believe it is far more important that WE operate efficiently and draw spells insure that. Throughout the history of this forum we have received overwhelming feedback from Grand Prixs or professional streamers testing the deck that we lose not due to our opponents efficient plays but rather when our deck doesn't operate efficiently. This leads me to believe we will win more matches where we ensure we hit lands and get spells on time mid and late game as opposed to shredding hands.
>Neither is AV or serum visions...of course every deck plays with synergies, and you actually sort of prove my point that AV and SV are not synergistic with the deck, itself, just pieces to help you dig for more synergy pieces. My whole point is why not fill every slot with a synergistic card?
I see your point. Discard is great, card advantage is great, but Im not sure as to how you believe it is more synergetic than a draw spell. Drawing cards cooperates with the deck very well more faeries more issues for our opponent, discard takes a card from their hand that we more than likely will have an answer for regardless. Ultimately I agree neither is perfect and totally accept both sides, but for now i prefer draws.
Quick note on SV: Two games last night I won solely on the back of a top deck serum visions Merfolk and Eldrazi. In menfolk I was able to get a needed cryptic to bounce BB ( was at 1 life) and tap creatures then swing lethal with Tar pit. And against eldrazi Drew a needed snap to dismember a top decked Smasher that sure were to end the game. SV serves a great purpose both early and late and am VERY happy with it thus far.
>I'm actually astounded you play Mistbind in a list without discard. Maybe you always wait for vclique to see if it's safe, but imo one of the most important aspects of MBind is being absolutely sure she'll resolve and be able to swing. I have played MBind on upkeep into a terminate, and I lost on the spot. Sure, he didn't get to do anything else with his turn, but what had I done with my last turn? What am I doing with my next turn?
Mistbind is a very tricky card and requires thoughtful play or risk blowouts as do all powerful cards (Cryptic), but the payoff is just too powerful for me to remove it. Faerie players require a VERY keen knowledge of the format at large and must be aware of possible removal. It is not necessary to protect mistbind to get huge payoffs, and I agree mistbind at upkeep into terminate is a VERY poor play which is why i would never do it. In that situation Assuming (Jund or Grixis is the matchup)Mistbind in grindy match ups is much better at saving a V Clique BB, etc. as to being run out as a threat trading bc 2 for 1 while saving a threat and ending all non instant speed interaction is great. And for those who are big on bluff plays MB is 4cc which implies cryptic a Jund or grixis player will typically attempt to bait out the crytptic and we are able to time walk them and stop the main threat from landing for a turn (HUGE when racing) When played effectively Mistbind sticking around is unneeded Imo.
Great point on when to play swords, I foolishly did not think of the idea of holding up the two mana t5 then equipping very savvy. Also with the discard shell and fatal pushes it may become a VERY good t4 play holding up 1 mana or play discard see its safe and commit to it. More and more i believe our takes on the draw vs discard revolve more around the swords and swords seem great with discard.
New topic how do we feel about match ups going forward? Meta seems very wide open at this point but imo we can expect a lot of ad naus, tron, GBx, eldrazi, Affinity, Burn, Titan decks, and various Blue control decks seem to be on the rise atm. Infect and dredge will still be decks for sure both in top deck lists at the first SCG open
Good Matchups imo
Ad Naus, Jund, Other Blue decks, Infect, titan decks.
OK matchups
Abzan, Affinity, burn.
Rough matchups
Tron (but better than most control decks), Eldrazi, Dredge (note little testing against new dredge but assume its still tough).
Of note is that in the comments Brian says this list is level 1 and definitely needs more tuning such as removing the River of Tears.
That article was evaluated earlier about yesterday with Unity24 Dotmatrix and Jeremy4050. Most of the discord fae team is split about the decklist, but that is the nature of things. There is an evolution that has created kind of a split between "Sword Faeries" and "Tribal Faeries" but there are other variants to the deck that have provided progress as well like "Copter Faeries"(2-3 max on copter) and "sorin splash faeries" each with respectable testing behind them. I think articles like these try to simplify faeries for an audience and as such generalize the deck too much to really give accurate information. Our group could probably make the case in an article of our own, but that would take forever to read as there are too many intricacies and lines of play to our cards
Can I get a link to the discord as those decks sounds interesting.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
So I have to ask. Since almost no run runs secluded glen anymore, is the common consensus that this card isn't good enough? Does it give too much info away?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
So I have to ask. Since almost no run runs secluded glen anymore, is the common consensus that this card isn't good enough? Does it give too much info away?
I'd say so unless you're playing a bitterblossom to follow it immediately.
Otherwise it gives your opponent a lot of information if you're holding a vClique, Spellstutter, or something else. Could spell trouble for you since they now know to properly play around it. If you're looking for a strong untapped land in turns 1-4 you should be looking at darkslick shores & drowned catacomb
Unrelated side note, I'm going to be at GP San Jose on Saturday and will most likely be doing an event or two. If anyone else is going there and would like to talk and or playtest, just let me know. I'm also going to hopefully be getting some alters from rkpost, but we will see if I can get to the front of the line for that to make sure I can get them done quickly.
I'm most likely getting my spellstutters altered, as he's altered stuff in the past for me and I've never been disappointed. If I manage to get them altered, I'll make sure to throw a photo of them on here for all to see.
>It is widely expressed by magics greatest players that bluffing is no where near as powerful as players think and that it is good technical plays that win games. For this reason I am totally fine with the opportunity cost that comes with the draw spell in the sense I lose this turn 3 line and would rather dig with serum visions for VERY important lands removal and/or counter.
This is a claim in which I am VERY interested in the source material. Corey Burkhart just wrote a great article about grixis control and a following sb guide, and makes very clear how important it is to be consistent with your bluffs (specifically citing mana leak). If you're playing a control deck, you're going to be holding mana early game to interact with your opponents early game. I really wish you would have linked/read my whole statement, where I said my typical turn 3 is not discard into 2 mana for leak, but was an example of looking at an opponent's hand and preparing for their next spell. I made the example less complex by having the interaction take place all in the same turn. I cast discard spells turn one and feel they're often just as valuable turn 6, just to know what my opponent has in hand.
Edit: My main original point was that discard exerts additional pressure when you bluff, since your opponent knows you've seen their hand, and are playing around it.
>Throughout the history of this forum we have received overwhelming feedback from Grand Prixs or professional streamers testing the deck that we lose not due to our opponents efficient plays but rather when our deck doesn't operate efficiently.
Every deck loses to itself some games, but I'm really not sure what you mean specifically when talking about faeries. We don't operate on a combo, we don't have lords, we don't run out of gas like burn...Sure, there are games where I don't see cryptic, and having it would be a huge leg up, but I certainly don't auto-lose those games. Early BB is often the best play our deck has, but I've had plenty and plenty of wins where I don't see BB at all.
>Drawing cards cooperates with the deck very well more faeries more issues for our opponent, discard takes a card from their hand that we more than likely will have an answer for regardless.
This is sort of combining two of my previous arguments. Draw spells are diluting the amount of answers in your deck, but making it easier to find specific ones. AV isn't getting you answers on suspend, and SV isn't getting you answers unless you top deck the card you need (scrying 2 isn't getting you answers until next turn) If you have a higher concentration of answers in your deck, you will have a higher chance of drawing them naturally and not needing to manipulate your deck. Ironically, the more card draw you have, the more you have to sift through them for answers. When we don't have a single lynchpin card needed to win, I'd rather just saturate my deck with efficient answers. My second argument here is that discard just adds to the number of "answer" cards I have. Thoughtseize my opponents OG Emrakul while he's tapped out with World Breaker in the gy is a nice example of discard acting as a significant "answer", effectively 2 for 1 my opponent, and seeing what else is in their hand.
Mistbind is a tricky card to play, I agree. On top of that, she has the caveat of needing to champion a faerie, and as I mentioned before, carries a large target over her head. As you mentioned, the synergy between MBind and cryptic bluffs is very nice. However, I've found that cryptic is effective enough at time waking my opponent, and upping the snap count to flash it back more consistently is just a more flexible plan, imo. Operating like a jund/attrition deck, I've found her to be too inconsistent, partially from a lowered faerie count(10 including BB), but also from a meta filled with cheap instant speed answers.
@Equinox I've been advocating cutting glens if you're playing control. I only run 10 faeries, including BB, but the information is also pretty relevant most of the time.
>This is a claim in which I am VERY interested in the source material.
Bluffing is powerful yes but never will be better than technical plays, that is fact and that is what I am saying. Every pro would agree. Here are links to two hall of famers expressing my beliefs on bluffs. http://www.channelfireball.com/home/pvs-playhouse-technical-play/
"Those people then start worrying about other things, such as bluffing, reading their opponents, blah blah—those things are cool, but they are not that important in anything but the latest stages of your Magic career, and you should not waste brainpower on them"
> Draw spells are diluting the amount of answers in your deck, but making it easier to find specific ones. AV isn't getting you answers on suspend, and SV isn't getting you answers unless you top deck the card you need (scrying 2 isn't getting you answers until next turn) If you have a higher concentration of answers in your deck, you will have a higher chance of drawing them naturally and not needing to manipulate your deck. Ironically, the more card draw you have, the more you have to sift through them for answers. When we don't have a single lynchpin card needed to win, I'd rather just saturate my deck with efficient answers. My second argument here is that discard just adds to the number of "answer" cards I have.
Im simple claiming our odds of winning significantly increase when we begin chaining cryptics and have a Spellstutter sprite that can countering relevant spells hence my choice for draws. I dont believe there is any successful control deck in the format right now running discard over AV for the same reason resources equal power. Draw spells are a staple in every control deck in the format rn and I dont believe there is any significant evidence that faeries is an exclusion of this as IoK has limited targets and thoughtseize bleeding can be significant as we are in VERY tight races at times and even my have to result to racing aggressively while our opponent has a much faster clock on us and bank on drawing that one last piece of removal to seal the deal.
> Mistbind is a tricky card to play, I agree. On top of that, she has the caveat of needing to champion a faerie, and as I mentioned before, carries a large target over her head. As you mentioned, the synergy between MBind and cryptic bluffs is very nice. However, I've found that cryptic is effective enough at time waking my opponent, and upping the snap count to flash it back more consistently is just a more flexible plan, imo. Operating like a jund/attrition deck, I've found her to be too inconsistent, partially from a lowered faerie count(10 including BB), but also from a meta filled with cheap instant speed answers.
Great points and I can definitely see the effectiveness in that route as cryptic does in fact play that role very well and i do believe it is much more likely to see your mistbind get snagged by a removal spell than it is for cryptic to get countered.
>Bluffing is powerful yes but never will be better than technical plays, that is fact and that is what I am saying. Every pro would agree. Here are links to two hall of famers expressing my beliefs on bluffs.
I appreciate you linking the material you drew your statements from. Both of those articles are relatively old, one of them being written before Modern was even a format. The modern meta is much more predictable than it was when either of these articles were written, therefore making bluffs a much more fundamental aspect of playing modern at this point in time. PVR is saying that honing your technical skills is better than focusing on fancy tricks, and I agree. Focus on being a spike, not a Johnny, if you want to have consistent and positive results. He's speaking on fundamentals, though, in this article, and even states,
--"Once you get to very good, though, then not making mistakes is not going to cut it, because most people at that level will not make a lot of them—by this point, I’d rather sacrifice a little bit of technicality for wins elsewhere (though it’s not really like building an RPG sheet—you are what you are). If you’re reading this article, however, that is most likely not you, and, again, you should just focus on technical play by now."
Hes pretty obviously talking about building good fundamentals, and by the time I'm having discussions about optimal builds on the forums, I'm assuming my peers have already developed those. He even states the importance of strong technical plays, IN ORDER to bluff,
--"Tapping lands is not much different—in many situations we’ll just tap the first lands we manage to grab that actually cast our spells; but then we’ll find ourselves in situations where we can’t cast a certain card, or, more subtly, we’ll not bluff anything because we happened to tap all our lands that cast tricks. This sounds silly, but I really do see people messing this up a lot, and I do it too, so I guess it’s not that silly."
Its like when you have 6 mana, cast a 2 mana spell, and realize you no longer have 3 blue for cryptic anymore, but could have. These are all subtleties that are improved by practicing with the deck. What I think you're saying is bluffing will never be better than OPTIMAL plays, but I would argue that bluffing is sometimes THE optimal play, especially in such an interactive deck like faeries.
>I dont believe there is any successful control deck in the format right now running discard over AV for the same reason resources equal power. Draw spells are a staple in every control deck in the format rn and I dont believe there is any significant evidence that faeries is an exclusion of this as IoK has limited targets and thoughtseize bleeding can be significant as we are in VERY tight races at times and even my have to result to racing aggressively while our opponent has a much faster clock on us and bank on drawing that one last piece of removal to seal the deal.
You make a good point that no other control decks run discard, namely grixis. I think a large facet in that decision is to include cheap spells to fill the gy with and resolve an early tasigur or gurmag angler. Kolaghans command is a card that is often used for its discard mode in that strategy.
IoK has limited targets, but in a Turn-4 format it definitely hits a vast majority of relevant Tier 1 cards. Thoughtseize is, like you say, very painful in tight races, but is amazing against big mana decks and is almost never a dead card, unless we draw it too late and cant invest the life. Its also probably the card I side out the most, and sb games are ideally 2/3 of the games we will be playing. I find the downsides of discard vastly outweighed by the hand/deck information, as well as usually taking relevant threats and also giving more weight to a bluff I may show.
I'm definitely not trying to change anyone's mind or claim that my opinions are "correct", but you did ask for criticism and I was happy to oblige. I put a lot of thought and work into my deck as well as my replies on this forum. I think too often people approach faeries as a pet deck or a Johnny deck, but I genuinely believe faeries can compete in the Tier 1 Modedern meta, and have found my attrition/control playstle to be consistent in its results.
Very greats points and can very easily see both sides. However, I could not be more pleased with drawing cards and casting mist binds in testing and also great results are showing up with the draw spell, mistbind package by Osman who is ultimately who inspired my list.
I am running 3 IoK and 3 Thoughtseize. I'm very happy with this mix.
>"Thoughtseize is, like you say, very painful in tight races, but is amazing against big mana decks and is almost never a dead card, unless we draw it too late and cant invest the life. Its also probably the card I side out the most, and sb games are ideally 2/3 of the games we will be playing. "
Thoughtseize is typically dead against decks like Burn and Affinity unless we play it on turn 1. I very often end up seeing a burn player with zero cards in hand past turn 3 (and turn 2, we want to be countering a spell or killing a creature).
>I could not be more pleased with drawing cards and casting mist binds in testing and also great results are showing up with the draw spell, mistbind package by Osman who is ultimately who inspired my list.
Be sure you are testing against the appropriate mix of decks. I strongly suggest using MTGO Competitive leagues if you want to test properly. AV and Mistbind are amazing against slower decks but very poor against the faster ones. Mistbind is obviously great against Tron (and somewhat against Eldrazi) but Thoughtseize is just as good, with the benefit of being useful early even against affinity and burn.
A quick discussion of technical play. If you'd like to answer, please use the SPOILER tag to hide your answer from others.
You are playing against Grishoalbrand. It is their turn, right after their attack. They are tapped out. You have been mana-light most of the game but through a combination of counter magic and discard, you managed to mostly stop their combo. It’s looking bad however - you have three U/B mana on the board, a snap caster and a mana leak in hand and they are going to win in either one turn or two. The only relevant spell in your graveyard is a Go for the Throat and a Serum Visions you played earlier.
The Grishoalbrand has two cards left in their deck - worrying because they also have a Lab Maniac on the board. In addition, they have a (tapped) Grislebrand on the board that will still be around next turn (they cast it). They also likely (75% chance) have a Goryos Vengeance in hand - if they don’t, it’s in one of the two cards left, and they have four tapped mana. All their other creatures have been exiled and they lack anything else relevant in the graveyard.
You are on seven life after the attack and your opponent is on three life.
You have a suspended Ancestral Vision with zero suspend counters on it. Last turn, you played Serum Visions and you put a Go for the Throat on top and a creeping tar pit below it. You think you have about a 25% chance that there is a second removal spell in either the third or fourth card down and a 30% chance that there will be a land that comes into play untapped as well as a 10% chance that one of the other two unknown cards is a flier that could chump block for a turn.
Draw your cards, play 4th land. They draw their second to last cand, kill Griselbrand after they attack. Draw, say go, they draw their last card, your Snapcaster answers any line they have. They deck out?
So something roughly similar came up for me in a MTGO match. It made me realize that just because certain cards usually work one way, we need to not forget their other uses.
My solution was: kill their Lab Maniac. Untap, resolve AV targeting THEM, win.
Since that game, I've used the same trick to attack into an Ensnaring Bridge many times.
You're really missing the point I was trying to make. I was stating that looking at an opponent's hand, leaving them with a spell, then holding 2 mana at a later point telegraphs that you have mana leak-whether you do or not. My typical turn 3 doesn't look like that either, but was just an example of what I was trying to say.
>Yes modern is a fast format, but it is undeniable that we are a control deck and therefore must be at peace with the concept that we will inevitability be playing from behind at times...
Again, we are saying different things. Discard, counters, and removal are all an early game proactive plan to keep my opponent from operating efficiently. My plan to win certainly develops later, as do most control decks, but I am not catching up from behind-I am securing a stable position from the first turns of the game. If I am suspending AV and casting serum visions, that is not proactive as I meant it, as in interacting with the opponent. Obviously your discardless list has interaction, but the draw cards detract from that plan imo.
>Spellstutter sprite and bitterblossom ALONE are not better quality cards than goyf, bob, arch-bound...
Neither is AV or serum visions...of course every deck plays with synergies, and you actually sort of prove my point that AV and SV are not synergistic with the deck, itself, just pieces to help you dig for more synergy pieces. My whole point is why not fill every slot with a synergistic card?
>On Mistbind, Copter, and Sword dilemma
Mistbind is great i really do not mind him eating removal as much as youd think...
I'm actually astounded you play Mistbind in a list without discard. Maybe you always wait for vclique to see if it's safe, but imo one of the most important aspects of MBind is being absolutely sure she'll resolve and be able to swing. I have played MBind on upkeep into a terminate, and I lost on the spot. Sure, he didn't get to do anything else with his turn, but what had I done with my last turn? What am I doing with my next turn?
>Swords, my biggest issue i guess is exactly what turn is the prime turn to play them.
Never tap out for swords(or ever) unless you know you can get thru and deal damage, or if you actually need the lifegain on Solas. Optimally I drop it turn 5 and leave up 2 mana for interaction, then suit the next turn.
It is widely expressed by magics greatest players that bluffing is no where near as powerful as players think and that it is good technical plays that win games. For this reason I am totally fine with the opportunity cost that comes with the draw spell in the sense I lose this turn 3 line and would rather dig with serum visions for VERY important lands removal and/or counter.
>Again, we are saying different things. Discard, counters, and removal are all an early game proactive plan to keep my opponent from operating efficiently
I agree that is a very proactive plan for sure but honestly believe it is far more important that WE operate efficiently and draw spells insure that. Throughout the history of this forum we have received overwhelming feedback from Grand Prixs or professional streamers testing the deck that we lose not due to our opponents efficient plays but rather when our deck doesn't operate efficiently. This leads me to believe we will win more matches where we ensure we hit lands and get spells on time mid and late game as opposed to shredding hands.
>Neither is AV or serum visions...of course every deck plays with synergies, and you actually sort of prove my point that AV and SV are not synergistic with the deck, itself, just pieces to help you dig for more synergy pieces. My whole point is why not fill every slot with a synergistic card?
I see your point. Discard is great, card advantage is great, but Im not sure as to how you believe it is more synergetic than a draw spell. Drawing cards cooperates with the deck very well more faeries more issues for our opponent, discard takes a card from their hand that we more than likely will have an answer for regardless. Ultimately I agree neither is perfect and totally accept both sides, but for now i prefer draws.
Quick note on SV: Two games last night I won solely on the back of a top deck serum visions Merfolk and Eldrazi. In menfolk I was able to get a needed cryptic to bounce BB ( was at 1 life) and tap creatures then swing lethal with Tar pit. And against eldrazi Drew a needed snap to dismember a top decked Smasher that sure were to end the game. SV serves a great purpose both early and late and am VERY happy with it thus far.
>I'm actually astounded you play Mistbind in a list without discard. Maybe you always wait for vclique to see if it's safe, but imo one of the most important aspects of MBind is being absolutely sure she'll resolve and be able to swing. I have played MBind on upkeep into a terminate, and I lost on the spot. Sure, he didn't get to do anything else with his turn, but what had I done with my last turn? What am I doing with my next turn?
Mistbind is a very tricky card and requires thoughtful play or risk blowouts as do all powerful cards (Cryptic), but the payoff is just too powerful for me to remove it. Faerie players require a VERY keen knowledge of the format at large and must be aware of possible removal. It is not necessary to protect mistbind to get huge payoffs, and I agree mistbind at upkeep into terminate is a VERY poor play which is why i would never do it. In that situation Assuming (Jund or Grixis is the matchup)Mistbind in grindy match ups is much better at saving a V Clique BB, etc. as to being run out as a threat trading bc 2 for 1 while saving a threat and ending all non instant speed interaction is great. And for those who are big on bluff plays MB is 4cc which implies cryptic a Jund or grixis player will typically attempt to bait out the crytptic and we are able to time walk them and stop the main threat from landing for a turn (HUGE when racing) When played effectively Mistbind sticking around is unneeded Imo.
Great point on when to play swords, I foolishly did not think of the idea of holding up the two mana t5 then equipping very savvy. Also with the discard shell and fatal pushes it may become a VERY good t4 play holding up 1 mana or play discard see its safe and commit to it. More and more i believe our takes on the draw vs discard revolve more around the swords and swords seem great with discard.
New topic how do we feel about match ups going forward? Meta seems very wide open at this point but imo we can expect a lot of ad naus, tron, GBx, eldrazi, Affinity, Burn, Titan decks, and various Blue control decks seem to be on the rise atm. Infect and dredge will still be decks for sure both in top deck lists at the first SCG open
Good Matchups imo
Ad Naus, Jund, Other Blue decks, Infect, titan decks.
OK matchups
Abzan, Affinity, burn.
Rough matchups
Tron (but better than most control decks), Eldrazi, Dredge (note little testing against new dredge but assume its still tough).
Can I get a link to the discord as those decks sounds interesting.
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
I'd say so unless you're playing a bitterblossom to follow it immediately.
Otherwise it gives your opponent a lot of information if you're holding a vClique, Spellstutter, or something else. Could spell trouble for you since they now know to properly play around it. If you're looking for a strong untapped land in turns 1-4 you should be looking at darkslick shores & drowned catacomb
Unrelated side note, I'm going to be at GP San Jose on Saturday and will most likely be doing an event or two. If anyone else is going there and would like to talk and or playtest, just let me know. I'm also going to hopefully be getting some alters from rkpost, but we will see if I can get to the front of the line for that to make sure I can get them done quickly.
I'm most likely getting my spellstutters altered, as he's altered stuff in the past for me and I've never been disappointed. If I manage to get them altered, I'll make sure to throw a photo of them on here for all to see.
FULL TIME FAERIES
Selvala
This is a claim in which I am VERY interested in the source material. Corey Burkhart just wrote a great article about grixis control and a following sb guide, and makes very clear how important it is to be consistent with your bluffs (specifically citing mana leak). If you're playing a control deck, you're going to be holding mana early game to interact with your opponents early game. I really wish you would have linked/read my whole statement, where I said my typical turn 3 is not discard into 2 mana for leak, but was an example of looking at an opponent's hand and preparing for their next spell. I made the example less complex by having the interaction take place all in the same turn. I cast discard spells turn one and feel they're often just as valuable turn 6, just to know what my opponent has in hand.
Edit: My main original point was that discard exerts additional pressure when you bluff, since your opponent knows you've seen their hand, and are playing around it.
>Throughout the history of this forum we have received overwhelming feedback from Grand Prixs or professional streamers testing the deck that we lose not due to our opponents efficient plays but rather when our deck doesn't operate efficiently.
Every deck loses to itself some games, but I'm really not sure what you mean specifically when talking about faeries. We don't operate on a combo, we don't have lords, we don't run out of gas like burn...Sure, there are games where I don't see cryptic, and having it would be a huge leg up, but I certainly don't auto-lose those games. Early BB is often the best play our deck has, but I've had plenty and plenty of wins where I don't see BB at all.
>Drawing cards cooperates with the deck very well more faeries more issues for our opponent, discard takes a card from their hand that we more than likely will have an answer for regardless.
This is sort of combining two of my previous arguments. Draw spells are diluting the amount of answers in your deck, but making it easier to find specific ones. AV isn't getting you answers on suspend, and SV isn't getting you answers unless you top deck the card you need (scrying 2 isn't getting you answers until next turn) If you have a higher concentration of answers in your deck, you will have a higher chance of drawing them naturally and not needing to manipulate your deck. Ironically, the more card draw you have, the more you have to sift through them for answers. When we don't have a single lynchpin card needed to win, I'd rather just saturate my deck with efficient answers. My second argument here is that discard just adds to the number of "answer" cards I have. Thoughtseize my opponents OG Emrakul while he's tapped out with World Breaker in the gy is a nice example of discard acting as a significant "answer", effectively 2 for 1 my opponent, and seeing what else is in their hand.
Mistbind is a tricky card to play, I agree. On top of that, she has the caveat of needing to champion a faerie, and as I mentioned before, carries a large target over her head. As you mentioned, the synergy between MBind and cryptic bluffs is very nice. However, I've found that cryptic is effective enough at time waking my opponent, and upping the snap count to flash it back more consistently is just a more flexible plan, imo. Operating like a jund/attrition deck, I've found her to be too inconsistent, partially from a lowered faerie count(10 including BB), but also from a meta filled with cheap instant speed answers.
@Equinox I've been advocating cutting glens if you're playing control. I only run 10 faeries, including BB, but the information is also pretty relevant most of the time.
Bluffing is powerful yes but never will be better than technical plays, that is fact and that is what I am saying. Every pro would agree. Here are links to two hall of famers expressing my beliefs on bluffs.
http://www.channelfireball.com/home/pvs-playhouse-technical-play/
"Those people then start worrying about other things, such as bluffing, reading their opponents, blah blah—those things are cool, but they are not that important in anything but the latest stages of your Magic career, and you should not waste brainpower on them"
http://www.channelfireball.com/home/here-i-ruel-bluffing-in-magic/
"However, most risky bluffs at Magic will get you two or three damage in, but they can cost you a game if you get caught"
> Draw spells are diluting the amount of answers in your deck, but making it easier to find specific ones. AV isn't getting you answers on suspend, and SV isn't getting you answers unless you top deck the card you need (scrying 2 isn't getting you answers until next turn) If you have a higher concentration of answers in your deck, you will have a higher chance of drawing them naturally and not needing to manipulate your deck. Ironically, the more card draw you have, the more you have to sift through them for answers. When we don't have a single lynchpin card needed to win, I'd rather just saturate my deck with efficient answers. My second argument here is that discard just adds to the number of "answer" cards I have.
Im simple claiming our odds of winning significantly increase when we begin chaining cryptics and have a Spellstutter sprite that can countering relevant spells hence my choice for draws. I dont believe there is any successful control deck in the format right now running discard over AV for the same reason resources equal power. Draw spells are a staple in every control deck in the format rn and I dont believe there is any significant evidence that faeries is an exclusion of this as IoK has limited targets and thoughtseize bleeding can be significant as we are in VERY tight races at times and even my have to result to racing aggressively while our opponent has a much faster clock on us and bank on drawing that one last piece of removal to seal the deal.
> Mistbind is a tricky card to play, I agree. On top of that, she has the caveat of needing to champion a faerie, and as I mentioned before, carries a large target over her head. As you mentioned, the synergy between MBind and cryptic bluffs is very nice. However, I've found that cryptic is effective enough at time waking my opponent, and upping the snap count to flash it back more consistently is just a more flexible plan, imo. Operating like a jund/attrition deck, I've found her to be too inconsistent, partially from a lowered faerie count(10 including BB), but also from a meta filled with cheap instant speed answers.
Great points and I can definitely see the effectiveness in that route as cryptic does in fact play that role very well and i do believe it is much more likely to see your mistbind get snagged by a removal spell than it is for cryptic to get countered.
I appreciate you linking the material you drew your statements from. Both of those articles are relatively old, one of them being written before Modern was even a format. The modern meta is much more predictable than it was when either of these articles were written, therefore making bluffs a much more fundamental aspect of playing modern at this point in time. PVR is saying that honing your technical skills is better than focusing on fancy tricks, and I agree. Focus on being a spike, not a Johnny, if you want to have consistent and positive results. He's speaking on fundamentals, though, in this article, and even states,
--"Once you get to very good, though, then not making mistakes is not going to cut it, because most people at that level will not make a lot of them—by this point, I’d rather sacrifice a little bit of technicality for wins elsewhere (though it’s not really like building an RPG sheet—you are what you are). If you’re reading this article, however, that is most likely not you, and, again, you should just focus on technical play by now."
Hes pretty obviously talking about building good fundamentals, and by the time I'm having discussions about optimal builds on the forums, I'm assuming my peers have already developed those. He even states the importance of strong technical plays, IN ORDER to bluff,
--"Tapping lands is not much different—in many situations we’ll just tap the first lands we manage to grab that actually cast our spells; but then we’ll find ourselves in situations where we can’t cast a certain card, or, more subtly, we’ll not bluff anything because we happened to tap all our lands that cast tricks. This sounds silly, but I really do see people messing this up a lot, and I do it too, so I guess it’s not that silly."
Its like when you have 6 mana, cast a 2 mana spell, and realize you no longer have 3 blue for cryptic anymore, but could have. These are all subtleties that are improved by practicing with the deck. What I think you're saying is bluffing will never be better than OPTIMAL plays, but I would argue that bluffing is sometimes THE optimal play, especially in such an interactive deck like faeries.
>I dont believe there is any successful control deck in the format right now running discard over AV for the same reason resources equal power. Draw spells are a staple in every control deck in the format rn and I dont believe there is any significant evidence that faeries is an exclusion of this as IoK has limited targets and thoughtseize bleeding can be significant as we are in VERY tight races at times and even my have to result to racing aggressively while our opponent has a much faster clock on us and bank on drawing that one last piece of removal to seal the deal.
You make a good point that no other control decks run discard, namely grixis. I think a large facet in that decision is to include cheap spells to fill the gy with and resolve an early tasigur or gurmag angler. Kolaghans command is a card that is often used for its discard mode in that strategy.
IoK has limited targets, but in a Turn-4 format it definitely hits a vast majority of relevant Tier 1 cards. Thoughtseize is, like you say, very painful in tight races, but is amazing against big mana decks and is almost never a dead card, unless we draw it too late and cant invest the life. Its also probably the card I side out the most, and sb games are ideally 2/3 of the games we will be playing. I find the downsides of discard vastly outweighed by the hand/deck information, as well as usually taking relevant threats and also giving more weight to a bluff I may show.
I'm definitely not trying to change anyone's mind or claim that my opinions are "correct", but you did ask for criticism and I was happy to oblige. I put a lot of thought and work into my deck as well as my replies on this forum. I think too often people approach faeries as a pet deck or a Johnny deck, but I genuinely believe faeries can compete in the Tier 1 Modedern meta, and have found my attrition/control playstle to be consistent in its results.
>"Thoughtseize is, like you say, very painful in tight races, but is amazing against big mana decks and is almost never a dead card, unless we draw it too late and cant invest the life. Its also probably the card I side out the most, and sb games are ideally 2/3 of the games we will be playing. "
Thoughtseize is typically dead against decks like Burn and Affinity unless we play it on turn 1. I very often end up seeing a burn player with zero cards in hand past turn 3 (and turn 2, we want to be countering a spell or killing a creature).
>I could not be more pleased with drawing cards and casting mist binds in testing and also great results are showing up with the draw spell, mistbind package by Osman who is ultimately who inspired my list.
Be sure you are testing against the appropriate mix of decks. I strongly suggest using MTGO Competitive leagues if you want to test properly. AV and Mistbind are amazing against slower decks but very poor against the faster ones. Mistbind is obviously great against Tron (and somewhat against Eldrazi) but Thoughtseize is just as good, with the benefit of being useful early even against affinity and burn.
Kickstarter here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1365447257/magic-the-gathering-mtg-pricing-trading-and-collec
You are playing against Grishoalbrand. It is their turn, right after their attack. They are tapped out. You have been mana-light most of the game but through a combination of counter magic and discard, you managed to mostly stop their combo. It’s looking bad however - you have three U/B mana on the board, a snap caster and a mana leak in hand and they are going to win in either one turn or two. The only relevant spell in your graveyard is a Go for the Throat and a Serum Visions you played earlier.
The Grishoalbrand has two cards left in their deck - worrying because they also have a Lab Maniac on the board. In addition, they have a (tapped) Grislebrand on the board that will still be around next turn (they cast it). They also likely (75% chance) have a Goryos Vengeance in hand - if they don’t, it’s in one of the two cards left, and they have four tapped mana. All their other creatures have been exiled and they lack anything else relevant in the graveyard.
You are on seven life after the attack and your opponent is on three life.
You have a suspended Ancestral Vision with zero suspend counters on it. Last turn, you played Serum Visions and you put a Go for the Throat on top and a creeping tar pit below it. You think you have about a 25% chance that there is a second removal spell in either the third or fourth card down and a 30% chance that there will be a land that comes into play untapped as well as a 10% chance that one of the other two unknown cards is a flier that could chump block for a turn.
What is your play?
Kickstarter here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1365447257/magic-the-gathering-mtg-pricing-trading-and-collec
My solution was: kill their Lab Maniac. Untap, resolve AV targeting THEM, win.
Since that game, I've used the same trick to attack into an Ensnaring Bridge many times.
Kickstarter here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1365447257/magic-the-gathering-mtg-pricing-trading-and-collec
Kickstarter here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1365447257/magic-the-gathering-mtg-pricing-trading-and-collec
5-0 list