it's been all of a week. people asking for results and such need to take that into account, as well as the fact that the BNR isn't even live on modo yet, last i checked(or if it is, it JUST went live) so there hasn't been a chance even. That said, most of us seem to be basing our predictions/lists off the basis of the deck as it was in standard/extended, where it's not even a question how much of a terror it was. When we are all starting with a deck that has no actual testing in this format, all we can do is fall back upon a format in which it did well with. there's a reason ub fae was ub fae then(in a meta of 4 and 5 color decks, so not like the mana was an issue). the thread has to start somewhere, and honestly, i doubt we will see anything meaningful until after the pro tour and subsequent modern gp afterwards. THIS is what should determine where things will really settle. until we actually have results, we can only theorycraft and try to help each other along with our testing.
Ok forget about statistics, just tell me what decks UB Fae is supposed to be winning and losing against. Far as I can tell right now, it doesn't have many (any) favorable relevant match ups. If I am way off please let me know.
My current list is learning more towards control with heavy discard, counters, with swords and no scions. With that in mind I've had very favorable matches with twin (both versions), UWR control, affinity, living end, and r/g tron when they don't get you au naturale (but then again who is favored against that). All of those decks are very favorable if you give them the proper respect that they deserve. The match ups which are about even for me are BG goyf/liliana decks as anytime you have two attrition-y decks facing off a large portion of the match is based on top decks. UWR geist/dragon midrange builds are maybe a little unfavorable for us because they have so many good cards in their main and we can't stop them all. The matches which I think we are actively bad against are 1 drop zoo, burn, and pod varients.
Some people might think the pod matches are fairly close instead of being very unfavorable but I have to disagree. Against melira pod we have to play EXTREMELY tight to get a win and requiring that much effort to have an even match up translates to being a bad match up in my opinion. Kiki pod is entirely different as they're far easier to disrupt and aren't able to "kill you with pure value" as much as melira, but can easily combo off from an empty board when you thought you were safe and didn't have to kill them asap. Regardless I still think both versions of pod isn't good to see across from you, and am still trying to think of things that will give us an edge.
Admittedly I have never actually played pod once in my life, I've only played against it and watched it on stream/GP coverage so I am not nearly as familiar with the different lines of play and pod chains they're capable of as a seasoned pod pilot would be. So I could easily be a terrible player in the match and be dead wrong on every play I make. So it's possible that the pod match isn't as bad as I've been saying it is for a while and I'm just a total noob with the match up and play especially poor as a result.
EDIT:
For the love of god, those who claim to have a good pod match up (which ever flavor you prefer) can you tell me how a typical winning game goes or give me a play by play of a test game? If you think the match is even or good I'd love to know what I'm doing wrong, but I just can't see it and have to rely heavily on the board to save me.
I agree that I like a more swords heavy controlling version of ub fae, but with me being so enamored with vapor snag I wanted to try an more balls out plus tempo shell. This is what I will be working with
Thoughts? I want to try and improve some points against the zoo match up. They are always extremely aggressive in playing shocks untapped, and the extra points from vapor snag add up quick. Also, seeing as how Michael Hetrick was playing rampagers to push damage through, a timely vapor snag will break their back. Snapcaster mage might be the next step in a build like this.
Some people might think the pod matches are fairly close instead of being very unfavorable but I have to disagree. Against melira pod we have to play EXTREMELY tight to get a win and requiring that much effort to have an even match up translates to being a bad match up in my opinion. Kiki pod is entirely different as they're far easier to disrupt and aren't able to "kill you with pure value" as much as melira, but can easily combo off from an empty board when you thought you were safe and didn't have to kill them asap. Regardless I still think both versions of pod isn't good to see across from you, and am still trying to think of things that will give us an edge.
Admittedly I have never actually played pod once in my life, I've only played against it and watched it on stream/GP coverage so I am not nearly as familiar with the different lines of play and pod chains they're capable of as a seasoned pod pilot would be. So I could easily be a terrible player in the match and be dead wrong on every play I make. So it's possible that the pod match isn't as bad as I've been saying it is for a while and I'm just a total noob with the match up and play especially poor as a result.
EDIT:
For the love of god, those who claim to have a good pod match up (which ever flavor you prefer) can you tell me how a typical winning game goes or give me a play by play of a test game? If you think the match is even or good I'd love to know what I'm doing wrong, but I just can't see it and have to rely heavily on the board to save me.
tbh as i said before i found pod a good MU or at least beatable as far as they don't land a pod. Too often they start chaining value without a viable/timely removal from me. So i have at least 2 slot in the SB (2x Cage) just for this occurrence.
Without it they play just a bunch of creature turn after turn, preyed upon by our removals or counterspells.
Between melira and kiki however the latter seems easier because is more comboish and less valueish than the former.
If i manage to produce some videos i will post them here.
- L
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
1) How is the UB Fae primer in the Established section when it hasn't even proven itself to be viable, let alone tournament verified?
2) The UB Fae strat is really not working. It just gets smoked by to many decks on the field, and it doesn't have enough matches that it dominates. Agree or Disagree?
3) When people start admitting to themselves that UB Fae is not viable, will this thread return to discussion of the much more viable UR Fae? Will Grixis miniFae be looked at?
1) Why are half the decks here? Most have never top 16'd a GP, or even been relevant meta-game decks. You want to tell me Assault Loam, Balance Combo, or Esper Zur are currently meta players? The point of the Established deck section is decks that have the power level to compete with the best decks in modern, but isn't good enough to be considered the top of the meta. Faeries was THE dominant deck in both its Standard iteration and its Extended iteration. That alone gives it enough of a pedigree to warrant being here for the time being.
2) I like how you say it's "not working" one week after the banlist. Clearly you must have some obscene amounts of testing versus proven meta decks? Verifiable data? No? Then how do you think you coming in here and saying "its not working" is either a relevant comment or one that is even true? You seems to have literally NO playtesting experience with it, so it is mind-numbing to have you pull something like that out. At the LEAST you could read the 8 pages that have been contributed to in the past week in this very thread. You want data? We have dozens of decklists, at least 2 tournament reports at GPTs, and a fairly large discourse on matchups. Yet you seem to be above looking at all that.
3) Again with the arrogance. I'm not really going to waste a time dignifying this with a response, beyond that Grixis Fae has been/is being discussed in this forum, and many, myself included, have actually put the hours in with both variants and have already said in this very thread that it is more than likely inferior to UB Fae.
Either contribute something in a positive light or leave the thread. I don't like being rude to people, but I'm also not going to sugarcoat that I think people who do posts like this are a waste of time and energy for anyone who even looks at it. If you want to contribute relevant discussion, I'm all for it.
1) Why are half the decks here? Most have never top 16'd a GP, or even been relevant meta-game decks. You want to tell me Assault Loam, Balance Combo, or Esper Zur are currently meta players? The point of the Established deck section is decks that have the power level to compete with the best decks in modern, but isn't good enough to be considered the top of the meta. Faeries was THE dominant deck in both its Standard iteration and its Extended iteration. That alone gives it enough of a pedigree to warrant being here for the time being.
2) I like how you say it's "not working" one week after the banlist. Clearly you must have some obscene amounts of testing versus proven meta decks? Verifiable data? No? Then how do you think you coming in here and saying "its not working" is either a relevant comment or one that is even true? You seems to have literally NO playtesting experience with it, so it is mind-numbing to have you pull something like that out. At the LEAST you could read the 8 pages that have been contributed to in the past week in this very thread. You want data? We have dozens of decklists, at least 2 tournament reports at GPTs, and a fairly large discourse on matchups. Yet you seem to be above looking at all that.
3) Again with the arrogance. I'm not really going to waste a time dignifying this with a response, beyond that Grixis Fae has been/is being discussed in this forum, and many, myself included, have actually put the hours in with both variants and have already said in this very thread that it is more than likely inferior to UB Fae.
Either contribute something in a positive light or leave the thread. I don't like being rude to people, but I'm also not going to sugarcoat that I think people who do posts like this are a waste of time and energy for anyone who even looks at it. If you want to contribute relevant discussion, I'm all for it.
1) The subtext under the Established forum title says "Tournament decks with results". Care to link some UB Fae tournament results for us to look at?
2) Well no I dont have some obscene amount of play testing against UB Fae, but lets compare it to Zoo. I think any reasonable person would define Zoo as "working at or near Tier 1 level". That deck has had the same amount of time to test as Fae, yet no one is questioning its viability. If zoo and ub fae were race cars that started at the same time, Zoo is like a supercharged Mustang against a ford focus hybrid. I have quite a few videos of my deck fighting UB Fae and Zoo. UB Fae is...not working. I don't know how else to say it. Unless a major break though happens, the deck is to be considered fringe viability AT BEST. Again I am speaking of UB Fae specifically, not referring to UR fae which actually has some legs in this format.
3) I'm not trying to be arrogant I just don't like wasting time. The old cliche "Don't throw good money after bad" seems to apply here. I believe UB Fae does not work. If you think I am wrong please link me a list that I can test with. I think the only way Fae works is in a UR shell or a Light Fae grixis shell that does not attempt to make use of the Tribal, only yses the Fae cards that are good on their own.
1) How is the UB Fae primer in the Established section when it hasn't even proven itself to be viable, let alone tournament verified?
2) The UB Fae strat is really not working. It just gets smoked by to many decks on the field, and it doesn't have enough matches that it dominates. Agree or Disagree?
3) When people start admitting to themselves that UB Fae is not viable, will this thread return to discussion of the much more viable UR Fae? Will Grixis miniFae be looked at?
1. I guess that this makes sense. I would have preferred it if the U(x) Faeries thread hadn't been archived.
2. I posted a version inspired by your Azorius Control deck. It runs a large amount of counterspells, which gives it the tools to beat Twin, WUR Control, and WUR Midrange. It can hold its own against Tron and BGx. For the most part, problematic match ups are solved by a Gifts Ungiven/Unburial Rites sideboard plan.
3. I don't see how UR Fae is even close to as powerful as UB Fae, but I agree that Grixis is probably the best traditional combination.
My current list is learning more towards control with heavy discard, counters, with swords and no scions.
I do agree, so u were thinking about 2x swords? (2xSoLaS? or just one and 1 of FaF/FaI?)
I'm running one yin/yang and one sofi. I tried feast and famine first but was rarely able to take advantage of the untap effect, and the discard isn't that great against a decent number of decks because of the speed of the format. By the time I manage to get a sword online each player is either empty handed or close to it just holding onto a few burn spells so the discard tends to not be too relevent. I prefer the extra draw and faster clock from sofi and the life gain from yin/yang is precious. Also the black white sword lets you live the dream of looping vendillions for eternity (and apparently eternity lasts approximately 2 turns + concession) or rebuy counter spells.
As for people saying that UR faeries is a legitimate deck and a tier 1 player, UR faeries and UB faeries are completely different decks doing completely different things so comparing them in the first place is a big mistake and there is no point arguing about it. They both have fae in the name and play basic island, but that's where the similarities end. Personally I think that UR faeries is just a worse version of tempo twin and delver pyro.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
And on that day, Garfield said unto the world "Go ye forth and durdle!"
1) Why are half the decks here? Most have never top 16'd a GP, or even been relevant meta-game decks. You want to tell me Assault Loam, Balance Combo, or Esper Zur are currently meta players? The point of the Established deck section is decks that have the power level to compete with the best decks in modern, but isn't good enough to be considered the top of the meta. Faeries was THE dominant deck in both its Standard iteration and its Extended iteration. That alone gives it enough of a pedigree to warrant being here for the time being.
2) I like how you say it's "not working" one week after the banlist. Clearly you must have some obscene amounts of testing versus proven meta decks? Verifiable data? No? Then how do you think you coming in here and saying "its not working" is either a relevant comment or one that is even true? You seems to have literally NO playtesting experience with it, so it is mind-numbing to have you pull something like that out. At the LEAST you could read the 8 pages that have been contributed to in the past week in this very thread. You want data? We have dozens of decklists, at least 2 tournament reports at GPTs, and a fairly large discourse on matchups. Yet you seem to be above looking at all that.
3) Again with the arrogance. I'm not really going to waste a time dignifying this with a response, beyond that Grixis Fae has been/is being discussed in this forum, and many, myself included, have actually put the hours in with both variants and have already said in this very thread that it is more than likely inferior to UB Fae.
Either contribute something in a positive light or leave the thread. I don't like being rude to people, but I'm also not going to sugarcoat that I think people who do posts like this are a waste of time and energy for anyone who even looks at it. If you want to contribute relevant discussion, I'm all for it.
1) The subtext under the Established forum title says "Tournament decks with results". Care to link some UB Fae tournament results for us to look at?
2) Well no I dont have some obscene amount of play testing against UB Fae, but lets compare it to Zoo. I think any reasonable person would define Zoo as "working at or near Tier 1 level". That deck has had the same amount of time to test as Fae, yet no one is questioning its viability. If zoo and ub fae were race cars that started at the same time, Zoo is like a supercharged Mustang against a ford focus hybrid. I have quite a few videos of my deck fighting UB Fae and Zoo. UB Fae is...not working. I don't know how else to say it. Unless a major break though happens, the deck is to be considered fringe viability AT BEST. Again I am speaking of UB Fae specifically, not referring to UR fae which actually has some legs in this format.
3) I'm not trying to be arrogant I just don't like wasting time. The old cliche "Don't throw good money after bad" seems to apply here. I believe UB Fae does not work. If you think I am wrong please link me a list that I can test with. I think the only way Fae works is in a UR shell or a Light Fae grixis shell that does not attempt to make use of the Tribal, only yses the Fae cards that are good on their own.
Zoo as people are testing it has not existed in Modern for three years. It has no tournament results. It is EXACTLY like UB Faeries in this instance if we are speaking in a vacuum, irregardless of what people think/what its past modern accomplishments are. And even if we take into account past achievements in modern, you're yet again doing a bad comparison, because Zoo HAS existed in this format, and people have (three years ago) gotten to play the deck in this format. Compared to Fae, which is a new variable to the format. But no, let's use the comparison that paints it in a worse picture for the argument.
Just because you tested UB Faeries against Zoo (arguably the hardest matchup) and won doesn't mean the deck is a waste of time with fringe viability. By that logic, Tron must be trash because Affinity spanks it, right?
Whether or not you believe the archetype/deck works, I really could care less. This thread is littered with decklists. If you can't look through it for decent ones, I'm not going to waste my time linking them for you.
Zoo as people are testing it has not existed in Modern for three years. It has no tournament results. It is EXACTLY like UB Faeries in this instance if we are speaking in a vacuum, irregardless of what people think/what its past modern accomplishments are. And even if we take into account past achievements in modern, you're yet again doing a bad comparison, because Zoo HAS existed in this format, and people have (three years ago) gotten to play the deck in this format. Compared to Fae, which is a new variable to the format. But no, let's use the comparison that paints it in a worse picture for the argument.
Just because you tested UB Faeries against Zoo (arguably the hardest matchup) and won doesn't mean the deck is a waste of time with fringe viability. By that logic, Tron must be trash because Affinity spanks it, right?
Whether or not you believe the archetype/deck works, I really could care less. This thread is littered with decklists. If you can't look through it for decent ones, I'm not going to waste my time linking them for you.
Not even in a vacuum does UB fae get anywhere near Zoo in terms of viability. Think about what UB really is. It's a soft control deck with some high value critters. Thats it. It contains no lock, not combo finish like Twin. No inevitability like UWR control. It's just a diluted control deck.
Zoo in its fastest incarnation is a better Red burn. If it was nothing other than that it, it would already be more viable that UB fae. But no, there is an entire spectrum of Zoo decks ranging from small to big that caters to myriad tastes and viable strategies. UB fae has yet to come up with ONE viable angle of attack that I have seen.
Prove.
Me.
Wrong.
Show me a list that makes me into a believer. I want to believe, trust me. I am not a zoo player. I have a vested interest in seein UB Fae become a significant part of the meta. Thus far, I don't see it happening. Switch gears.
Zoo as people are testing it has not existed in Modern for three years. It has no tournament results. It is EXACTLY like UB Faeries in this instance if we are speaking in a vacuum, irregardless of what people think/what its past modern accomplishments are. And even if we take into account past achievements in modern, you're yet again doing a bad comparison, because Zoo HAS existed in this format, and people have (three years ago) gotten to play the deck in this format. Compared to Fae, which is a new variable to the format. But no, let's use the comparison that paints it in a worse picture for the argument.
Just because you tested UB Faeries against Zoo (arguably the hardest matchup) and won doesn't mean the deck is a waste of time with fringe viability. By that logic, Tron must be trash because Affinity spanks it, right?
Whether or not you believe the archetype/deck works, I really could care less. This thread is littered with decklists. If you can't look through it for decent ones, I'm not going to waste my time linking them for you.
Not even in a vacuum does UB fae get anywhere near Zoo in terms of viability. Think about what UB really is. It's a soft control deck with some high value critters. Thats it. It contains no lock, not combo finish like Twin. No inevitability like UWR control. It's just a diluted control deck.
Zoo in its fastest incarnation is a better Red burn. If it was nothing other than that it, it would already be more viable that UB fae. But no, there is an entire spectrum of Zoo decks ranging from small to big that caters to myriad tastes and viable strategies. UB fae has yet to come up with ONE viable angle of attack that I have seen.
Prove.
Me.
Wrong.
Show me a list that makes me into a believer. I want to believe, trust me. I am not a zoo player. I have a vested interest in seein UB Fae become a significant part of the meta. Thus far, I don't see it happening. Switch gears.
As I said MemoryLapse, you are going to love this list. Behold!
I probably need to remove the Grislebrands and an Elesh Norn from the sideboard and add two more Hurkyl's Recalls and Iona. I might also add Mana Tithes to the main deck.
you were like this with your UW vs UWR midrange deck. burden of proof is on the guy who comes in and offers nothing constructive other than, "this deck is bad." the deck has more inevitability than WUR control (despite it not being a control deck) and stomps it in any given match. it also, coincidentally, has a slightly positive match up against tempo twin, in my own playing.
i also think the gifts plan is not where the sideboard wants to be... but that's another discussion.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
Show me a list that makes me into a believer. I want to believe, trust me. I am not a zoo player. I have a vested interest in seein UB Fae become a significant part of the meta. Thus far, I don't see it happening. Switch gears.
Well here's two example lists. One is an untuned pile that won't beat anything, and one that I've been having success with lately.
If you play a handful of games with the first list you'll agree that faeries is unplayable garbage and never look back. It is also why I strongly believe that any results we have right now should only be considered "first impressions" and not a true representation of how the deck can preform because of people playing a very underwhelming list and losing with it. We need a more agreed upon list before we can start to even assume that our collective results are worth paying attention to. Even my own list, while it has been doing well, I don't count my own results as representative because I'm admittedly bad at playing against pod so I have no idea if the match is bad or if I'm bad.
On the flip side, somebody could just as easily be playing a terrible list and saying that every match up is awesome and that they even had LSV run the numbers. Twice.
you were like this with your UW vs UWR midrange deck. burden of proof is on the guy who comes in and offers nothing constructive other than, "this deck is bad." the deck has more inevitability than WUR control (despite it not being a control deck) and stomps it in any given match. it also, coincidentally, has a slightly positive match up against tempo twin, in my own playing.
i also think the gifts plan is not where the sideboard wants to be... but that's another discussion.
Just curious, why don't you think that the Gifts plan is viable?
you were like this with your UW vs UWR midrange deck. burden of proof is on the guy who comes in and offers nothing constructive other than, "this deck is bad." the deck has more inevitability than WUR control (despite it not being a control deck) and stomps it in any given match. it also, coincidentally, has a slightly positive match up against tempo twin, in my own playing.
i also think the gifts plan is not where the sideboard wants to be... but that's another discussion.
Just curious, why don't you think that the Gifts plan is viable?
There seem to be too many card slots being dedicated to a gameplan that takes away from the variety of matchups that could use more cards attributed to them. I am going to venture a guess and say that when the format stabilizes a bit more the numbers of the gifts package will reduce somewhat for things like Counter-squall. I admit it seems like your list is fully geared toward crushing aggro and the gifts plan of your sideboard kind of reflects that, but I could be wrong. It comes off with an alternative gameplan for when people see you coming though and its not terrible, I just cant see myself doing that personally.
To the people arguing that memorylapse is jumping to conclusions without full development of a list, while I dont see fault in either side, I say this. Faeries is a deck where the pilot NEEDS dedicated knowledge of the GAMEPLAN they are to achieve well before turns 3-4 because that knowledge helps you determine what to interact with and how to interact with it profitably. You need to know all of your outs realistically before you sit down to play the game moreso than any other deck and when you see cards that tip you off to what the matchup is you adjust your gears accordingly. I dont believe in matchup percentages with this deck personally so that would get you all nowhere with me (not to suggest that I am ignorant of the data, but having knowledge of your outs in that matchup progresses you more than the numbers that prove it is an established deck). Players are what make this deck established, and help keep it that way, not numbers. Plus there are a LARGE variety of lists that can be played under the title "Faeries" so the best method of finding the list that is right for you is knowing your environment.
So maybe it is time we start creating gameplan guides, to be added to the primer, for each deck that we are worried about facing. How about that? MemoryLapse wants to see progress, so let us give him just that. But it is NEVER going to be as cut and dry as "this deck is good/bad" it is usually about the time invested looking at all the options you have before you.
@MemoryLapse, from what you have said am I to assume that "Time spent before you are put to 0", based on the speed of the format, should be looked at as a mark for the deck's viability? I think while you have a point there are approaches that can be taken similar to what Valnarch has done, with his maindeck moreso than sideboard. So That is what I will suggest you take a look at as proof of one version's viability.
Decks I have in my bag of tricks- Needless to say, someone who wants to play will probably have a deck UB/x Faeries UR Storm XURWB Affinity G Elves UW control
you were like this with your UW vs UWR midrange deck. burden of proof is on the guy who comes in and offers nothing constructive other than, "this deck is bad." the deck has more inevitability than WUR control (despite it not being a control deck) and stomps it in any given match. it also, coincidentally, has a slightly positive match up against tempo twin, in my own playing.
i also think the gifts plan is not where the sideboard wants to be... but that's another discussion.
Just curious, why don't you think that the Gifts plan is viable?
There seem to be too many card slots being dedicated to a gameplan that takes away from the variety of matchups that could use more cards attributed to them. I am going to venture a guess and say that when the format stabilizes a bit more the numbers of the gifts package will reduce somewhat for things like Counter-squall. I admit it seems like your list is fully geared toward crushing aggro and the gifts plan of your sideboard kind of reflects that, but I could be wrong. It comes off with an alternative gameplan for when people see you coming though and its not terrible, I just cant see myself doing that personally.
I still need to remove the extra creatures from my sideboard, so that might be why it seems like the Gifts plan is taking up too many slots. Also, the reason why I am dedicated to stopping aggro and Pod is because the massive amount of mainboard counterspells allows my deck to beat the lategame of control decks, stop any combo deck other than Pod from assembling its combo, and even match the late-game of RG Tron. The only problem right now, other than needing to change my sideboard, replacing a Watery Grave with a Hallowed Fountain, and trying to find room for Mana Tithe, is that my deck is weak to Hatebears, Delver, Burn, and it still has problems with Pod. But against everything else, it seems strong.
...and it still has problems with Pod. But against everything else, it seems strong.
This is the puzzle I'm still trying to solve. And no I will not shut up about it until either we collectively give up on the match up and hope we get lucky or they make a mistake, or we get a solid game plan and/or board strategy. So far all I have is a pair of cages, a fist full of wrath effects, and death marks to take the tried and true UWR control approach and just KILL ALL THE THINGS! I don't mind having a bad match up or two, but I do mind having a bad match with one of the strongest, if not THE strongest, deck in the format.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
And on that day, Garfield said unto the world "Go ye forth and durdle!"
Damping Matrix exists as a card that puts a stop to most aspects of the combo but it is a matter of putting them on the beatdown plan which is still REALLY good due to kitchen finks and voice of resurgence mainly. So it will still be difficult as cutting through bricks with a butterknife...but at least its not a falling brick
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks I have in my bag of tricks- Needless to say, someone who wants to play will probably have a deck UB/x Faeries UR Storm XURWB Affinity G Elves UW control
Just an exercise of style.
I'll try to reproduce a goldfish decisional tree for the Melira Pod (the harder pod MU) pre-board MU.
Take it with some grain of salt but please highlight all my poor decisions abysmal mistake.
(numbers before decisions list them for decrescent relevance)
Mulligan (pre-board obviously this section counts only if you know that your oppo is on melira)
On the play: DO NOT keep hand w/o 1cmc discard or mana leak/remand; spell snare is fringe keep; 1cmc removal for mana dork is even more fringe.
On the draw: DO NOT keep hand w/o 1) 1cmc or 2) spell snare or 3)very good hand
Caveat for lands: in a vacuum i tend to not keep 2 lander on the play, while keep them (especially if w/o colorless land) on the draw.
Turn 1 play:
Coming Soon
- L
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My current list is learning more towards control with heavy discard, counters, with swords and no scions. With that in mind I've had very favorable matches with twin (both versions), UWR control, affinity, living end, and r/g tron when they don't get you au naturale (but then again who is favored against that). All of those decks are very favorable if you give them the proper respect that they deserve. The match ups which are about even for me are BG goyf/liliana decks as anytime you have two attrition-y decks facing off a large portion of the match is based on top decks. UWR geist/dragon midrange builds are maybe a little unfavorable for us because they have so many good cards in their main and we can't stop them all. The matches which I think we are actively bad against are 1 drop zoo, burn, and pod varients.
Some people might think the pod matches are fairly close instead of being very unfavorable but I have to disagree. Against melira pod we have to play EXTREMELY tight to get a win and requiring that much effort to have an even match up translates to being a bad match up in my opinion. Kiki pod is entirely different as they're far easier to disrupt and aren't able to "kill you with pure value" as much as melira, but can easily combo off from an empty board when you thought you were safe and didn't have to kill them asap. Regardless I still think both versions of pod isn't good to see across from you, and am still trying to think of things that will give us an edge.
Admittedly I have never actually played pod once in my life, I've only played against it and watched it on stream/GP coverage so I am not nearly as familiar with the different lines of play and pod chains they're capable of as a seasoned pod pilot would be. So I could easily be a terrible player in the match and be dead wrong on every play I make. So it's possible that the pod match isn't as bad as I've been saying it is for a while and I'm just a total noob with the match up and play especially poor as a result.
EDIT:
For the love of god, those who claim to have a good pod match up (which ever flavor you prefer) can you tell me how a typical winning game goes or give me a play by play of a test game? If you think the match is even or good I'd love to know what I'm doing wrong, but I just can't see it and have to rely heavily on the board to save me.
3 scion of oona (trimmed this because i want to vapor snag my cliques of the vendilion and mistbind kind)
2 vendilion clique
4 mistbind clique
4 bitterblossom
1 sword of light and shadow
4 vapor snag
2 spell snare (i want to try spell pierce in this slot)
3 mana leak
3 cryptic command
4 secluded glen
3 river of tears
2 watery grave
4 mutavault
2 creeping tar pit
5 island
1 swamp
Thoughts? I want to try and improve some points against the zoo match up. They are always extremely aggressive in playing shocks untapped, and the extra points from vapor snag add up quick. Also, seeing as how Michael Hetrick was playing rampagers to push damage through, a timely vapor snag will break their back. Snapcaster mage might be the next step in a build like this.
tbh as i said before i found pod a good MU or at least beatable as far as they don't land a pod. Too often they start chaining value without a viable/timely removal from me. So i have at least 2 slot in the SB (2x Cage) just for this occurrence.
Without it they play just a bunch of creature turn after turn, preyed upon by our removals or counterspells.
Between melira and kiki however the latter seems easier because is more comboish and less valueish than the former.
If i manage to produce some videos i will post them here.
- L
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
1) Why are half the decks here? Most have never top 16'd a GP, or even been relevant meta-game decks. You want to tell me Assault Loam, Balance Combo, or Esper Zur are currently meta players? The point of the Established deck section is decks that have the power level to compete with the best decks in modern, but isn't good enough to be considered the top of the meta. Faeries was THE dominant deck in both its Standard iteration and its Extended iteration. That alone gives it enough of a pedigree to warrant being here for the time being.
2) I like how you say it's "not working" one week after the banlist. Clearly you must have some obscene amounts of testing versus proven meta decks? Verifiable data? No? Then how do you think you coming in here and saying "its not working" is either a relevant comment or one that is even true? You seems to have literally NO playtesting experience with it, so it is mind-numbing to have you pull something like that out. At the LEAST you could read the 8 pages that have been contributed to in the past week in this very thread. You want data? We have dozens of decklists, at least 2 tournament reports at GPTs, and a fairly large discourse on matchups. Yet you seem to be above looking at all that.
3) Again with the arrogance. I'm not really going to waste a time dignifying this with a response, beyond that Grixis Fae has been/is being discussed in this forum, and many, myself included, have actually put the hours in with both variants and have already said in this very thread that it is more than likely inferior to UB Fae.
Either contribute something in a positive light or leave the thread. I don't like being rude to people, but I'm also not going to sugarcoat that I think people who do posts like this are a waste of time and energy for anyone who even looks at it. If you want to contribute relevant discussion, I'm all for it.
UB Faeries GP Record - 22/9/2, 1 Top 64
1) The subtext under the Established forum title says "Tournament decks with results". Care to link some UB Fae tournament results for us to look at?
2) Well no I dont have some obscene amount of play testing against UB Fae, but lets compare it to Zoo. I think any reasonable person would define Zoo as "working at or near Tier 1 level". That deck has had the same amount of time to test as Fae, yet no one is questioning its viability. If zoo and ub fae were race cars that started at the same time, Zoo is like a supercharged Mustang against a ford focus hybrid. I have quite a few videos of my deck fighting UB Fae and Zoo. UB Fae is...not working. I don't know how else to say it. Unless a major break though happens, the deck is to be considered fringe viability AT BEST. Again I am speaking of UB Fae specifically, not referring to UR fae which actually has some legs in this format.
3) I'm not trying to be arrogant I just don't like wasting time. The old cliche "Don't throw good money after bad" seems to apply here. I believe UB Fae does not work. If you think I am wrong please link me a list that I can test with. I think the only way Fae works is in a UR shell or a Light Fae grixis shell that does not attempt to make use of the Tribal, only yses the Fae cards that are good on their own.
1. I guess that this makes sense. I would have preferred it if the U(x) Faeries thread hadn't been archived.
2. I posted a version inspired by your Azorius Control deck. It runs a large amount of counterspells, which gives it the tools to beat Twin, WUR Control, and WUR Midrange. It can hold its own against Tron and BGx. For the most part, problematic match ups are solved by a Gifts Ungiven/Unburial Rites sideboard plan.
3. I don't see how UR Fae is even close to as powerful as UB Fae, but I agree that Grixis is probably the best traditional combination.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I'm running one yin/yang and one sofi. I tried feast and famine first but was rarely able to take advantage of the untap effect, and the discard isn't that great against a decent number of decks because of the speed of the format. By the time I manage to get a sword online each player is either empty handed or close to it just holding onto a few burn spells so the discard tends to not be too relevent. I prefer the extra draw and faster clock from sofi and the life gain from yin/yang is precious. Also the black white sword lets you live the dream of looping vendillions for eternity (and apparently eternity lasts approximately 2 turns + concession) or rebuy counter spells.
As for people saying that UR faeries is a legitimate deck and a tier 1 player, UR faeries and UB faeries are completely different decks doing completely different things so comparing them in the first place is a big mistake and there is no point arguing about it. They both have fae in the name and play basic island, but that's where the similarities end. Personally I think that UR faeries is just a worse version of tempo twin and delver pyro.
Zoo as people are testing it has not existed in Modern for three years. It has no tournament results. It is EXACTLY like UB Faeries in this instance if we are speaking in a vacuum, irregardless of what people think/what its past modern accomplishments are. And even if we take into account past achievements in modern, you're yet again doing a bad comparison, because Zoo HAS existed in this format, and people have (three years ago) gotten to play the deck in this format. Compared to Fae, which is a new variable to the format. But no, let's use the comparison that paints it in a worse picture for the argument.
Just because you tested UB Faeries against Zoo (arguably the hardest matchup) and won doesn't mean the deck is a waste of time with fringe viability. By that logic, Tron must be trash because Affinity spanks it, right?
Whether or not you believe the archetype/deck works, I really could care less. This thread is littered with decklists. If you can't look through it for decent ones, I'm not going to waste my time linking them for you.
UB Faeries GP Record - 22/9/2, 1 Top 64
Not even in a vacuum does UB fae get anywhere near Zoo in terms of viability. Think about what UB really is. It's a soft control deck with some high value critters. Thats it. It contains no lock, not combo finish like Twin. No inevitability like UWR control. It's just a diluted control deck.
Zoo in its fastest incarnation is a better Red burn. If it was nothing other than that it, it would already be more viable that UB fae. But no, there is an entire spectrum of Zoo decks ranging from small to big that caters to myriad tastes and viable strategies. UB fae has yet to come up with ONE viable angle of attack that I have seen.
Prove.
Me.
Wrong.
Show me a list that makes me into a believer. I want to believe, trust me. I am not a zoo player. I have a vested interest in seein UB Fae become a significant part of the meta. Thus far, I don't see it happening. Switch gears.
As I said MemoryLapse, you are going to love this list. Behold!
3 Mistbind Clique
4 Snapcaster Mage
4 Spellstutter Sprite
2 Vendilion Clique
4 Condescend
4 Cryptic Command
2 Dissolve
4 Mana Leak
4 Bitterblossom
1 Hallowed Fountain
2 Marsh Flats
4 Misty Rainforest
4 Mutavault
1 River of Tears
2 Scalding Tarn
7 Snow-Covered Island
1 Snow-Covered Swamp
4 Gifts Ungiven
4 Hibernation
2 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
2 Griselbrand
1 Unburial Rites
I probably need to remove the Grislebrands and an Elesh Norn from the sideboard and add two more Hurkyl's Recalls and Iona. I might also add Mana Tithes to the main deck.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
i also think the gifts plan is not where the sideboard wants to be... but that's another discussion.
Well here's two example lists. One is an untuned pile that won't beat anything, and one that I've been having success with lately.
2 thoughtseize
1 disfigure
4 spell snare
3 mana leak
4 smother
4 bitterblossom
1 snapcaster mage
4 spellstutter sprite
3 vendilion clique
2 sword of feast and famine
4 cryptic command
19 colored lands
6 colorless lands
4 bitterblossom
2 spell snare
3 mana leak
2 inquisition of kozilek
3 thoughtseize
4 spellstutter sprite
4 mistbind clique
2 vendilion clique
1 sword of fire and ice
1 sword of light and shadow
2 doom blade
2 smother
1 agony warp
20 colored lands
5 colorless lands
If you play a handful of games with the first list you'll agree that faeries is unplayable garbage and never look back. It is also why I strongly believe that any results we have right now should only be considered "first impressions" and not a true representation of how the deck can preform because of people playing a very underwhelming list and losing with it. We need a more agreed upon list before we can start to even assume that our collective results are worth paying attention to. Even my own list, while it has been doing well, I don't count my own results as representative because I'm admittedly bad at playing against pod so I have no idea if the match is bad or if I'm bad.
On the flip side, somebody could just as easily be playing a terrible list and saying that every match up is awesome and that they even had LSV run the numbers. Twice.
Just curious, why don't you think that the Gifts plan is viable?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
There seem to be too many card slots being dedicated to a gameplan that takes away from the variety of matchups that could use more cards attributed to them. I am going to venture a guess and say that when the format stabilizes a bit more the numbers of the gifts package will reduce somewhat for things like Counter-squall. I admit it seems like your list is fully geared toward crushing aggro and the gifts plan of your sideboard kind of reflects that, but I could be wrong. It comes off with an alternative gameplan for when people see you coming though and its not terrible, I just cant see myself doing that personally.
To the people arguing that memorylapse is jumping to conclusions without full development of a list, while I dont see fault in either side, I say this. Faeries is a deck where the pilot NEEDS dedicated knowledge of the GAMEPLAN they are to achieve well before turns 3-4 because that knowledge helps you determine what to interact with and how to interact with it profitably. You need to know all of your outs realistically before you sit down to play the game moreso than any other deck and when you see cards that tip you off to what the matchup is you adjust your gears accordingly. I dont believe in matchup percentages with this deck personally so that would get you all nowhere with me (not to suggest that I am ignorant of the data, but having knowledge of your outs in that matchup progresses you more than the numbers that prove it is an established deck). Players are what make this deck established, and help keep it that way, not numbers. Plus there are a LARGE variety of lists that can be played under the title "Faeries" so the best method of finding the list that is right for you is knowing your environment.
So maybe it is time we start creating gameplan guides, to be added to the primer, for each deck that we are worried about facing. How about that? MemoryLapse wants to see progress, so let us give him just that. But it is NEVER going to be as cut and dry as "this deck is good/bad" it is usually about the time invested looking at all the options you have before you.
@MemoryLapse, from what you have said am I to assume that "Time spent before you are put to 0", based on the speed of the format, should be looked at as a mark for the deck's viability? I think while you have a point there are approaches that can be taken similar to what Valnarch has done, with his maindeck moreso than sideboard. So That is what I will suggest you take a look at as proof of one version's viability.
UB/x Faeries
UR Storm
XURWB Affinity
G Elves
UW control
I still need to remove the extra creatures from my sideboard, so that might be why it seems like the Gifts plan is taking up too many slots. Also, the reason why I am dedicated to stopping aggro and Pod is because the massive amount of mainboard counterspells allows my deck to beat the lategame of control decks, stop any combo deck other than Pod from assembling its combo, and even match the late-game of RG Tron. The only problem right now, other than needing to change my sideboard, replacing a Watery Grave with a Hallowed Fountain, and trying to find room for Mana Tithe, is that my deck is weak to Hatebears, Delver, Burn, and it still has problems with Pod. But against everything else, it seems strong.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
This is the puzzle I'm still trying to solve. And no I will not shut up about it until either we collectively give up on the match up and hope we get lucky or they make a mistake, or we get a solid game plan and/or board strategy. So far all I have is a pair of cages, a fist full of wrath effects, and death marks to take the tried and true UWR control approach and just KILL ALL THE THINGS! I don't mind having a bad match up or two, but I do mind having a bad match with one of the strongest, if not THE strongest, deck in the format.
UB/x Faeries
UR Storm
XURWB Affinity
G Elves
UW control
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I'll try to reproduce a goldfish decisional tree for the Melira Pod (the harder pod MU) pre-board MU.
Take it with some grain of salt but please highlight all my poor decisions abysmal mistake.
(numbers before decisions list them for decrescent relevance)
Mulligan (pre-board obviously this section counts only if you know that your oppo is on melira)
On the play: DO NOT keep hand w/o 1cmc discard or mana leak/remand; spell snare is fringe keep; 1cmc removal for mana dork is even more fringe.
On the draw: DO NOT keep hand w/o 1) 1cmc or 2) spell snare or 3)very good hand
Caveat for lands: in a vacuum i tend to not keep 2 lander on the play, while keep them (especially if w/o colorless land) on the draw.
Turn 1 play:
Coming Soon
- L
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater