On a separate note: what does everyone think of running a singleton dryad arbor in place of a nonbasic? I like the idea of vialing it into play at the bottom of turn one.
For the purposes of the deck I don't see much point in having dryad arbor. It doesn't function well as an attacker, its a terrible blocker, Gives additional targets for stray damage ie: electrolyze @ sweepers, It cant even produce mana for a real mana dork on T1 and later turns its still dangerous since we want all our mana functional if possible, and I don't really see the point in vialing it in since vial on its own represents a very powerful piece of "Ramp" as it were, so all your really doing is emptying your hand .5-1 turn faster with the extreme risk of a blowout.
I think that mindcensor makes the most sense in GW hatebears/dnt where it can be ramped into play and have exalted pump. That's what won me a match vs Bw eldrazi at last fnm.
Edit: on a separate note: what does everyone think of running a singleton dryad arbor in place of a nonbasic? I like the idea of vialing it into play at the bottom of turn one.
I think that I did the math for Vialing the singleton Dryad Arbor some time ago, you should look up for it. I can't recall the scientific term for it but I think it was 'magical christmas land' On a more serious note, it isn't really that fantastic... it's like playing a llanowar elves on turn 1 along with that vial. The downside is that when you fail to vial it, it's mediocre. And keep in mind that Lightning Bolt is played widely in modern.
Regarding Aven Mindcensor, it depends on the metagame as most creatures in this deck do. Pack the dudes you need for the metagame. The bird is good vs Tron, Amulet, Scapeshift, and anything with Chord of Calling as it was said before. It also does some work against Affinity and Infect, since most creatures can't deal with a Nexus of any flavor.
I believe WoTC's new policy is to make sure that every color can enjoy the exciting gameplay mechanic of making undercosted dudes and then turning them sideways. Clearly the future of magic.
Quote from "Kakaroto" »
Quote from "Disco Stu" »
Podríamos hacer un topic donde marquemos los peores horrores de ortografía.
Your success in playing dnt/hatebears is determined largely by your ability to read and prepare for the meta that you will be playing in. Furthermore, it has an absolutely brutal learning curve. Expect to lose; a lot.
Am I the only one underwhelmed by Aven Mindcensor? Nobody at my LGS ever falls for it and it's a 3drop with mediocre stats.
That's not the point. I mean, you could meta your LGS and have them play around it while taking it out. Having them have to play around it is almost as important as having it. I wouldn't go advertising whether or not you have it. The card is still absurdly powerful in Modern. The fact that they're playing around it means it works. It means they're not playing the optimal line. Just because they don't fall for it doesn't mean that it's not getting actual value. This is more of a problem with local and regional metas when you're a known commodity and people know your decklist.
Un autre con brandit le drapeau de la nouvelle économie. Agitant sa criminelle thérapie, l'abruti prophá¨te s'en va guerrir le monde de ses maux ! Mais la misá¨re n'a que faire de cette médecine á dose homeopathétique, Il n'y a d'autre cure que l'ablation du liberal-fascisme qui nous ronge. - Amanda Woodward, Un Autre Con
This is the second week we've gotten Modern to fire at 6 people so far. We're a very small group, so we know what everyone's playing. For reference, the other decks I know about are:
Nivix Gear Cyclops (UR Kiln Fiend)
RG Shaman Tribal
Living End
Mono U Tron (x2)
Mono W Weenies
Overall 1-2
Round 1: Mardu Superfriends (L, 0-2)
Game 1 found me turning cards sideways until he was at 2 before he stabilized with several back-to-bakc turns of planeswalkers. No real interaction from my side, which is unfortunate. Any flyer would have gotten there, as his first stabilization was Elspeth, Sun's Champion.
In: Celestial Purge x2, Sigarda, Chandra, Pyromaster
Out: I cannot remember. Maybe Voices or Pridgemages? Might have shaved an Arbiter or a Path?
Considered but didn't: Eidolon of Rhetoric (Lingering Souls + Flashback, but the really terrifying stuff is just a single 4+ drop), Burrenton Forge-Tender (Bolts, Helixes, but not enough and not terribly aggressive)
Both games taught me about what hands are keepable. Game 2 especially, I kept Oath + Loxodon Smiter + 5 lands, and it should've been immediately shipped back. I got drowned in Lingering Souls, Soldiers, Knights, and Vampires.
I'm really at a loss how to improve this matchup through deckbuilding, but at this point I'm making a ton of play mistakes anyway.
Round 2: Mono-B Aristocrats (L, 0-2)
Both games I beat down with no real hate happening. He'd end up around 2 life before he could start sacrificing with an active Zulaport Cutthroat or Falkenrath Noble. Didn't manage to see much of Path, Purge, or RIP, which would've been nice to break up some shenanigans. The death triggers were pretty nasty, making it hard to deal with combat when both creatures dying helped him.
Game 2 especially I kept a hand that could beat down, and should've mulliganed to find some actual interaction as his combo is often fairly fragile.
Sadly, he's missing a ton of cards for this deck to really shine. He kept a couple of 2-landers and learned what Arbiter + Ghost Quarter does. I traded him some cards for his deck afterward; maybe next week will be better for him.
In: Sigarda, Host of Herons, Chandra, Pyromaster
Out: Leonin Arbiter x2
Should've considered but didn't: Ghostly Prison (I expected him to have instant-speed stuff, but he did not. He was U-Aggro. Voices should've come out, too.)
Thoughts on this list after a few weeks playing it:
Oath was an amazing top-deck every time I saw it. Vial, not so much. I've seen a lot of lists here running one over the other, and I'm not sure where I stand yet.
I'd like to replace the 1-2 of the Aven Mindcensors, as it really only affects 2 of the 7 decks we regularly see. Bird -> Arbiter -> GQ is still quite potent, but the Bird is just not doing it for me.
Needs more buff effects. More Wilt-Leaf Lieges and some Noble Hierarchs are in the mail, and I cannot wait.
I replaced a RIP with an Eidolon of Rhetoric in the sideboard, and I really wish I hadn't. Eidolon hits Living End and Nivix Gear Solid pretty well, but I'm already pretty well suited against the latter and I didn't anticipate losing as easily to Aristocrats.
I've yet to see a Scavenging Oooze hit the board (they're new this week), but I think they would've been all-stars in basically every match tonight.
I don't love the Mirran Crusader in the main. Not sure what he should be, though.
Sea Gate Wreckage is great when it works, but the colorless or 1-color draws are killing me. Needs more Temple Gardens; probably replacing 1 Stirring Wildwood, Sea Gate, and then cutting in to the Brushlands. I've never seen Eiganjo be more than a Plains, but I'm fine with it for the 1% of the time it saves Thalia from a 'Clasm, for now. I could stand another Tec. Edge, as there are quite a few slow decks that really want that mana at our store.
Chandra really felt like a good choice a lot of the time as I have trouble in grindier match ups, but I would like to try Domri over her. I'm not sure if I'm brace enough to throw him in the main.
Pridgemage is basically an Exalted 2/2, which is actually fine. Kataki and Stony Silence are dead sideboard cards in fear of some potential stranger bringing something someday. Not sure if that's good enough justification. At least Stony is good against Tron should those folks show up.
In general I need to really evaluate hands past "can I play cards with this?" and start looking at "how do I win with this?"
Feedback
How are the threats looking? What would you suggest, especially over Mindcensor and Mirran Crusader
How does one fight through tokens as GW? I'm thinking Nylea and more beaters/buffs, but I'm open to suggestion.
Anything else you'd like to say =)
Am I the only one underwhelmed by Aven Mindcensor? Nobody at my LGS ever falls for it and it's a 3drop with mediocre stats.
The fact that they're playing around it means it works. It means they're not playing the optimal line. Just because they don't fall for it doesn't mean that it's not getting actual value.
@thebombzen,Please do a search on this thread. You'll find plenty of discussion on the merits and shortcomings of Aven Mindcensor and how the card does in various metagames.
@tadiou, Relying on your opponent to make mistakes is not really any sort of metric to add merit to an argument on a cards inclusion in a deck. Going by a more obvious form of that logic our opponent will never play their best creatures because we play path to exile in our deck...
One word answers aside there are a number of ways to beat tokens. Rancor is certainly one of them but I prefer to stay away since it always opens you up to the possibility of a 2 for 1.
When i'm facing tokens post board there are some key cards I would like to see.
Though since its a planeswalker causing your specific problem only Thalia and EE are really relevant from that list.
Its definitely a strategy we are weak too and the usual answer is to force them to block until the tokens are gone and then win. In your case though elspeth is the one causing you issues I would strongly consider a 1 of sideboarded pithing needle as it catches many important threats in modern currently. Also you could consider Elspeth, Knight Errant in your Side/Main. She has always kind of been an average card for our deck but might do well in your meta.
I keep looking at Suppression Field as a catch-all sideboard option. It does most of what Stony Silence does but so much more! With our game plan of disruption and beats it seems ideal. It essentially shuts down so much stuff: Melira comobs, Lantern, Planeswalkers, Expedition Map, Kiki combo, Griselbrand activations, Aether Vial, (bl)inkmoth lands, equips and the best one Fetch lands. It makes out Ghost Quarters cost more but I'm ok with that.
It seems like such a super high-impact card that doesn't see play mainly because people are playing fetches - it's an instant non-bo. For us it's like Leonin Arbiter 5-8. Better than arbiter in many ways. Obviously does not play well with Aether Vial which many posters here have dropped anyhow.
Doesn't affect Noble Hierarch, that's a mana ability.
I don't mind paying 2 mana for to activate a few things in a game when it is likely to hurt my opponent much, much worse. Against any 3 colour deck it ups the chance we get to turn off their Fetches early in the game. Our deck still functions with Field out, I suspect it cripples a lot of other decks cold. Field won't win you the game on its own but it provides the window through which you can take your beats and get through for the win. I don't mind paying extra for Ghost Quarter if it's going to deeply impact the game, otherwise I just keep it for mana.
Does saccing Eldrazi tokens count as a mana ability?
I don't think you need to cut forge tender...Its not like burn is going to be running Koz Return and my guess is that many decks will still prefer Anger of the gods due to the extra damage and exile.
I probably will keep my singleton in the sideboard with the difference being I keep one or two dromoka's command post side and don't put in the forge tender vs. Tron.
@tadiou, Relying on your opponent to make mistakes is not really any sort of metric to add merit to an argument on a cards inclusion in a deck. Going by a more obvious form of that logic our opponent will never play their best creatures because we play path to exile in our deck...
Amusingly, you're not relying on your opponent to make mistakes. You're relying on your opponent to make the correct play which is to not walk into into getting blown out. If they're constantly playing around wrath does it matter if you actually have a wrath or not? That's the point I'm making. I'm basically at the 2nd level here, while you're looking at this as a 1st level exercise. You're playing as if your opponent is playing around the card you think they think you have, which, for the person who's questioning removing Mindcensor, sometimes not having it is just as good as having it.
I think your last argument is also incorrect. People play around Path. They do. They want to make us use Path when it's least favorable to us, on a weaker target, and we want to save it to use it on their best targets, or at the most opportune time. They can choose to play around Path by not playing their best creature, forcing out Path by virtue of the board state, and then play their better creature knowing that we've played a path and the odds of having another path are less than likely.
Example: playing against Abzan Midrange, they play a Goyf, and then another, we handle one with the board state, but you question on whether or not to use Path on the other one. It's a 3/4, you're at 10 life. You use path on it, they follow up with a Siege Rhino and then you don't have a Path for the Rhino. I'm sure they had the ability to play a Rhino the past 2 turns, but they didn't. Why? Because you'd have Pathed the Rhino and they were playing around with their higher value creatures baiting removal. It happens.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Un autre con brandit le drapeau de la nouvelle économie. Agitant sa criminelle thérapie, l'abruti prophá¨te s'en va guerrir le monde de ses maux ! Mais la misá¨re n'a que faire de cette médecine á dose homeopathétique, Il n'y a d'autre cure que l'ablation du liberal-fascisme qui nous ronge. - Amanda Woodward, Un Autre Con
Amusingly, you're not relying on your opponent to make mistakes. You're relying on your opponent to make the correct play which is to not walk into into getting blown out. If they're constantly playing around wrath does it matter if you actually have a wrath or not? That's the point I'm making. I'm basically at the 2nd level here, while you're looking at this as a 1st level exercise. You're playing as if your opponent is playing around the card you think they think you have, which, for the person who's questioning removing Mindcensor, sometimes not having it is just as good as having it.
I think your last argument is also incorrect. People play around Path. They do. They want to make us use Path when it's least favorable to us, on a weaker target, and we want to save it to use it on their best targets, or at the most opportune time. They can choose to play around Path by not playing their best creature, forcing out Path by virtue of the board state, and then play their better creature knowing that we've played a path and the odds of having another path are less than likely.
Example: playing against Abzan Midrange, they play a Goyf, and then another, we handle one with the board state, but you question on whether or not to use Path on the other one. It's a 3/4, you're at 10 life. You use path on it, they follow up with a Siege Rhino and then you don't have a Path for the Rhino. I'm sure they had the ability to play a Rhino the past 2 turns, but they didn't. Why? Because you'd have Pathed the Rhino and they were playing around with their higher value creatures baiting removal. It happens.
I don't think you quite understand what i'm trying to convey. What you say is essentially correct but for the purposes of building a deck and arguing towards the inclusion or exclusion of particular cards its worthless advice.
During actual play given all the known information by both opponents (Cards played, Graveyard Size, Lands/Colors on Field, Cards in hand, Probability key cards are in hand or will be drawn from deck, ect..) it is indeed possible that the correct play from the opponents standpoint is take make a decision that is not optimal if they had actually known everything. i.e. what your attempting to describe. Those situations are entirely contextual and not something you should ever go into a match expecting to achieve but rather something to take advantage of when the possibly gain far outweighs the immediate disadvantage to you.
The problem with trying to play these mindgames are that the "levels", as you put it, are an infinite logic chain looping through two decisions based upon the possibility your opponent is bluffing you. In actuality a good magic player has many similarities to a good poker play and they simply run the numbers, as it were, and determine the line of play with the best chance of success.
This isn't to say that there is no advantage to be gained from representing more lines of play than you actually have but I firmly believe it should never come at a detriment to the functionality of your deck or your current path to victory.
In the context of our discussion this would mean choosing to play aven mindcensor in a metagame where it was not suited to force your opponent to respect the possibility you have it rather than for its actual impact on the game. Likewise this would include leaving up three mana to represent the possibility you have the mindcensor (regardless if it in your list or not) but at the cost of developing your board and losing valuable tempo when they call your bluff.
Why is it worthless? We're not talking about the meta at large here, we're talking about a very specific LGS where there's a very specific meta and expectations around GW Hatebears when it's played. If you're talking about numbers, it's the same things as in poker if you play certain hands with in a certain way every time, you're able to exploit consistency and likely scenarios.
With six anti-search cards, and Vial making at least all of them flash. There's an expectation of existence, and it goes to my original point (which I've made about this deck since 2011), is that part of it's charm is creating awkward board states where your opponent has to account for a lot of scenarios and possibilities.
You're right there's an infinite decision loop with these levels. But as a player, you cannot just jam your best line for you every time in a vacuum. And that's what this deck punishes. If your deck says jam this fetchland on turn 2, and your opponent has a hierarch and 2 open lands. That's bad. Right? Especially if you've played against the deck many times, and they have shown that they play Mindcensor. Playing against it, as the level one thought, you're asking yourself: okay, before i do this, they may have Mindcensor. Can I play around that card? If yes, then do this, if not then do this. It's not just 'can I play around this', but can I afford to play around this card. The level 2 thought for the Hatebears player happens in deckbuilding. The idea is when people start playing level 1 thought in respect to your deck, it then becomes irrelevant on if you have it or not in a majority of cases. Because it implies that there's the possibility they will guess wrong. So, here: if it's some percent chance you have Mindcensor t3 availble on a sylvan scrying (I think it's like 15% chance, but it's also strongly tied to the concept of vial->arbiter, which probably raises it to about 30%), the level zero play has a 70% chance of getting it right. If you're using a level 1 play here, you're possibly playing around it as opposed to playing into it. It's not necessarily a 70-30 split here, because you're using more information available to you to infer what your opponent has based on what you have and can play around. What happens is, in practice, while you won't be blown out as much, you also will have a more conservative gameplan because you'll be playing around cards regardless on if they have it or not because of what you can and cannot play around. When you state you're possibly losing tempo by leaving up 3 mana, you're actually accomplishing just what I've been trying to explain all along here. If you can play around certain things, and you can't always, it doesn't matter if you have it or not as long as people think you can have it and they can or cannot play around it, we're just turning the tables here, where you have the decision to make, on if they'll crack that fetchland this turn or play sylvan scrying or chord or whatever, can you afford to play around it. It's risk reward about calling bluffs with the available knowledge that you have. The thing is is that knowledge isn't equal, and that's where the poker comparisons get a bit weirder because probabilities aren't a closed system with magic (the permutations are infinitely larger), and where bluffing becomes a bit more powerful than it does in higher level magic games because of it. The best line of play is based on available knowledge, but the knowledge or lack of knowledge create plays in and of itself for the deck if you're looking for it. That's the level 2 play, exploiting when they think they have the knowledge, but they really don't.
It may not be suited for your meta, but if in the OP's meta, if they're playing around it, it's because they can be significantly affected by it, and have taken the level 1 play into consideration, and are playing around it. That's the key here. It's like if you play certain hands in poker a certain way, and people recognize that, you need to start playing them differently if you want a different reaction. Or you can start playing hands that aren't like that similarly if you can afford to, which is the much easier scenario. It's much more difficult to justify not playing it in situations you have 'it' like you can in poker because of the best of three format, there's just less action opportunity to take advantage of hands like it, that your best time to take action is usually the time that it presents itself and not later (which, amusingly is unlike hearthstone which rewards it a little differently because of interactions with minoins vindicates usually the person with the last follow up). I mean, a practical example is, while you may get better value out of pathing and ghost quartering something on the same turn, it's almost always better to use it at the first because the opportunity risk increases that that line won't be there when you're planning on using it (which is what separates HS from MTG in a lot of ways).
Therefore, it doesn't matter if you have it or not because if they play around it, they're going to either play around it if you have it or if you don't have it. Whether or not you have it is irrelevant if they're going to play around it. If they play around it and you don't have it, it's better for you because you're gaining a sense of virtual card advantage, or cards that you have that you don't actually have that people are playing around and lose tempo because of playing around cards that they think you have.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Un autre con brandit le drapeau de la nouvelle économie. Agitant sa criminelle thérapie, l'abruti prophá¨te s'en va guerrir le monde de ses maux ! Mais la misá¨re n'a que faire de cette médecine á dose homeopathétique, Il n'y a d'autre cure que l'ablation du liberal-fascisme qui nous ronge. - Amanda Woodward, Un Autre Con
That said, when it comes to ridiculous sideboard tech. I wanted to try something out that I haven't vs Eldrazi Black.
Karma. Lets just say, it's sometimes an instant auto win if you can stall the game long enough. I played a game last night against the heartless summoning variety of eldrazi black, and they're pretty low on actual threats. I just kept them off of being able to search for Ulamog for long enough, dropped Karma, and while I wasn't able to alpha strike through for a lot of damage, Karma got in for 8 damage two turns in a row with doing 3 damage through a few Oblivion Sower and let Karma clean up the rest.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Un autre con brandit le drapeau de la nouvelle économie. Agitant sa criminelle thérapie, l'abruti prophá¨te s'en va guerrir le monde de ses maux ! Mais la misá¨re n'a que faire de cette médecine á dose homeopathétique, Il n'y a d'autre cure que l'ablation du liberal-fascisme qui nous ronge. - Amanda Woodward, Un Autre Con
For the purposes of the deck I don't see much point in having dryad arbor. It doesn't function well as an attacker, its a terrible blocker, Gives additional targets for stray damage ie: electrolyze @ sweepers, It cant even produce mana for a real mana dork on T1 and later turns its still dangerous since we want all our mana functional if possible, and I don't really see the point in vialing it in since vial on its own represents a very powerful piece of "Ramp" as it were, so all your really doing is emptying your hand .5-1 turn faster with the extreme risk of a blowout.
GUGEdric, Spymaster of Trest - Elfball
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic- Doomsday!
RWUEphara, God of the Polis - Blink + Control
GBGGlissa, the Traitor - Stax & Lands
URGMaelstrom Wanderer - Goodstuff RUG
RGWMayael the Anima - Timmy
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher - The One Hit Wonder
RGWMarath, Will of the Wild - Old-school Enchantress Hate
RWRAurelia, the Warleader - Equipment Aggro
GGGReki, the History of Kamigawa - Legends + Banding
UBRSedris, the Traitor King - Creatures with : Ability
BUBPhenax, God of Deception - Mill
*Sidenote, I specifically excluded infinite combos from all these decks with the exception of Marath and the squirrel nest + Earthcraft combo.
Looking for something Aggressive in modern? Try - BR Aggro
I think that I did the math for Vialing the singleton Dryad Arbor some time ago, you should look up for it. I can't recall the scientific term for it but I think it was 'magical christmas land' On a more serious note, it isn't really that fantastic... it's like playing a llanowar elves on turn 1 along with that vial. The downside is that when you fail to vial it, it's mediocre. And keep in mind that Lightning Bolt is played widely in modern.
Regarding Aven Mindcensor, it depends on the metagame as most creatures in this deck do. Pack the dudes you need for the metagame. The bird is good vs Tron,
Amulet, Scapeshift, and anything with Chord of Calling as it was said before. It also does some work against Affinity and Infect, since most creatures can't deal with a Nexus of any flavor.3 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Leonin Arbiter
4 Voice of Resurgence
3 Qasali Pridemage
3 Scavenging Ooze
4 Loxodon Smiter
2 Kitchen Finks
3 Wilt-Leaf Liege
2 Collected Company
2 Dromoka's Command
4 Path to Exile
4 Razorverge Thicket
2 Brushland
2 Tectonic Edge
4 Ghost Quarter
2 Stirring Wildwood
2 Plains
2 Forest
1 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
2 Dismember
2 Celestial Flare
2 Kor Firewalker
1 Kitchen Finks
4 Kataki, War's Wage
2 Worship
1 Sigarda, Host of Herons
EDH - GU Kruphix, God of Horizons, WB Teysa, Envoy of Ghosts, GUR Surrak Dragonclaw, WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores, R Purphoros, God of the Forge, RW Archangel Avacyn
That's not the point. I mean, you could meta your LGS and have them play around it while taking it out. Having them have to play around it is almost as important as having it. I wouldn't go advertising whether or not you have it. The card is still absurdly powerful in Modern. The fact that they're playing around it means it works. It means they're not playing the optimal line. Just because they don't fall for it doesn't mean that it's not getting actual value. This is more of a problem with local and regional metas when you're a known commodity and people know your decklist.
4 Birds of Paradise
2 Qasali Pridemage
3 Scavenging Ooze
2 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
2 Voice of Resurgence
4 Leonin Arbiter
2 Aven Mindcensor
1 Brimaz, King of Oreskos
4 Loxodon Smiter
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Wilt-Leaf Liege
Non-creature:
4 Oath of Nissa
4 Path to Exile
4 Aether Vial
4 Brushland
1 Eiganjo Castle
1 Forest
1 Gavony Township
4 Ghost Quarter
1 Plains
4 Razorverge Thicket
1 Sea Gate Wreckage
3 Stirring Wildwood
1 Tectonic Edge
1 Temple Garden
2 Burrenton Forge-Tender
2 Celestial Purge
1 Chandra, Pyromaster
2 Eidolon of Rhetoric
1 Ghostly Prison
2 Hushwing Gryff
1 Kataki, War's Wage
1 Rest in Peace
1 Sigarda, Host of Herons
1 Stony Silence
1 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
Writeup of this week's Modern Monday:
This is the second week we've gotten Modern to fire at 6 people so far. We're a very small group, so we know what everyone's playing. For reference, the other decks I know about are:
Nivix Gear Cyclops (UR Kiln Fiend)
RG Shaman Tribal
Living End
Mono U Tron (x2)
Mono W Weenies
Overall 1-2
Round 1: Mardu Superfriends (L, 0-2)
Game 1 found me turning cards sideways until he was at 2 before he stabilized with several back-to-bakc turns of planeswalkers. No real interaction from my side, which is unfortunate. Any flyer would have gotten there, as his first stabilization was Elspeth, Sun's Champion.
In: Celestial Purge x2, Sigarda, Chandra, Pyromaster
Out: I cannot remember. Maybe Voices or Pridgemages? Might have shaved an Arbiter or a Path?
Considered but didn't: Eidolon of Rhetoric (Lingering Souls + Flashback, but the really terrifying stuff is just a single 4+ drop), Burrenton Forge-Tender (Bolts, Helixes, but not enough and not terribly aggressive)
Both games taught me about what hands are keepable. Game 2 especially, I kept Oath + Loxodon Smiter + 5 lands, and it should've been immediately shipped back. I got drowned in Lingering Souls, Soldiers, Knights, and Vampires.
I'm really at a loss how to improve this matchup through deckbuilding, but at this point I'm making a ton of play mistakes anyway.
Round 2: Mono-B Aristocrats (L, 0-2)
Both games I beat down with no real hate happening. He'd end up around 2 life before he could start sacrificing with an active Zulaport Cutthroat or Falkenrath Noble. Didn't manage to see much of Path, Purge, or RIP, which would've been nice to break up some shenanigans. The death triggers were pretty nasty, making it hard to deal with combat when both creatures dying helped him.
Game 2 especially I kept a hand that could beat down, and should've mulliganed to find some actual interaction as his combo is often fairly fragile.
In: Celestial Purge x2, RIP, Sigarda
Out: Voice x2, Tectonic Edge, Leonin Arbiter x1
Round 3: Mono-U Illusions (W, 2-0)
Sadly, he's missing a ton of cards for this deck to really shine. He kept a couple of 2-landers and learned what Arbiter + Ghost Quarter does. I traded him some cards for his deck afterward; maybe next week will be better for him.
In: Sigarda, Host of Herons, Chandra, Pyromaster
Out: Leonin Arbiter x2
Should've considered but didn't: Ghostly Prison (I expected him to have instant-speed stuff, but he did not. He was U-Aggro. Voices should've come out, too.)
Thoughts on this list after a few weeks playing it:
Oath was an amazing top-deck every time I saw it. Vial, not so much. I've seen a lot of lists here running one over the other, and I'm not sure where I stand yet.
I'd like to replace the 1-2 of the Aven Mindcensors, as it really only affects 2 of the 7 decks we regularly see. Bird -> Arbiter -> GQ is still quite potent, but the Bird is just not doing it for me.
Needs more buff effects. More Wilt-Leaf Lieges and some Noble Hierarchs are in the mail, and I cannot wait.
I replaced a RIP with an Eidolon of Rhetoric in the sideboard, and I really wish I hadn't. Eidolon hits Living End and Nivix Gear Solid pretty well, but I'm already pretty well suited against the latter and I didn't anticipate losing as easily to Aristocrats.
I've yet to see a Scavenging Oooze hit the board (they're new this week), but I think they would've been all-stars in basically every match tonight.
I don't love the Mirran Crusader in the main. Not sure what he should be, though.
Sea Gate Wreckage is great when it works, but the colorless or 1-color draws are killing me. Needs more Temple Gardens; probably replacing 1 Stirring Wildwood, Sea Gate, and then cutting in to the Brushlands. I've never seen Eiganjo be more than a Plains, but I'm fine with it for the 1% of the time it saves Thalia from a 'Clasm, for now. I could stand another Tec. Edge, as there are quite a few slow decks that really want that mana at our store.
Chandra really felt like a good choice a lot of the time as I have trouble in grindier match ups, but I would like to try Domri over her. I'm not sure if I'm brace enough to throw him in the main.
Pridgemage is basically an Exalted 2/2, which is actually fine. Kataki and Stony Silence are dead sideboard cards in fear of some potential stranger bringing something someday. Not sure if that's good enough justification. At least Stony is good against Tron should those folks show up.
In general I need to really evaluate hands past "can I play cards with this?" and start looking at "how do I win with this?"
Feedback
How are the threats looking? What would you suggest, especially over Mindcensor and Mirran Crusader
How does one fight through tokens as GW? I'm thinking Nylea and more beaters/buffs, but I'm open to suggestion.
Anything else you'd like to say =)
Rancor
@thebombzen,Please do a search on this thread. You'll find plenty of discussion on the merits and shortcomings of Aven Mindcensor and how the card does in various metagames.
@tadiou, Relying on your opponent to make mistakes is not really any sort of metric to add merit to an argument on a cards inclusion in a deck. Going by a more obvious form of that logic our opponent will never play their best creatures because we play path to exile in our deck...
One word answers aside there are a number of ways to beat tokens. Rancor is certainly one of them but I prefer to stay away since it always opens you up to the possibility of a 2 for 1.
When i'm facing tokens post board there are some key cards I would like to see.
-Thalia, Guardian of Thraben (Before Turn 3)
-Dromoka's Command (I still play two main board even though many seem to dislike it these days)
-Ghostly Prison
-And most importantly Engineered Explosives
Though since its a planeswalker causing your specific problem only Thalia and EE are really relevant from that list.
Its definitely a strategy we are weak too and the usual answer is to force them to block until the tokens are gone and then win. In your case though elspeth is the one causing you issues I would strongly consider a 1 of sideboarded pithing needle as it catches many important threats in modern currently. Also you could consider Elspeth, Knight Errant in your Side/Main. She has always kind of been an average card for our deck but might do well in your meta.
GUGEdric, Spymaster of Trest - Elfball
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic- Doomsday!
RWUEphara, God of the Polis - Blink + Control
GBGGlissa, the Traitor - Stax & Lands
URGMaelstrom Wanderer - Goodstuff RUG
RGWMayael the Anima - Timmy
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher - The One Hit Wonder
RGWMarath, Will of the Wild - Old-school Enchantress Hate
RWRAurelia, the Warleader - Equipment Aggro
GGGReki, the History of Kamigawa - Legends + Banding
UBRSedris, the Traitor King - Creatures with : Ability
BUBPhenax, God of Deception - Mill
*Sidenote, I specifically excluded infinite combos from all these decks with the exception of Marath and the squirrel nest + Earthcraft combo.
Looking for something Aggressive in modern? Try - BR Aggro
It seems like such a super high-impact card that doesn't see play mainly because people are playing fetches - it's an instant non-bo. For us it's like Leonin Arbiter 5-8. Better than arbiter in many ways. Obviously does not play well with Aether Vial which many posters here have dropped anyhow.
Why does it see essentially no play?
I don't mind paying 2 mana for to activate a few things in a game when it is likely to hurt my opponent much, much worse. Against any 3 colour deck it ups the chance we get to turn off their Fetches early in the game. Our deck still functions with Field out, I suspect it cripples a lot of other decks cold. Field won't win you the game on its own but it provides the window through which you can take your beats and get through for the win. I don't mind paying extra for Ghost Quarter if it's going to deeply impact the game, otherwise I just keep it for mana.
Does saccing Eldrazi tokens count as a mana ability?
The idea is that it's worth it to hit our scoozes and pridemages in order to shut everything they have down. (Also it doesn't hit Hierarch.)
EDH - GU Kruphix, God of Horizons, WB Teysa, Envoy of Ghosts, GUR Surrak Dragonclaw, WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores, R Purphoros, God of the Forge, RW Archangel Avacyn
I probably will keep my singleton in the sideboard with the difference being I keep one or two dromoka's command post side and don't put in the forge tender vs. Tron.
GUGEdric, Spymaster of Trest - Elfball
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic- Doomsday!
RWUEphara, God of the Polis - Blink + Control
GBGGlissa, the Traitor - Stax & Lands
URGMaelstrom Wanderer - Goodstuff RUG
RGWMayael the Anima - Timmy
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher - The One Hit Wonder
RGWMarath, Will of the Wild - Old-school Enchantress Hate
RWRAurelia, the Warleader - Equipment Aggro
GGGReki, the History of Kamigawa - Legends + Banding
UBRSedris, the Traitor King - Creatures with : Ability
BUBPhenax, God of Deception - Mill
*Sidenote, I specifically excluded infinite combos from all these decks with the exception of Marath and the squirrel nest + Earthcraft combo.
Looking for something Aggressive in modern? Try - BR Aggro
Amusingly, you're not relying on your opponent to make mistakes. You're relying on your opponent to make the correct play which is to not walk into into getting blown out. If they're constantly playing around wrath does it matter if you actually have a wrath or not? That's the point I'm making. I'm basically at the 2nd level here, while you're looking at this as a 1st level exercise. You're playing as if your opponent is playing around the card you think they think you have, which, for the person who's questioning removing Mindcensor, sometimes not having it is just as good as having it.
I think your last argument is also incorrect. People play around Path. They do. They want to make us use Path when it's least favorable to us, on a weaker target, and we want to save it to use it on their best targets, or at the most opportune time. They can choose to play around Path by not playing their best creature, forcing out Path by virtue of the board state, and then play their better creature knowing that we've played a path and the odds of having another path are less than likely.
Example: playing against Abzan Midrange, they play a Goyf, and then another, we handle one with the board state, but you question on whether or not to use Path on the other one. It's a 3/4, you're at 10 life. You use path on it, they follow up with a Siege Rhino and then you don't have a Path for the Rhino. I'm sure they had the ability to play a Rhino the past 2 turns, but they didn't. Why? Because you'd have Pathed the Rhino and they were playing around with their higher value creatures baiting removal. It happens.
I don't think you quite understand what i'm trying to convey. What you say is essentially correct but for the purposes of building a deck and arguing towards the inclusion or exclusion of particular cards its worthless advice.
During actual play given all the known information by both opponents (Cards played, Graveyard Size, Lands/Colors on Field, Cards in hand, Probability key cards are in hand or will be drawn from deck, ect..) it is indeed possible that the correct play from the opponents standpoint is take make a decision that is not optimal if they had actually known everything. i.e. what your attempting to describe. Those situations are entirely contextual and not something you should ever go into a match expecting to achieve but rather something to take advantage of when the possibly gain far outweighs the immediate disadvantage to you.
The problem with trying to play these mindgames are that the "levels", as you put it, are an infinite logic chain looping through two decisions based upon the possibility your opponent is bluffing you. In actuality a good magic player has many similarities to a good poker play and they simply run the numbers, as it were, and determine the line of play with the best chance of success.
This isn't to say that there is no advantage to be gained from representing more lines of play than you actually have but I firmly believe it should never come at a detriment to the functionality of your deck or your current path to victory.
In the context of our discussion this would mean choosing to play aven mindcensor in a metagame where it was not suited to force your opponent to respect the possibility you have it rather than for its actual impact on the game. Likewise this would include leaving up three mana to represent the possibility you have the mindcensor (regardless if it in your list or not) but at the cost of developing your board and losing valuable tempo when they call your bluff.
GUGEdric, Spymaster of Trest - Elfball
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic- Doomsday!
RWUEphara, God of the Polis - Blink + Control
GBGGlissa, the Traitor - Stax & Lands
URGMaelstrom Wanderer - Goodstuff RUG
RGWMayael the Anima - Timmy
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher - The One Hit Wonder
RGWMarath, Will of the Wild - Old-school Enchantress Hate
RWRAurelia, the Warleader - Equipment Aggro
GGGReki, the History of Kamigawa - Legends + Banding
UBRSedris, the Traitor King - Creatures with : Ability
BUBPhenax, God of Deception - Mill
*Sidenote, I specifically excluded infinite combos from all these decks with the exception of Marath and the squirrel nest + Earthcraft combo.
Looking for something Aggressive in modern? Try - BR Aggro
With six anti-search cards, and Vial making at least all of them flash. There's an expectation of existence, and it goes to my original point (which I've made about this deck since 2011), is that part of it's charm is creating awkward board states where your opponent has to account for a lot of scenarios and possibilities.
You're right there's an infinite decision loop with these levels. But as a player, you cannot just jam your best line for you every time in a vacuum. And that's what this deck punishes. If your deck says jam this fetchland on turn 2, and your opponent has a hierarch and 2 open lands. That's bad. Right? Especially if you've played against the deck many times, and they have shown that they play Mindcensor. Playing against it, as the level one thought, you're asking yourself: okay, before i do this, they may have Mindcensor. Can I play around that card? If yes, then do this, if not then do this. It's not just 'can I play around this', but can I afford to play around this card. The level 2 thought for the Hatebears player happens in deckbuilding. The idea is when people start playing level 1 thought in respect to your deck, it then becomes irrelevant on if you have it or not in a majority of cases. Because it implies that there's the possibility they will guess wrong. So, here: if it's some percent chance you have Mindcensor t3 availble on a sylvan scrying (I think it's like 15% chance, but it's also strongly tied to the concept of vial->arbiter, which probably raises it to about 30%), the level zero play has a 70% chance of getting it right. If you're using a level 1 play here, you're possibly playing around it as opposed to playing into it. It's not necessarily a 70-30 split here, because you're using more information available to you to infer what your opponent has based on what you have and can play around. What happens is, in practice, while you won't be blown out as much, you also will have a more conservative gameplan because you'll be playing around cards regardless on if they have it or not because of what you can and cannot play around. When you state you're possibly losing tempo by leaving up 3 mana, you're actually accomplishing just what I've been trying to explain all along here. If you can play around certain things, and you can't always, it doesn't matter if you have it or not as long as people think you can have it and they can or cannot play around it, we're just turning the tables here, where you have the decision to make, on if they'll crack that fetchland this turn or play sylvan scrying or chord or whatever, can you afford to play around it. It's risk reward about calling bluffs with the available knowledge that you have. The thing is is that knowledge isn't equal, and that's where the poker comparisons get a bit weirder because probabilities aren't a closed system with magic (the permutations are infinitely larger), and where bluffing becomes a bit more powerful than it does in higher level magic games because of it. The best line of play is based on available knowledge, but the knowledge or lack of knowledge create plays in and of itself for the deck if you're looking for it. That's the level 2 play, exploiting when they think they have the knowledge, but they really don't.
It may not be suited for your meta, but if in the OP's meta, if they're playing around it, it's because they can be significantly affected by it, and have taken the level 1 play into consideration, and are playing around it. That's the key here. It's like if you play certain hands in poker a certain way, and people recognize that, you need to start playing them differently if you want a different reaction. Or you can start playing hands that aren't like that similarly if you can afford to, which is the much easier scenario. It's much more difficult to justify not playing it in situations you have 'it' like you can in poker because of the best of three format, there's just less action opportunity to take advantage of hands like it, that your best time to take action is usually the time that it presents itself and not later (which, amusingly is unlike hearthstone which rewards it a little differently because of interactions with minoins vindicates usually the person with the last follow up). I mean, a practical example is, while you may get better value out of pathing and ghost quartering something on the same turn, it's almost always better to use it at the first because the opportunity risk increases that that line won't be there when you're planning on using it (which is what separates HS from MTG in a lot of ways).
Therefore, it doesn't matter if you have it or not because if they play around it, they're going to either play around it if you have it or if you don't have it. Whether or not you have it is irrelevant if they're going to play around it. If they play around it and you don't have it, it's better for you because you're gaining a sense of virtual card advantage, or cards that you have that you don't actually have that people are playing around and lose tempo because of playing around cards that they think you have.
Karma. Lets just say, it's sometimes an instant auto win if you can stall the game long enough. I played a game last night against the heartless summoning variety of eldrazi black, and they're pretty low on actual threats. I just kept them off of being able to search for Ulamog for long enough, dropped Karma, and while I wasn't able to alpha strike through for a lot of damage, Karma got in for 8 damage two turns in a row with doing 3 damage through a few Oblivion Sower and let Karma clean up the rest.