Well I have been on 3 colonnade since beginning of the year, so I will have to agree to disagree on colonnade numbers, 3/1 might work depending if you have alot of walkers you wanna nug.
Hi everyone, just wanted to share an article on control decks in Modern. I included Esper, because I feel its metagame positioning is solid right now. Check it out here, and let me know what you think!
I absolutely think that 3 snap is the way to go now with push.
I also think 3 colonnade is the sweet spot as it's not a land you want to be seeing to often in early turns as it's a always a tapped land.
I can't help but disagree with this. 4 Colonnades have never really been a problem, and they do a lot -- I really don't see a reason to cut one.
3 Snappy seems pretty good, tho I think lists with 3 Snaps probably need to have 4 Path/3 Push.
Funny story, I played last night against Living end. I had two colonnades as my only white sources that game, and he blew it up with 2 fulminators. I draw into a 3rd, and he drew into his 3rd fulminator. The next turn I topdeck a 4th, and he is able to resolve Living End with Ricochet trap backup since I only have 2 lands. The thing is, I had a Hallowed Moonlight in my hand this whole time, but because I drew the 4th colonnade and not an untapped white source, I couldn't blow him out with it.
Obviously this doesn't matter at all in the 3 vs 4 argument, I just thought it was a funny thing that came up in one of my games while we're on the topic of colonnades.
Firstly, it's very low opportunity-cost. cycling for ONE WHITE MANA means we can basically ditch it for free at virtually any point in the game, and one is the best mana cost for anything we're going to cycle in unfair matchups where holding up mana all the time is important.
Secondly, it's SUPER flexible. anguished unmaking feels so close to playable, because we want the effect very badly, but three life is just too much. utter end is something a lot of us toyed with, but eventually I think we mostly realized that trading it for a 1 or 2 mana spell is not where we wanted to be, even if it did have snapcaster value. detention sphere is the effect we most often look at, and many of us play or have played a detention sphere in the sideboard because having a catchall answer is just really good in many matchups.
I want to compare it to detention sphere and utter end in particular here. If we compare it to utter end, it's the same mana cost, and same speed--4 mana, instant. Straight up, utter end at first blush is better since it's permanent. However, cast out doesn't ever sit dead in our hand. If it's not a matchup where we can profit from trading 4 mana for flexibility, we only actually have to commit one mana to turn it into a better card.
If you compare it to detention sphere, it's almost strictly better. raw cmc aside, cast out is an instant, still deals with planeswalkers, and dodges abrupt decay which is the most significant enchantment removal we see brought in by decks that we *actually* want this effect against. It's not like we play this against affinity, infect, or tron. It's just going to cycle in those matchups most of the time. We want it against random fair decks with expensive planeswalkers that are hard for us to actually get off the board. If you want to sweep tokens, EE is a better tool anyway, and we're strong against tokens because of all the wraths in the first place.
I'm not saying it'll be a 2-of or a 3-of in the mainboard, ever. But I very much see it sneaking in as a 1 of in the mainboard or sideboard of control decks in the future. In particular, for mystical teachings builds. Flexible, tutor target, but not a dead card if drawn at the wrong time.
Feels like a good card to me. Will have to wait to see how it plays out in testing though. I feel like the cycle ability on it isn't as relevant as it is on other cards. It's probably not going to be very often that you want to cycle this card just because of it being catch-all removal. I mean, what else are you hoping to cycle into? Land I guess, or counter-magic against decks with low a permanent count.
I guess what I'm saying is that cycling generally makes narrow cards much better. This is not a narrow card. If this was an instant, it would be a slam dunk. Cycle away early, snapcast value later. Or if it was 3cmc, tap-out control with sun Titan would love it. I guess it makes logic knot a little better? Can't really think of any other synergies.
Firstly, it's very low opportunity-cost. cycling for ONE WHITE MANA means we can basically ditch it for free at virtually any point in the game, and one is the best mana cost for anything we're going to cycle in unfair matchups where holding up mana all the time is important.
Secondly, it's SUPER flexible. anguished unmaking feels so close to playable, because we want the effect very badly, but three life is just too much. utter end is something a lot of us toyed with, but eventually I think we mostly realized that trading it for a 1 or 2 mana spell is not where we wanted to be, even if it did have snapcaster value. detention sphere is the effect we most often look at, and many of us play or have played a detention sphere in the sideboard because having a catchall answer is just really good in many matchups.
I want to compare it to detention sphere and utter end in particular here. If we compare it to utter end, it's the same mana cost, and same speed--4 mana, instant. Straight up, utter end at first blush is better since it's permanent. However, cast out doesn't ever sit dead in our hand. If it's not a matchup where we can profit from trading 4 mana for flexibility, we only actually have to commit one mana to turn it into a better card.
If you compare it to detention sphere, it's almost strictly better. raw cmc aside, cast out is an instant, still deals with planeswalkers, and dodges abrupt decay which is the most significant enchantment removal we see brought in by decks that we *actually* want this effect against. It's not like we play this against affinity, infect, or tron. It's just going to cycle in those matchups most of the time. We want it against random fair decks with expensive planeswalkers that are hard for us to actually get off the board. If you want to sweep tokens, EE is a better tool anyway, and we're strong against tokens because of all the wraths in the first place.
I'm not saying it'll be a 2-of or a 3-of in the mainboard, ever. But I very much see it sneaking in as a 1 of in the mainboard or sideboard of control decks in the future. In particular, for mystical teachings builds. Flexible, tutor target, but not a dead card if drawn at the wrong time.
Feels like a good card to me. Will have to wait to see how it plays out in testing though. I feel like the cycle ability on it isn't as relevant as it is on other cards. It's probably not going to be very often that you want to cycle this card just because of it being catch-all removal. I mean, what else are you hoping to cycle into? Land I guess, or counter-magic against decks with low a permanent count.
I guess what I'm saying is that cycling generally makes narrow cards much better. This is not a narrow card. If this was an instant, it would be a slam dunk. Cycle away early, snapcast value later. Or if it was 3cmc, tap-out control with sun Titan would love it. I guess it makes logic knot a little better? Can't really think of any other synergies.
Feels like an inefficient card to me. I am interested to see how it performs for you guys, but in a format dominated by efficient threats, I'm not really in the market for a 4 mana o-ring. I suppose the cycling makes it more enticing, but it's still extremely unappealing. If the format becomes more about 3 and 4 mana permanents then I'd definitely consider this, but right now I'm going to be jamming an efficient list, not clogging it up with even more 4 drops (I don't understand how the 'stock' lists is going to add this when you all ready play 3-4 Cryptics, 3-4 SV's, 2 Sphinx's Rev, etc.). The only cards so far that I see can improve the deck are Gideon and 1-2 of the cycling lands. Beyond that AMK is a bit underwhelming. Was hoping for at least something like Miscalculation, but I did the dumb dumb and let myself have 0.5% hope that Neo-WoTC would ever print a playable modern counter in standard. Stupid me.
Firstly, it's very low opportunity-cost. cycling for ONE WHITE MANA means we can basically ditch it for free at virtually any point in the game, and one is the best mana cost for anything we're going to cycle in unfair matchups where holding up mana all the time is important.
Secondly, it's SUPER flexible. anguished unmaking feels so close to playable, because we want the effect very badly, but three life is just too much. utter end is something a lot of us toyed with, but eventually I think we mostly realized that trading it for a 1 or 2 mana spell is not where we wanted to be, even if it did have snapcaster value. detention sphere is the effect we most often look at, and many of us play or have played a detention sphere in the sideboard because having a catchall answer is just really good in many matchups.
I want to compare it to detention sphere and utter end in particular here. If we compare it to utter end, it's the same mana cost, and same speed--4 mana, instant. Straight up, utter end at first blush is better since it's permanent. However, cast out doesn't ever sit dead in our hand. If it's not a matchup where we can profit from trading 4 mana for flexibility, we only actually have to commit one mana to turn it into a better card.
If you compare it to detention sphere, it's almost strictly better. raw cmc aside, cast out is an instant, still deals with planeswalkers, and dodges abrupt decay which is the most significant enchantment removal we see brought in by decks that we *actually* want this effect against. It's not like we play this against affinity, infect, or tron. It's just going to cycle in those matchups most of the time. We want it against random fair decks with expensive planeswalkers that are hard for us to actually get off the board. If you want to sweep tokens, EE is a better tool anyway, and we're strong against tokens because of all the wraths in the first place.
I'm not saying it'll be a 2-of or a 3-of in the mainboard, ever. But I very much see it sneaking in as a 1 of in the mainboard or sideboard of control decks in the future. In particular, for mystical teachings builds. Flexible, tutor target, but not a dead card if drawn at the wrong time.
Feels like a good card to me. Will have to wait to see how it plays out in testing though. I feel like the cycle ability on it isn't as relevant as it is on other cards. It's probably not going to be very often that you want to cycle this card just because of it being catch-all removal. I mean, what else are you hoping to cycle into? Land I guess, or counter-magic against decks with low a permanent count.
I guess what I'm saying is that cycling generally makes narrow cards much better. This is not a narrow card. If this was an instant, it would be a slam dunk. Cycle away early, snapcast value later. Or if it was 3cmc, tap-out control with sun Titan would love it. I guess it makes logic knot a little better? Can't really think of any other synergies.
Feels like an inefficient card to me. I am interested to see how it performs for you guys, but in a format dominated by efficient threats, I'm not really in the market for a 4 mana o-ring. I suppose the cycling makes it more enticing, but it's still extremely unappealing. If the format becomes more about 3 and 4 mana permanents then I'd definitely consider this, but right now I'm going to be jamming an efficient list, not clogging it up with even more 4 drops (I don't understand how the 'stock' lists is going to add this when you all ready play 3-4 Cryptics, 3-4 SV's, 2 Sphinx's Rev, etc.). The only cards so far that I see can improve the deck are Gideon and 1-2 of the cycling lands. Beyond that AMK is a bit underwhelming. Was hoping for at least something like Miscalculation, but I did the dumb dumb and let myself have 0.5% hope that Neo-WoTC would ever print a playable modern counter in standard. Stupid me.
Well yes, it is strictly the cycling that makes the card enticing...Or even worthy of conversation. The same goes for Miscalculation....It's a worse Mana leak without cycle. Cycling is everything on Cast Out. I think without a way to abuse it going to the yard, it probably isn't good enough. But I'll still try it, with 3 or more logic knots.
I disagree with the notion that cast out ISN'T a narrow card. In the context of what our deck is built to do, it's actually very narrow--it exists to deal with resolved non-creature non-enchantment non-land permanents. Basically, to hit artifacts and planeswalkers. It's a 4-mana, instant-speed answer to a resolved planeswalker or artifact that can cycle away if it's dead. Do me a favor and list every card in modern that can kill a planeswalker or an artifact and is instant speed.
I'll give you a hint--it's very short. anguished unmaking and utter end. Bouncing isn't the same as actually answering a threat, so that's about it. If we reflect on this and realize that killing a planeswalker at instant speed (hero's downfall) is at least three mana, saying we want flexibility on top of that means a slightly more expensive but less restrictive (only a single colored mana) cost is reasonable. Since 4 mana is reasonable for our flexible instant-speed answer, we're comparing cast out to utter end. Utter end is straight useless in certain matchups, and too expensive to be good in many others. cast out is useless in the same matchups, is still usable but not effective in the same matchups, and is ALSO able to be cashed in for a new card. Basically, it's an UPGRADE to a spell we've already played with and been wanting a slightly better version of.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes, I am a local area mod. WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
Primary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Hi, going to be playing this list in the SCG Worcester Classic today. Need suggestions for adding 1 Colonnade and cutting one land, as well as sideboard help. Thanks.
Hi, going to be playing this list in the SCG Worcester Classic today. Need suggestions for adding 1 Colonnade and cutting one land, as well as sideboard help. Thanks.
Not a fan of the Geists in the board, and I feel like you need some Blessed Alliance , they shore up the Burn and Eldrazi matchups, or Runed Halos, for a cathcall.
Playing only 1 Secure in the main feels a little risky, so I'd either add another and make a cut somewhere (prolly a Serum) or switch it to a Zenith.
Is someone playing with Thoughtseize ? I am curious to know about the results of this card, and the match up where it shines.
Having them in the board with Extirpate/Surgical Extraction is good for combo. I'm a fan.
Also, when are we going to start admitting that Mana Leak as a one-of is okay? Looking at the stats for the decks that are doing well at competitions, one Mana Leak and three Logic Knot isn't unusual. Where we struggle is getting to turn 4/5, and that's where Mana Leak is good. I know it doesn't feel good including it for the reasons that have been listed so many times here, but I don't feel that the threads feelings towards it are reflective of the current real world meta. (Admittedly, I am just an esper noob and respect the experience of others on the forum, but when Wafo-Tapa etc are giving good results with it, who am I to argue?)
MTGO and paper are just too different to compare for our deck in particular. In general, i think mana leak is still terrible. Those of you who are new to the deck are probably thinking of mana leak in the context of most bgx decks being death's shadow, which makes leak much better. The grindy fair matchups really show why leak is bad.
I played a 4-rounder today. lost to goblins, beat uw emeria titan, beat grixis death's shadow, beat esper mill. Goblins is basically unwinnable, uw titan is a really good matchup, grixis death's shadow is a really easy matchup, and I lucked into a T0 leyline g1, mulled to 5 game two because hands had no lands, and lucksacked into leyline plus two lands and two spell snares. Opponent slammed rest in peace on 2, I said "thanks" and rode spell snares on disenchant to an easy match win.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes, I am a local area mod. WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
Primary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Is someone playing with Thoughtseize ? I am curious to know about the results of this card, and the match up where it shines.
Having them in the board with Extirpate/Surgical Extraction is good for combo. I'm a fan.
Also, when are we going to start admitting that Mana Leak as a one-of is okay? Looking at the stats for the decks that are doing well at competitions, one Mana Leak and three Logic Knot isn't unusual. Where we struggle is getting to turn 4/5, and that's where Mana Leak is good. I know it doesn't feel good including it for the reasons that have been listed so many times here, but I don't feel that the threads feelings towards it are reflective of the current real world meta. (Admittedly, I am just an esper noob and respect the experience of others on the forum, but when Wafo-Tapa etc are giving good results with it, who am I to argue?)
Mana Leak as a 1-of is very good. I've argued for it before and will do so again. The reason it's good as a 1-of is because no one plays around it until they've seen it and once they see it they will play around it. So it's essentially the best 2cmc counterspell and then the worst 2cmc counterspell. Playing 1 copy mitigates those factors. After they see it for the first time, board it out. And even while it's sitting in your sideboard it will be doing work by forcing your opponent to consider it.
Concentration is not an infinite resource and forcing your opponent to keep Mana Leak in mind has serious value. Good to see the data actually supporting the position finally.
People will play around mana leak against blue decks. You don't need to play the first one for this to happen.
Once they do see it, there's still no guarantee they'll continue to play around it. Sometimes they'll just make you have it (which you never will since you only play 1).
Its also only the best 2 cmc counterspell if you draw it on time (which is unlikely).
Then you board it out, because you know you're only playing it as a gimmick, and you need your board to have an extra card to bring in whenever you want to side it out.
Mana leak is seeing play, but its not for the reasons you think.
The major reason is that people are more likely to concede early online. When you can get games on demand (not only being able to play in a shop once a week, and having to wait for everyone to finish before moving onto the next round) theres no reason to keep playing when you're hellbent and they rev for 5, or they run you out of resources and start firing up colonnades.
Maybe its just me, but people don't tend to concede against me all that often.
When your games are consistently ending on earlier turns, and when you're consistently playing against decks that meet 2 conditions (are one of the best decks in the format, less variety than fnms and day 1, and are fast/aggressive to churn out games faster) mana leak suddenly looks a lot more appealing.
Sure, not every deck is going to be death's shadow, but you can narrow down the most played decks a lot more accurately than you often can at fnm.
People will play around mana leak against blue decks. You don't need to play the first one for this to happen.
Once they do see it, there's still no guarantee they'll continue to play around it. Sometimes they'll just make you have it (which you never will since you only play 1).
Its also only the best 2 cmc counterspell if you draw it on time (which is unlikely).
Then you board it out, because you know you're only playing it as a gimmick, and you need your board to have an extra card to bring in whenever you want to side it out.
This is not good logic. Good players are not playing around Mana Leak because they know it sees little to no play in the format. Adept players know that most lists only have 1 at most, so they will, as you say, 'make you have it'. Which decidedly means they aren't playing around it, which makes it good.
Bad players may (or may not) play around it, making it a bad main board card (sometimes). But if players are choosing to play around it, you shouldn't be concerned about about it because you can leverage play ability against them.
Sideboarding it out doesn't happen every game. If you level your opponent correctly, you can decide if they will or won't play around it. If you decide they won't (you think they are a good player, or a reckless player) you leave it in. If you decide they will play around it (you think they are a bad player, or it suprised them when they saw it) you take it out because you get more win percentage when they play around a card you don't have (which good players will sometimes do after seeing it). Even putting in a sub-optimal card from the sideboard is fine because the +Ev gained from them playing around it outweighs the -ev from a sub-optimal slot in from the board. If you think your opponent is leveling you, you sometimes leave it in and sometimes take it out. It's game theory.
It's not a gimmick, it's just takes a lot of objective reflection to see how good the card is. We remember the instances where it was a dead card more saliently then when it did it's job because we are generally risk adverse. Play it as a 1-of and keep records of how often it's bad vs good and you'll see exactly what I mean.
Mana leak does still see play in the format. Most jeskai variants play it, most delver lists play it, most UW lists play it, and some grixis control lists still play it.
Many of those lists have more than one.
Them not playing around mana leak doesn't make the inclusion of it in the deck good.
It means it might not be dead when you draw it if they don't respect it, but them not playing around your 1 of doesn't somehow make that card better.
While I certainly remember the times when its bad more than I remember the times its good, thats just as much because its bad way more often than its good.
In jeskai nahiri, I (like most people) tended to play ~3 copies of mana leak as my counterspells. The card was often bad there because of how often it died, and its way better in that deck than it is here.
On top of that, mana leak is (generously) good through about turn 7, against most of the popular decks in the format.
Most of my games consistently go 18, 20 turns, which means mana leak is going to be dead for 2/3s of the game. Given that we draw more cards in the later turns than we do the early turns, you're much more likely to see it when its dead. (I can't tell you exactly how much likelier without making up numbers for cards drawn per game turn).
Don't get me wrong here. I've played with mana leaks in esper.
I played 4 rune snags in esper for a decent number of games, and simply put, those types of counter spells are not very strong in this deck.
They do not function how you want them to. I would much rather play a copy of deprive than mana leak, but I don't think adding more cheap counterspells is the way to go right now.
Mana leak is defensible in this deck (though I think its very bad), but the reasons you're using are simply wrong, IMO. Its not played because of some leveling strategy you're trying to pull on your opponent (given that the card is still likely to "fail" even when you've correctly leveled them), but because its an early game counterspell that counters things like death's shadow and eldrazi.
The fact that you credit 'most' of your games as going 20+ turns is akin to the saliency heuristic that causes you to think 1-of Mana Leak is bad. The games you are winning probably go 20+ turns, and Mana Leak is bad there. But who cares? If you're in t20 you're probably winning.
Also, depending on how soft your meta is, my guess is that if you're a good player your win rate is somewhere between 65-80%. Again, this is going to bias you into thinking leak is bad, because you spend more time in turns 20+ situations where it feels horrible to draw it. If you were in a tougher meta, where your win rate as a non-pro is probably less than 65%, you are going to notice that your games are not getting to turn 20, and you're going to notice that Mana Leak is very good when you draw it. This is why it is 'feels' better as an online card.
I don't keep winrate statistics, I grant you, but my winrate is probably around 60-70% of games.
I won't get into too much specifics regarding my meta, but its pretty competitive. There are consistently people who are on the PT/were on the PT/are in testing groups with PT players, etc.
I don't think its better online because the skill level is higher. I think its better online because games don't go as long.
I tend to win a lot of the games that go to turn 20 because the answers I draw are actual answers. As soon as I start drawing mana leaks instead of negates, I'll be losing more of those games.
Its not uncommon to be casting your answers as you draw them because you haven't been able to build up a reserve. It doesn't take a whole lot to lose games you're winning.
I wrote a bit on miscalculation when it was posted about on here a few days ago. The part about having answers than aren't answers is relevant to mana leak as well. I'll try to find the post, and edit this one when I do.
Mana leak is very good when you draw it early. I'm quite convinced that mana leak's best case scenario is quite powerful, but I genuinely feel that you won't get that nearly often enough to warrant playing the card.
Consider why you're playing it. What are the questions you want it to answer? Is the flexibility of having one card answer all of these worth the major downside it entails? Would playing a different split of removal and other counterspells answer you questions better? In all of my experience with the deck, a different split will always do you better.
Finally, I will point out that I do not play on MTGO. All of my experience comes from paper (or free simulators against friends), and none of the grinding aspects of MTGO are things I'm intimately familiar with. That being said, while mana leak is better online, I'm still unconvinced its really where you want to be.
Perhaps I'll start keeping actual data, but I'm well aware of the cognitive biases when remembering results. Whether or not that effects my memory of these situations, I can't say.
I think at the end of the day, the major reason I think its bad is because I could just play another logic knot, or negates, or even deprives.
Its not like I'm choosing between mana leak and some card that isn't a 2 cmc counterspell. There are options. Mana leak is the worst of them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Esper draw go Control!
Twitch stream: http://www.twitch.tv/pimpdonny
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Funny story, I played last night against Living end. I had two colonnades as my only white sources that game, and he blew it up with 2 fulminators. I draw into a 3rd, and he drew into his 3rd fulminator. The next turn I topdeck a 4th, and he is able to resolve Living End with Ricochet trap backup since I only have 2 lands. The thing is, I had a Hallowed Moonlight in my hand this whole time, but because I drew the 4th colonnade and not an untapped white source, I couldn't blow him out with it.
Obviously this doesn't matter at all in the 3 vs 4 argument, I just thought it was a funny thing that came up in one of my games while we're on the topic of colonnades.
Feels like a good card to me. Will have to wait to see how it plays out in testing though. I feel like the cycle ability on it isn't as relevant as it is on other cards. It's probably not going to be very often that you want to cycle this card just because of it being catch-all removal. I mean, what else are you hoping to cycle into? Land I guess, or counter-magic against decks with low a permanent count.
I guess what I'm saying is that cycling generally makes narrow cards much better. This is not a narrow card. If this was an instant, it would be a slam dunk. Cycle away early, snapcast value later. Or if it was 3cmc, tap-out control with sun Titan would love it. I guess it makes logic knot a little better? Can't really think of any other synergies.
Feels like an inefficient card to me. I am interested to see how it performs for you guys, but in a format dominated by efficient threats, I'm not really in the market for a 4 mana o-ring. I suppose the cycling makes it more enticing, but it's still extremely unappealing. If the format becomes more about 3 and 4 mana permanents then I'd definitely consider this, but right now I'm going to be jamming an efficient list, not clogging it up with even more 4 drops (I don't understand how the 'stock' lists is going to add this when you all ready play 3-4 Cryptics, 3-4 SV's, 2 Sphinx's Rev, etc.). The only cards so far that I see can improve the deck are Gideon and 1-2 of the cycling lands. Beyond that AMK is a bit underwhelming. Was hoping for at least something like Miscalculation, but I did the dumb dumb and let myself have 0.5% hope that Neo-WoTC would ever print a playable modern counter in standard. Stupid me.
Well yes, it is strictly the cycling that makes the card enticing...Or even worthy of conversation. The same goes for Miscalculation....It's a worse Mana leak without cycle. Cycling is everything on Cast Out. I think without a way to abuse it going to the yard, it probably isn't good enough. But I'll still try it, with 3 or more logic knots.
I'll give you a hint--it's very short. anguished unmaking and utter end. Bouncing isn't the same as actually answering a threat, so that's about it. If we reflect on this and realize that killing a planeswalker at instant speed (hero's downfall) is at least three mana, saying we want flexibility on top of that means a slightly more expensive but less restrictive (only a single colored mana) cost is reasonable. Since 4 mana is reasonable for our flexible instant-speed answer, we're comparing cast out to utter end. Utter end is straight useless in certain matchups, and too expensive to be good in many others. cast out is useless in the same matchups, is still usable but not effective in the same matchups, and is ALSO able to be cashed in for a new card. Basically, it's an UPGRADE to a spell we've already played with and been wanting a slightly better version of.
Yes, I am a local area mod.WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVEPrimary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Counts : 60 main / 15 sideboard
Creatures:3
3 Snapcaster Mage
Spells:32
2 Fatal Push
4 Path to Exile
1 Secure the Wastes
4 Serum Visions
2 Logic Knot
1 Negate
3 Think Twice
4 Esper Charm
2 Sphinx's Revelation
4 Cryptic Command
4 Supreme Verdict
1 Elspeth, Sun's Champion
Lands:25
2 Celestial Colonnade
3 Drowned Catacomb
4 Flooded Strand
1 Ghost Quarter
2 Glacial Fortress
1 Godless Shrine
2 Hallowed Fountain
3 Island
1 Plains
4 Polluted Delta
1 Swamp
1 Watery Grave
Sideboard:15
3 Geist of Saint Traft
2 Vendilion Clique
1 Condemn
1 Dispel
2 Duress
1 Fatal Push
1 Thoughtseize
1 Celestial Purge
1 Negate
1 Jace, Architect of Thought
1 Gideon Jura
Esper draw go Control!
Twitch stream: http://www.twitch.tv/pimpdonny
Not a fan of the Geists in the board, and I feel like you need some Blessed Alliance , they shore up the Burn and Eldrazi matchups, or Runed Halos, for a cathcall.
Playing only 1 Secure in the main feels a little risky, so I'd either add another and make a cut somewhere (prolly a Serum) or switch it to a Zenith.
UWB Esper Draw-Go Control (clicky)
UW Azorius Control (clicky)
Currently pursuing a degree in Biochemistry.
EDH: I've decided I don't like multiplayer formats.
Having them in the board with Extirpate/Surgical Extraction is good for combo. I'm a fan.
Also, when are we going to start admitting that Mana Leak as a one-of is okay? Looking at the stats for the decks that are doing well at competitions, one Mana Leak and three Logic Knot isn't unusual. Where we struggle is getting to turn 4/5, and that's where Mana Leak is good. I know it doesn't feel good including it for the reasons that have been listed so many times here, but I don't feel that the threads feelings towards it are reflective of the current real world meta. (Admittedly, I am just an esper noob and respect the experience of others on the forum, but when Wafo-Tapa etc are giving good results with it, who am I to argue?)
In paper, its maybe defensible, but it will always be the worst card in the deck.
TBH, in the 4 serum visions, 4 wrath of god decks, I feel like negate is better because you have more creature removal.
I played a 4-rounder today. lost to goblins, beat uw emeria titan, beat grixis death's shadow, beat esper mill. Goblins is basically unwinnable, uw titan is a really good matchup, grixis death's shadow is a really easy matchup, and I lucked into a T0 leyline g1, mulled to 5 game two because hands had no lands, and lucksacked into leyline plus two lands and two spell snares. Opponent slammed rest in peace on 2, I said "thanks" and rode spell snares on disenchant to an easy match win.
Yes, I am a local area mod.WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVEPrimary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Mana Leak as a 1-of is very good. I've argued for it before and will do so again. The reason it's good as a 1-of is because no one plays around it until they've seen it and once they see it they will play around it. So it's essentially the best 2cmc counterspell and then the worst 2cmc counterspell. Playing 1 copy mitigates those factors. After they see it for the first time, board it out. And even while it's sitting in your sideboard it will be doing work by forcing your opponent to consider it.
Concentration is not an infinite resource and forcing your opponent to keep Mana Leak in mind has serious value. Good to see the data actually supporting the position finally.
Once they do see it, there's still no guarantee they'll continue to play around it. Sometimes they'll just make you have it (which you never will since you only play 1).
Its also only the best 2 cmc counterspell if you draw it on time (which is unlikely).
Then you board it out, because you know you're only playing it as a gimmick, and you need your board to have an extra card to bring in whenever you want to side it out.
Mana leak is seeing play, but its not for the reasons you think.
The major reason is that people are more likely to concede early online. When you can get games on demand (not only being able to play in a shop once a week, and having to wait for everyone to finish before moving onto the next round) theres no reason to keep playing when you're hellbent and they rev for 5, or they run you out of resources and start firing up colonnades.
Maybe its just me, but people don't tend to concede against me all that often.
When your games are consistently ending on earlier turns, and when you're consistently playing against decks that meet 2 conditions (are one of the best decks in the format, less variety than fnms and day 1, and are fast/aggressive to churn out games faster) mana leak suddenly looks a lot more appealing.
Sure, not every deck is going to be death's shadow, but you can narrow down the most played decks a lot more accurately than you often can at fnm.
This is not good logic. Good players are not playing around Mana Leak because they know it sees little to no play in the format. Adept players know that most lists only have 1 at most, so they will, as you say, 'make you have it'. Which decidedly means they aren't playing around it, which makes it good.
Bad players may (or may not) play around it, making it a bad main board card (sometimes). But if players are choosing to play around it, you shouldn't be concerned about about it because you can leverage play ability against them.
Sideboarding it out doesn't happen every game. If you level your opponent correctly, you can decide if they will or won't play around it. If you decide they won't (you think they are a good player, or a reckless player) you leave it in. If you decide they will play around it (you think they are a bad player, or it suprised them when they saw it) you take it out because you get more win percentage when they play around a card you don't have (which good players will sometimes do after seeing it). Even putting in a sub-optimal card from the sideboard is fine because the +Ev gained from them playing around it outweighs the -ev from a sub-optimal slot in from the board. If you think your opponent is leveling you, you sometimes leave it in and sometimes take it out. It's game theory.
It's not a gimmick, it's just takes a lot of objective reflection to see how good the card is. We remember the instances where it was a dead card more saliently then when it did it's job because we are generally risk adverse. Play it as a 1-of and keep records of how often it's bad vs good and you'll see exactly what I mean.
Many of those lists have more than one.
Them not playing around mana leak doesn't make the inclusion of it in the deck good.
It means it might not be dead when you draw it if they don't respect it, but them not playing around your 1 of doesn't somehow make that card better.
While I certainly remember the times when its bad more than I remember the times its good, thats just as much because its bad way more often than its good.
In jeskai nahiri, I (like most people) tended to play ~3 copies of mana leak as my counterspells. The card was often bad there because of how often it died, and its way better in that deck than it is here.
On top of that, mana leak is (generously) good through about turn 7, against most of the popular decks in the format.
Most of my games consistently go 18, 20 turns, which means mana leak is going to be dead for 2/3s of the game. Given that we draw more cards in the later turns than we do the early turns, you're much more likely to see it when its dead. (I can't tell you exactly how much likelier without making up numbers for cards drawn per game turn).
Don't get me wrong here. I've played with mana leaks in esper.
I played 4 rune snags in esper for a decent number of games, and simply put, those types of counter spells are not very strong in this deck.
They do not function how you want them to. I would much rather play a copy of deprive than mana leak, but I don't think adding more cheap counterspells is the way to go right now.
Mana leak is defensible in this deck (though I think its very bad), but the reasons you're using are simply wrong, IMO. Its not played because of some leveling strategy you're trying to pull on your opponent (given that the card is still likely to "fail" even when you've correctly leveled them), but because its an early game counterspell that counters things like death's shadow and eldrazi.
Also, depending on how soft your meta is, my guess is that if you're a good player your win rate is somewhere between 65-80%. Again, this is going to bias you into thinking leak is bad, because you spend more time in turns 20+ situations where it feels horrible to draw it. If you were in a tougher meta, where your win rate as a non-pro is probably less than 65%, you are going to notice that your games are not getting to turn 20, and you're going to notice that Mana Leak is very good when you draw it. This is why it is 'feels' better as an online card.
I won't get into too much specifics regarding my meta, but its pretty competitive. There are consistently people who are on the PT/were on the PT/are in testing groups with PT players, etc.
I don't think its better online because the skill level is higher. I think its better online because games don't go as long.
I tend to win a lot of the games that go to turn 20 because the answers I draw are actual answers. As soon as I start drawing mana leaks instead of negates, I'll be losing more of those games.
Its not uncommon to be casting your answers as you draw them because you haven't been able to build up a reserve. It doesn't take a whole lot to lose games you're winning.
I wrote a bit on miscalculation when it was posted about on here a few days ago. The part about having answers than aren't answers is relevant to mana leak as well. I'll try to find the post, and edit this one when I do.
Mana leak is very good when you draw it early. I'm quite convinced that mana leak's best case scenario is quite powerful, but I genuinely feel that you won't get that nearly often enough to warrant playing the card.
Consider why you're playing it. What are the questions you want it to answer? Is the flexibility of having one card answer all of these worth the major downside it entails? Would playing a different split of removal and other counterspells answer you questions better? In all of my experience with the deck, a different split will always do you better.
Finally, I will point out that I do not play on MTGO. All of my experience comes from paper (or free simulators against friends), and none of the grinding aspects of MTGO are things I'm intimately familiar with. That being said, while mana leak is better online, I'm still unconvinced its really where you want to be.
Perhaps I'll start keeping actual data, but I'm well aware of the cognitive biases when remembering results. Whether or not that effects my memory of these situations, I can't say.
I think at the end of the day, the major reason I think its bad is because I could just play another logic knot, or negates, or even deprives.
Its not like I'm choosing between mana leak and some card that isn't a 2 cmc counterspell. There are options. Mana leak is the worst of them.