Just played vs some grixis midrange. I must say: resolving a Leyline of Sanctity the turn after your opponent taps out to cast their Keranos, God of Storms is pretty funny to watch.
Is anybody going to GP Charlotte? I'll be there rocking either esper or a slightly modified UW list and I'll be running Runed Halo if I can find them for a decent price between now and then which I'm sure I can. Would be sweet to meet up with fellow control players from here and hang out between rounds.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
And on that day, Garfield said unto the world "Go ye forth and durdle!"
Planning on going, currently planning on playing some form of u/w tapout with gideons and halos
EDIT:
Interestingly enough, I've been up almost 24 hours straight playtesting, and I wanted to share something with you all.
So I'm testing U/w Tap out control, but I thought you guys might like this. I was looking for a card that's a great topdeck against Gb/x, because that matchup typically comes down to that.
Martial Coup That card does WORK work work work work
3 sideboard. I just finished a terrible (well, 3-2) league with a pretty stock list and couldn't believe how bad Burn and Infect felt when you don't have Condemn or Runed Halo. Just that raw feeling that you don't even have any business winning a game against them when there's only 4 Paths in your deck, is too much. I now am running all the core cards, with 2 Vendilion Clique in the flex slots, and 2 Condemns in the place of 2 Spell Snare. I also am swapping 1 Verdict for Careful Consideration, again.
It's me again. Still. Awake. Haven't lost a match since midnight. Thank god for dedicated test groups. Not only did we brew up some sweet lantern deck with the thopter combo, I've been slinging this montrosity. Undefeated against infect, Merfolk, affinity, running at 70 percent vs burn in matches, 70 vs Jund, only dropped one game out of 7 vs zoo. One game out of 5 vs living end, undefeated in matches vs griselbrand, undefeated in 8 out of 8 games cs Abzan coco.
Probably gonna drift off to sleep soon, but here's the list for you all to scoff at. Love you guys.
It's me again. Still. Awake. Haven't lost a match since midnight. Thank god for dedicated test groups. Not only did we brew up some sweet lantern deck with the thopter combo, I've been slinging this montrosity. Undefeated against infect, Merfolk, affinity, running at 70 percent vs burn in matches, 70 vs Jund, only dropped one game out of 7 vs zoo. One game out of 5 vs living end, undefeated in matches vs griselbrand, undefeated in 8 out of 8 games cs Abzan coco.
Probably gonna drift off to sleep soon, but here's the list for you all to scoff at. Love you guys.
It's me again. Still. Awake. Haven't lost a match since midnight. Thank god for dedicated test groups. Not only did we brew up some sweet lantern deck with the thopter combo, I've been slinging this montrosity. Undefeated against infect, Merfolk, affinity, running at 70 percent vs burn in matches, 70 vs Jund, only dropped one game out of 7 vs zoo. One game out of 5 vs living end, undefeated in matches vs griselbrand, undefeated in 8 out of 8 games cs Abzan coco.
Probably gonna drift off to sleep soon, but here's the list for you all to scoff at. Love you guys.
How does this mainboard beat Grishoalbrand? You don't have any counters main?
A few things: griselbrand is a horrifically inconsistent pile. Runed halo naming borbygmos or whatever is good, and third, you just drop some game ones against a deck that's less than 2 percent of the meta on a GOOD day.
Also, I'm undefeated in *matches* against grishoalbrand. It is very uphill game one, but if you're going to lose its usually mercifully short, and you can get down to business of bringing in leyline, grafdiggers, the extra halo, dispels, the whole 9 yards. Very very difficult to lose post board
It's me again. Still. Awake. Haven't lost a match since midnight. Thank god for dedicated test groups. Not only did we brew up some sweet lantern deck with the thopter combo, I've been slinging this montrosity. Undefeated against infect, Merfolk, affinity, running at 70 percent vs burn in matches, 70 vs Jund, only dropped one game out of 7 vs zoo. One game out of 5 vs living end, undefeated in matches vs griselbrand, undefeated in 8 out of 8 games cs Abzan coco.
Probably gonna drift off to sleep soon, but here's the list for you all to scoff at. Love you guys.
I have to say, I was very negative on the list at first, but I fired up Xmage and gave the exact list a spin. Whew was I surprised. It's really smooth, which wasn't what I expected. It actually still feels like a control deck too. I like it.
It's me again. Still. Awake. Haven't lost a match since midnight. Thank god for dedicated test groups. Not only did we brew up some sweet lantern deck with the thopter combo, I've been slinging this montrosity. Undefeated against infect, Merfolk, affinity, running at 70 percent vs burn in matches, 70 vs Jund, only dropped one game out of 7 vs zoo. One game out of 5 vs living end, undefeated in matches vs griselbrand, undefeated in 8 out of 8 games cs Abzan coco.
Probably gonna drift off to sleep soon, but here's the list for you all to scoff at. Love you guys.
I have to say, I was very negative on the list at first, but I fired up Xmage and gave the exact list a spin. Whew was I surprised. It's really smooth, which wasn't what I expected. It actually still feels like a control deck too. I like it.
Ok so first of all THANK YOU, for actually trying it out. As a man who loves slinging cryptic commands, spell snaring things, and mana leaking the hell out of your on curve planeswalkers.... THAT BEING SAID: the list I posted is still very much control.
Look at the meta, how many times do you REALLY want cryptic command against zoo, or affinity, or even Jund for that matter? Sure, it's a serviceable card and is very versatile, but against most tier one decks right now I'd rather just load up on verdicts, value-town sweepers like martial coup, and abuse Jace and Gideon. People take advantage how good aot is, he stops thopters cold, he digs pretty deep, he helps Gideon live basically forever. Gideon is insane against basically every tier one deck except burn, which is heavily accounted for in the very versatile sideboard I've provided.
I'm not saying anyone should play this, as I'm well aware this is the wrong forum for such a thing, it's just that I started with esper draw go and just started making logical tweaks based on countless hours of actual testing, and this is where I ended up.
By contemporary definitions, anything with more than 10 interactive spells is Control. This also includes Jund, Liliana-Junk, Grixis, UW Tron, etc. If you were to add a playset of Bolts to GR Tron, it would also meet the criteria of being a Control deck.
So yes, if playing cheap interactive spells until your permanents can solo your opponent's remaining permanents with ease is you definition of Control, it's definitely a Control deck. I don't say this to be negative; I just think people should define what Control even means instead of using it as an "Triple OG" label they can stamp whichever deck they choose to play with.
By contemporary definitions, anything with more than 10 interactive spells is Control. This also includes Jund, Liliana-Junk, Grixis, UW Tron, etc. If you were to add a playset of Bolts to GR Tron, it would also meet the criteria of being a Control deck.
So yes, if playing cheap interactive spells until your permanents can solo your opponent's remaining permanents with ease is you definition of Control, it's definitely a Control deck. I don't say this to be negative; I just think people should define what Control even means instead of using it as an "Triple OG" label they can stamp whichever deck they choose to play with.
Counter spells are cheap interactive spells, I don't really see the difference. I love durdling just as much as the next guy, but in a twin-less format doninated by linear aggro, I'd rather have verdict playsets and Gideons instead of counterspells. One of those sets beats wild Nacatals, etched champions, and etc. at any point in the game, the other of those sets has a very narrow window.
any list with 8 2-mana cantrips is going to feel silky smooth. Especially on a 2-color manabase.
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
I however, do not subscribe to the notion that "technically burn is control because 4x lightning bolt and 4x searing blaze"
That is a gross oversimplification. If the only way to build control was draw-go, then that would imply draw-go is literally synonymous with control, in which case this thread wouldn't have needed the distinction of "draw-go", it could have simply remained Esper Control, so clearly there are various styles of control, and I think we would all agree different metagame sets reward each style differently.
By contemporary definitions, anything with more than 10 interactive spells is Control. This also includes Jund, Liliana-Junk, Grixis, UW Tron, etc. If you were to add a playset of Bolts to GR Tron, it would also meet the criteria of being a Control deck.
So yes, if playing cheap interactive spells until your permanents can solo your opponent's remaining permanents with ease is you definition of Control, it's definitely a Control deck. I don't say this to be negative; I just think people should define what Control even means instead of using it as an "Triple OG" label they can stamp whichever deck they choose to play with.
To be fair, I don't personally throw around the term "control" lightly. What I mean is that the list is still mostly reactive, usually only taking the aggressive lines when its turned the corner. It doesn't really have the ability to just jam a Goyf (for example) and start turning sideways. Since the reactive/patient line is almost always best, I'd still classify it as a control deck.
Everybody knows rg tron and Jund aren't control, I think he was just trying to prove some weird theoretical point bc he doesn't like the list. Which is fine, I readily admitted this wasn't the right place to put it, I just thought it was interesting bc I arrived there by tweaking the wafo list here and there over time over hundreds of matches and documenting what worked and what would have been better. I'm not trying to derail, I'm just saying think critically about the meta. Are are you really happy to see those remands against.... Well... ANY of the meta besides maybe grixis control or some weird non existent mirror? Maybe against AV decks , but even then you would have to acknowledge the overwhelming portion of the metagame is linear aggro of some sort, be it affinity, burn, or infect, or zoo, and gbx midrange
Which brings us to the problem. Most of us have been building control decks BACKWARDS. Starting with one "golden list" that historically, nobody has really done that well with in a CONSISTENT FASHION, and then trying to rationalize the data to fit what we already believe: wafo list is untouchable and is the god-list of all control decks. Whereas even wafo himself would say in order to build a successful control deck, you have to look at the metagame you're supposedly controlling. That's control 101, and everybody here knows that. I'm speaking to myself as much as I'm speaking to any of you.
We can't build control decks like combo decks i.e.: start with a list that we assume is "correct" and then just hope the meta is favorable for us at any given point in the season. We are the police. Historically we are the people who have always said "oh, you willfully played a deck that folds to a single day of judgment? Neat. ". "You're entire strategy is to resolve inferno Titan? Sweet. Have a mana leak"
But anyways, at least we've got our shadow of doubts, right? Lol
TLDR; Not liking the list or not being a fan of the style is one thing, but to say it isn't control would be some pretty heavy mental gymnastics
Everybody knows rg tron and Jund aren't control, I think he was just trying to prove some weird theoretical point bc he doesn't like the list. Which is fine, I readily admitted this wasn't the right place to put it, I just thought it was interesting bc I arrived there by tweaking the wafo list here and there over time over hundreds of matches and documenting what worked and what would have been better. I'm not trying to derail, I'm just saying think critically about the meta. Are are you really happy to see those remands against.... Well... ANY of the meta besides maybe grixis control or some weird non existent mirror? Maybe against AV decks , but even then you would have to acknowledge the overwhelming portion of the metagame is linear aggro of some sort, be it affinity, burn, or infect, or zoo, and gbx midrange
Which brings us to the problem. Most of us have been building control decks BACKWARDS. Starting with one "golden list" that historically, nobody has really done that well with in a CONSISTENT FASHION, and then trying to rationalize the data to fit what we already believe: wafo list is untouchable and is the god-list of all control decks. Whereas even wafo himself would say in order to build a successful control deck, you have to look at the metagame you're supposedly controlling. That's control 101, and everybody here knows that. I'm speaking to myself as much as I'm speaking to any of you.
We can't build control decks like combo decks i.e.: start with a list that we assume is "correct" and then just hope the meta is favorable for us at any given point in the season. We are the police. Historically we are the people who have always said "oh, you willfully played a deck that folds to a single day of judgment? Neat. ". "You're entire strategy is to resolve inferno Titan? Sweet. Have a mana leak"
But anyways, at least we've got our shadow of doubts, right? Lol
TLDR; Not liking the list or not being a fan of the style is one thing, but to say it isn't control would be some pretty heavy mental gymnastics
THIS ^^^
Let's imagine the wafo list never existed. How would we go about building a control deck (be that draw-go or tappout) that attacks the current metagame?
Everybody knows rg tron and Jund aren't control, I think he was just trying to prove some weird theoretical point bc he doesn't like the list. Which is fine, I readily admitted this wasn't the right place to put it, I just thought it was interesting bc I arrived there by tweaking the wafo list here and there over time over hundreds of matches and documenting what worked and what would have been better. I'm not trying to derail, I'm just saying think critically about the meta. Are are you really happy to see those remands against.... Well... ANY of the meta besides maybe grixis control or some weird non existent mirror? Maybe against AV decks , but even then you would have to acknowledge the overwhelming portion of the metagame is linear aggro of some sort, be it affinity, burn, or infect, or zoo, and gbx midrange
Which brings us to the problem. Most of us have been building control decks BACKWARDS. Starting with one "golden list" that historically, nobody has really done that well with in a CONSISTENT FASHION, and then trying to rationalize the data to fit what we already believe: wafo list is untouchable and is the god-list of all control decks. Whereas even wafo himself would say in order to build a successful control deck, you have to look at the metagame you're supposedly controlling. That's control 101, and everybody here knows that. I'm speaking to myself as much as I'm speaking to any of you.
We can't build control decks like combo decks i.e.: start with a list that we assume is "correct" and then just hope the meta is favorable for us at any given point in the season. We are the police. Historically we are the people who have always said "oh, you willfully played a deck that folds to a single day of judgment? Neat. ". "You're entire strategy is to resolve inferno Titan? Sweet. Have a mana leak"
But anyways, at least we've got our shadow of doubts, right? Lol
TLDR; Not liking the list or not being a fan of the style is one thing, but to say it isn't control would be some pretty heavy mental gymnastics
What do you mean I don't like the list? It looks like a port of very successful extended lists which you referenced. It's probably a better deck for Modern as it exists now than the one this forum was modeled after. I'm currently on a 7-game winning streak with UWR Flash. I love the deck,and I think it's better positioned than Esper Draw Go because it can utilize Ancestral. I just don't call every blue deck I play a Control deck, even if the general consensus it that all decks with a late-game focus and at least 12 interactive spells is a Control deck.
You're assuming I have no point and I'm just being childish, but I actually do have one. At this point, I've conceded that people really don't give a damn what it is (on this forum or elsewhere) and if you hadn't been so vehement about it I probably wouldn't have said anything. But, how about one last time for the recordbooks:
I look at Magic from an overall strategic perspective. When I say Strategy, I'm referring to the theory of warfare that outlines a pyramid with Strategy on top, and Tactics and then Logistics beneath. Read it in a book a long time ago...might have been Von Clausevitz. Anyway, the "grand strategy" of the deck in my mind is what defines the grand archetypes.
Aggro decks enforce the mana development chokepoints in Magic and 20-0 the opponent before their strategy is realized. Examples are Sligh and White Weene, but also Burn and UB Mill. Maybe Blitz is a better name than Aggro.
Midrange decks use a suite of interactive spells to neutralize positional advantage, then play powerful permanents and swing the positional advantage in their favor.
Combo decks break the rules of Magic in some way that effectively yields either infinite card advantage or infinite positional advantage and just win the game on the spot.
Control decks also use a suite of interactive spells to neutralize positional advantage, but then scale their interaction to the point where the opponent loses de facto. There's two ways to do this. For starters you can play lock pieces like Moat, Ensnaring Bridge, Leyline, or Thopter Sword. All these cards create or neutralize positional advantage to such an extent that entire swaths of your opponent's deck are invalid. Gift's Ungiven can tutor up Iona or Elspeth to turn off an opponent's deck on turn 5. Mystical Teachings favors cards like Extirpate or Teferi -> Crovax, Ascendant Hero to accomplish a similar gamestate. All of these, I call Prison Control decks.
The other way to scale interaction is to draw so many damn cards that you can Doom Blade or Counterspell everything your opponent hopes to do. Examples of that are this would be Wafo's Esper list of course, but also the UR Goggles list in current Standard, or even the awful Season's Past loop deck that Finkel managed to Top 8 the Pro Tour with. Draw-Go is the label assigned to the archetype because blue used to be the only color that could pull it off, but the current Standard is a perfect example of how R&D's hate for the color blue is pushing it into other color combinations. The unifying trait is that they all utilize a crazy card advantage suite to not let the opponent so anything and win de facto. Prison = ridiculous positional advantage, Draw Go = ridiculous card advantage.
That's the way I see it. I'm sure every Platinum Pro subscribes to the more conventional logic, so whatever. The conventional logic as I see it is basically looking at archetypes from a tempo perspective. Aggro is early game, Midrange is midgame, and Control is endgame. That's fine and well, but you can see where mistaken identities turn into deckbuilding errors, when people do things like slot Sphinx's Revelation into a UWR SnapBolt deck that needs to be converting it's ability to neutralize early positional advantage into a turn 5 planeswalker or Kiki + Resto combo. Or when people build draw-go decks and insert a bunch of Mystical Teachings because "they're good in Control", not realizing the card is at it's best when you're tutoring singleton massive positional advantage blowouts.
As I see it, planeswalkers don't qualify as Prison pieces. You see the difference when you play Gideon or Elspeth, and are sometimes still facing lethal the next turn. Someone mentioned Gofy, but planeswalkers in my mind are high-risk, high-reward Goyfs in the same sense that Wraths are high-risk, high-reward Doom Blades. I just 20-0'd two opponents in a row playing UWR with Gideon. The mismatches created by planeswalkers are exaggerated versions of the mismatches created by Goyf v. Wild Nacatl.
See my point? You're under no obligation to agree. By the way, I appreciate you calling attention to those Extended lists; I plan on combing through the lists from that GP. I think R&D has designed Modern to play out similarly to a turbo-powered Standard, and we have to get used to slamming planeswalkers and Dragonlord Ojutais. Hell, there hasn't been a decent blue Control deck in Standard since Revelation (a mistake, from their perspective) rotated. I'm currently grinding with UWR, and I agree that midrange variants are more powerful in Modern. With the current Affinity/Burn/Infect trio taking up a half the top tables, I think UWR is a better option than Esper or UW, if you're going to not run draw-go. If Jund and Junk Company decks push back to the top, I'd be more inclined to try these planeswalker lists that go a bit over the top of them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
EDIT:
Interestingly enough, I've been up almost 24 hours straight playtesting, and I wanted to share something with you all.
So I'm testing U/w Tap out control, but I thought you guys might like this. I was looking for a card that's a great topdeck against Gb/x, because that matchup typically comes down to that.
Martial Coup That card does WORK work work work work
3 in the main? Or 2 in the main, 1 in the board? What's the split?
Currently trying to discover the quickest way to get the opponent from 20 to 0.
Probably gonna drift off to sleep soon, but here's the list for you all to scoff at. Love you guys.
4x flooded strand
4x glacial fortress
2x hallowed fountain
4x island
4x plains
2x mystic gate
2x ghost quarter
4x spreading seas
4x wall of omens
2x sphinx's revelation
3x Gideon Jura
1x elspeth, Sun's champion
4x supreme verdict
1x martial coup
4x path to exile
2x runed halo
3x detention sphere
2x everflowing chalice
3x Dispel
3x Negate
1x Rest in Peace
3x Leyline of Sanctity
2x Grafdigger's Cage
1x Pithing Needle
1x Runed Halo
1x Detention Sphere
How does this mainboard beat Grishoalbrand? You don't have any counters main?
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.
A few things: griselbrand is a horrifically inconsistent pile. Runed halo naming borbygmos or whatever is good, and third, you just drop some game ones against a deck that's less than 2 percent of the meta on a GOOD day.
Also, I'm undefeated in *matches* against grishoalbrand. It is very uphill game one, but if you're going to lose its usually mercifully short, and you can get down to business of bringing in leyline, grafdiggers, the extra halo, dispels, the whole 9 yards. Very very difficult to lose post board
I have to say, I was very negative on the list at first, but I fired up Xmage and gave the exact list a spin. Whew was I surprised. It's really smooth, which wasn't what I expected. It actually still feels like a control deck too. I like it.
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.
Ok so first of all THANK YOU, for actually trying it out. As a man who loves slinging cryptic commands, spell snaring things, and mana leaking the hell out of your on curve planeswalkers.... THAT BEING SAID: the list I posted is still very much control.
Look at the meta, how many times do you REALLY want cryptic command against zoo, or affinity, or even Jund for that matter? Sure, it's a serviceable card and is very versatile, but against most tier one decks right now I'd rather just load up on verdicts, value-town sweepers like martial coup, and abuse Jace and Gideon. People take advantage how good aot is, he stops thopters cold, he digs pretty deep, he helps Gideon live basically forever. Gideon is insane against basically every tier one deck except burn, which is heavily accounted for in the very versatile sideboard I've provided.
I'm not saying anyone should play this, as I'm well aware this is the wrong forum for such a thing, it's just that I started with esper draw go and just started making logical tweaks based on countless hours of actual testing, and this is where I ended up.
So yes, if playing cheap interactive spells until your permanents can solo your opponent's remaining permanents with ease is you definition of Control, it's definitely a Control deck. I don't say this to be negative; I just think people should define what Control even means instead of using it as an "Triple OG" label they can stamp whichever deck they choose to play with.
Counter spells are cheap interactive spells, I don't really see the difference. I love durdling just as much as the next guy, but in a twin-less format doninated by linear aggro, I'd rather have verdict playsets and Gideons instead of counterspells. One of those sets beats wild Nacatals, etched champions, and etc. at any point in the game, the other of those sets has a very narrow window.
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
I however, do not subscribe to the notion that "technically burn is control because 4x lightning bolt and 4x searing blaze"
That is a gross oversimplification. If the only way to build control was draw-go, then that would imply draw-go is literally synonymous with control, in which case this thread wouldn't have needed the distinction of "draw-go", it could have simply remained Esper Control, so clearly there are various styles of control, and I think we would all agree different metagame sets reward each style differently.
To be fair, I don't personally throw around the term "control" lightly. What I mean is that the list is still mostly reactive, usually only taking the aggressive lines when its turned the corner. It doesn't really have the ability to just jam a Goyf (for example) and start turning sideways. Since the reactive/patient line is almost always best, I'd still classify it as a control deck.
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.
Which brings us to the problem. Most of us have been building control decks BACKWARDS. Starting with one "golden list" that historically, nobody has really done that well with in a CONSISTENT FASHION, and then trying to rationalize the data to fit what we already believe: wafo list is untouchable and is the god-list of all control decks. Whereas even wafo himself would say in order to build a successful control deck, you have to look at the metagame you're supposedly controlling. That's control 101, and everybody here knows that. I'm speaking to myself as much as I'm speaking to any of you.
We can't build control decks like combo decks i.e.: start with a list that we assume is "correct" and then just hope the meta is favorable for us at any given point in the season. We are the police. Historically we are the people who have always said "oh, you willfully played a deck that folds to a single day of judgment? Neat. ". "You're entire strategy is to resolve inferno Titan? Sweet. Have a mana leak"
But anyways, at least we've got our shadow of doubts, right? Lol
TLDR; Not liking the list or not being a fan of the style is one thing, but to say it isn't control would be some pretty heavy mental gymnastics
THIS ^^^
Let's imagine the wafo list never existed. How would we go about building a control deck (be that draw-go or tappout) that attacks the current metagame?
WUBR [url=http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/06-04-17-ad-nauseam/]Ad Nauseam WUBR
What do you mean I don't like the list? It looks like a port of very successful extended lists which you referenced. It's probably a better deck for Modern as it exists now than the one this forum was modeled after. I'm currently on a 7-game winning streak with UWR Flash. I love the deck,and I think it's better positioned than Esper Draw Go because it can utilize Ancestral. I just don't call every blue deck I play a Control deck, even if the general consensus it that all decks with a late-game focus and at least 12 interactive spells is a Control deck.
You're assuming I have no point and I'm just being childish, but I actually do have one. At this point, I've conceded that people really don't give a damn what it is (on this forum or elsewhere) and if you hadn't been so vehement about it I probably wouldn't have said anything. But, how about one last time for the recordbooks:
I look at Magic from an overall strategic perspective. When I say Strategy, I'm referring to the theory of warfare that outlines a pyramid with Strategy on top, and Tactics and then Logistics beneath. Read it in a book a long time ago...might have been Von Clausevitz. Anyway, the "grand strategy" of the deck in my mind is what defines the grand archetypes.
Aggro decks enforce the mana development chokepoints in Magic and 20-0 the opponent before their strategy is realized. Examples are Sligh and White Weene, but also Burn and UB Mill. Maybe Blitz is a better name than Aggro.
Midrange decks use a suite of interactive spells to neutralize positional advantage, then play powerful permanents and swing the positional advantage in their favor.
Combo decks break the rules of Magic in some way that effectively yields either infinite card advantage or infinite positional advantage and just win the game on the spot.
Control decks also use a suite of interactive spells to neutralize positional advantage, but then scale their interaction to the point where the opponent loses de facto. There's two ways to do this. For starters you can play lock pieces like Moat, Ensnaring Bridge, Leyline, or Thopter Sword. All these cards create or neutralize positional advantage to such an extent that entire swaths of your opponent's deck are invalid. Gift's Ungiven can tutor up Iona or Elspeth to turn off an opponent's deck on turn 5. Mystical Teachings favors cards like Extirpate or Teferi -> Crovax, Ascendant Hero to accomplish a similar gamestate. All of these, I call Prison Control decks.
The other way to scale interaction is to draw so many damn cards that you can Doom Blade or Counterspell everything your opponent hopes to do. Examples of that are this would be Wafo's Esper list of course, but also the UR Goggles list in current Standard, or even the awful Season's Past loop deck that Finkel managed to Top 8 the Pro Tour with. Draw-Go is the label assigned to the archetype because blue used to be the only color that could pull it off, but the current Standard is a perfect example of how R&D's hate for the color blue is pushing it into other color combinations. The unifying trait is that they all utilize a crazy card advantage suite to not let the opponent so anything and win de facto. Prison = ridiculous positional advantage, Draw Go = ridiculous card advantage.
That's the way I see it. I'm sure every Platinum Pro subscribes to the more conventional logic, so whatever. The conventional logic as I see it is basically looking at archetypes from a tempo perspective. Aggro is early game, Midrange is midgame, and Control is endgame. That's fine and well, but you can see where mistaken identities turn into deckbuilding errors, when people do things like slot Sphinx's Revelation into a UWR SnapBolt deck that needs to be converting it's ability to neutralize early positional advantage into a turn 5 planeswalker or Kiki + Resto combo. Or when people build draw-go decks and insert a bunch of Mystical Teachings because "they're good in Control", not realizing the card is at it's best when you're tutoring singleton massive positional advantage blowouts.
As I see it, planeswalkers don't qualify as Prison pieces. You see the difference when you play Gideon or Elspeth, and are sometimes still facing lethal the next turn. Someone mentioned Gofy, but planeswalkers in my mind are high-risk, high-reward Goyfs in the same sense that Wraths are high-risk, high-reward Doom Blades. I just 20-0'd two opponents in a row playing UWR with Gideon. The mismatches created by planeswalkers are exaggerated versions of the mismatches created by Goyf v. Wild Nacatl.
See my point? You're under no obligation to agree. By the way, I appreciate you calling attention to those Extended lists; I plan on combing through the lists from that GP. I think R&D has designed Modern to play out similarly to a turbo-powered Standard, and we have to get used to slamming planeswalkers and Dragonlord Ojutais. Hell, there hasn't been a decent blue Control deck in Standard since Revelation (a mistake, from their perspective) rotated. I'm currently grinding with UWR, and I agree that midrange variants are more powerful in Modern. With the current Affinity/Burn/Infect trio taking up a half the top tables, I think UWR is a better option than Esper or UW, if you're going to not run draw-go. If Jund and Junk Company decks push back to the top, I'd be more inclined to try these planeswalker lists that go a bit over the top of them.