You seem to be taking my points out of context here Delver, I'm trying to point out that the faster MUs (like Infect and Affinity, etc.) are seemingly much worse for us now than before and that we likely need to acknowledge this in our deck building if they are on the rise.
I actually think the other way round and think you are taking my points out of context as for my understanding. But whatever, it seems we have different views on that topic. Doesn't make much more sense to go into that any further.
Jadine drew the wrong half of her deck and made...decesions I wouldn't have. That k command to bring back scooze was so awful
Chaos making that comment is something I disagree with and leaves me with the impression that it's a matchup he doesn't have good luck with.
Almost no jund list is running just 4 discard, most lists have moved to 5 or 6.
The decks I want to test out are joesepth herreras from the classic and connets from the top 32 in the open.
No one seems to agree on the removal suit though, that's for sure
I've also found dreadbore ******* terrible. We are overrating jace, I think it's absolutely unneeded.
Joseph Herreras list looks interesting. Its very low to the ground and I like that. Thats a list I totally think works with 24 lands. Unsure about the 3 BBE only, I think it might be due to aggro decks? But I think overall 4 is still correct.
I am more leaning towards lower to the ground lists with 24 lands anyway. EctoMark made good points about that and I like his list so far. I think clunky lists are outdated. Its also not the baseline I was talking about in the Infect issue. I think we need to go back to 6 discard at the very least. I don't want to loose to an obvious good matchup more likely.
And since I consider lower to the ground lists more as being correct than clunkier builds I think aggro matchups are fine. Jadine also came to the conclusion. With her loosing to the deck is more a matter or wrong decisions (That KCommand was wrong) and variance than the normal outcome of the matchup with that removal suite for me.
Its just the next page of finding the best Jund list for me.
Another Jund deck made top 32 in the classics with Rabblemaster. While I doubt this is where Jund goes, I think it warrants testing, since it saw some results. Connet was also doing extremely well day 1 of the Open.
I am curious about the rabblemaster, since I also think it doesn't belong in the deck any longer and I am struggling to find a real good reason to run it.
I am still on EctoMarks list atm, having a removal suite looking like: 4 Bolt, 2 Push, 2 Terminate, 2 KCommand, 2 Pulse and 4 LoTV is alright. I could see cutting the second Pulse for a Decay going forward. But other than that, 16 removal spells alongside 6 discard seems good to me.
So, to conclude, these are main points where I am at concerning the decklist:
24 lands with a lower manacurve.
6 discard spells.
4 BBE and 7 to max 8 three drops.
11-12 one drops.
4 Bolts, 1 Pulse, 1 Push, 1 KCommand, 2 Terminate fixed, the rest is up in the air (more Push, KCommand, some decays or more Pulse)
Although I would love to run LtLH main, I think its tough without cutting 1 KCommand for it, while also running 24 lands only. Still think she is amazing.
It seems that more and more players are startin to realize we need lower curve and more removal which is something I said right after BBE was unbanned-that I felt the number of removal spells in the initial list (Reid Duke for example) was a bit too low to be comfortable with.
I completely agree. It was soon recognized that 25 lands feel much by pretty much everyone of us. I also said, that if we go to 24 lands, we can't do it without lowering the curve. If it is necessary to do so is something we will see going forward. I am just testing it and see how it goes.
I'm going back to 2x Abrupt Decay in the maindeck, it's too versatile and I missed it against non-creature decks that rely on enchantments and artifacts. Makes me weaker against delve creatures, but whatever.
Like the list, my personal changes would be -1 Decay and +1 Terminate (But you stated the reason for running 2 Decays, which is totally fine, its just me) as well as -1 Ravine and +1 Wooded Foothills.
This makes more sense then. You've been such a proponent of 25 lands builds with heavy BBE synergy that I assumed that you were still holding firm to that view - and thus would likely be weaker to faster decks. That's where my interpretation of your views were coming from earlier.
I was trying to say that in my various textwalls from the last page, but I guess I didn't quite stress that enough. Apologies for that, we are definitely on the same page in that case
I like your list! I would personally want more unconditional removal since only 1 Pulse and 1 Terminate is too few for my tastes, but since you are running 3 Pushes, it can somewhat make up for that.
On a side note, my areas of needing improvement are currently the decklist template and the sideboard template section of the primer. I am looking for interesting suggestions to improve the layout and display of the sections, to get a better visual experience reading through the sections. If anyone has a good idea about that, please let me know.
For me there's a couple of things I've been very keen on, as of late, with my maindeck.
1. I want TONS of 1 mana interaction. I'm looking at playing a minimum of 12 mana spells. Currently at 5 discard and 7 removal spells - could see it being a 6/6 split instead, my local meta is just very flooded by creature decks. I keep the 6th 1 mana discard spell in the board as a Duress currently. If I were to play only 6 removal spells, I'd go with a 3/3 split of Push and Bolt, push has been great to have multiples of - I think in general we're underrating the card right now.
2. I want to reliably be able to kill 2 mana creatures. Instead of going deep on the grindy cards for the mirror match, I'm going for simple effective removal - which has the benefit of working out well against aggressive decks as well. I also want at least 3 spells to reliably deal with delve threats and the likes (2 terminates and 1 pulse maindeck for me). Also, I think dreadbore is so not worth running - the instant speed terminate is just so much better.
3. I find Liliana, the Last Hope to be a way better sideboard card than maindeck. I could see having 2 of her in the sideboard as an option - but for me at least, the one copy does the work so far. I supplement her with a Grim Lavamancer for the small creature removal package (in addition to all my maindeck removal spells).
As a new thing I'm going to try 4x fulminator's in the board. I played against a lot of decks that needed land destruction this weekend - boarded in 3 every time, but didn't see them reliably enough. In general I've hedged my list against generally useful cards (so besides the fulminators, a lot of 1 of cards). I still like the 2nd Pulse in the board to be able to board in against the decks playing creatures that are more difficult to deal with.
I also think we need to reconsider which matches it is fine to board out BBE - I think some matchups where we can operate just fine trading one for one - but needs to do it early and often, she might be too clunky. But it is a tough call as she does wonders wrt. turning the corner.
Just some thoughts - overall I think we cannot afford to skimp on 1 mana interaction spells. The postive tempo swing in dealing with threats for much less mana than the opponent spends on them is something we rely on quite a bit I think.
In my experience, 3 BBE was better bc I do not want to run 25 lands to support 4 of them since I flood wayyy too much when I do so. Also, lowering the probability of having Bob reveal a BBE is important. I decided to increase my removal count bc I kept losing to aggro decks on modo and also because Dallas meta usually has more aggro decks. Kitchen Finks main was a meta call to have an extra out main deck vs burn and other aggro decks, it can be swapped out for the 4th bbe if the meta turns into a midrange fest but at the moment i wouldnt dare... specially if storm and infect are real threats, these are matchups where we really dont want bbe
I don't really care what you're comparing it to, the match up feels like a crap shoot at best even after sideboarding. The only reason I'm particularly aware of it is that we have a local Infect player. You brought up the era. We're just talking about the match up. At least I am anyway.
Care or don't care, fact is that in that period I mentioned Infect was not the problem and actually the reason Jund was a good deck, as it had a good matchup during that time. And I really disagree about it being a crapshoot right now, since we obviously have an equally good matchup and the tools to beat the deck at least compared to when Infect was a good deck. And that matters, regardless of what you are referring to or what you are saying you are talking about. Just because only I seem to do the comparison, does make it irrelevant? Is that what you are trying to say?
Its the same thing with the manabase, why should Infect now be a problem when it was a good matchup back then? Infect had probe back then, and we had no Push. I honestly don't get why you are denying that piece of info we have about the matchup. Infect can have nut draws like we saw, yeah, but I think there is absolutely no reason to be alarmed.
You also have to keep in mind that Jadine draw nothing but lands after Fulminator.
My literal point is that a lot of Jund lists have moved to a more aggressive stance and cut the number of instant speed removal spells. This lower amount of removal, and, in some cases, discard does play out in meaningful ways. I mean we're all talking about cutting Abrupt Decay completely as well. If you're playing 0-1 Terminate, 1 Dreadbore, 2 Kolaghan's Command and maybe a Fatal Push on top of 4 Lightning Bolt, you will be softer to Infect than playing more Terminates and Abrupt Decay. I never cared about Probe if I had proper removal in hand. It just removed my ability to bluff. Keep in mind, I'm seeing the RL player and several lists from the last open going back to Spellskite main deck. I don't understand how you guys think it's still the same. I'm not concerned with their deck so much as how Jund is being constructed. Short story version: the issues I'm seeing with fast Zoo decks (traditionally good/great matchup) is just amped up with fast decks like Infect. If all of you think nothing has changed, then just ignore me.
Jadine drew the wrong half of her deck and made...decesions I wouldn't have. That k command to bring back scooze was so awful
Chaos making that comment is something I disagree with and leaves me with the impression that it's a matchup he doesn't have good luck with.
Almost no jund list is running just 4 discard, most lists have moved to 5 or 6.
The decks I want to test out are joesepth herreras from the classic and connets from the top 32 in the open.
No one seems to agree on the removal suit though, that's for sure
I've also found dreadbore ******* terrible. We are overrating jace, I think it's absolutely unneeded.
Why does everyone think I'm talking about one specific match on camera? Yes, I'm pointing out specifically that the Infect match up isn't as good. I also said the same thing in the past for fast, aggro decks in general. I literally spent a month testing unbans for Stoneforge Mystic, Bloodbraid Elf and Jace prior to unbanning.
Y’all have convinced me to try out a lower curve, 24 land build. As of right now I am running 2x Swamp, 1x Forest, 1x Mountain, 2x Raging Ravine, and 2x Treetop Village.
My question is: Can I get away with keeping the 2/2 split on my manlands when going down to 24 lands?
I think the Mountain would be on the chopping block if I kept both Treetops. Is this ok? Am I losing too many R sources at that point? I can’t tell you how much I love Treetop. That trample and low activation cost is the real deal. Also, are we still as scared of Field of Ruin as we were? How necessary are the 4x basics and fetchable Mountain?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MODERN: BRGJUNDGRB---BRHOLLOW ONERB---BGELVESGB---BRGLIVING ENDGRB---GWBOGLESWG EDH: BRGKARRTHUS, TYRANT OF JUNDGRB
I've tried a 2/2 split on creature-lands on a 24-land mana base. Statistically, you're being unbelievably greedy in an already greedy mana base to run 2 Treetop Village. So statistically, I'd recommend 0 Treetop Village and 3 Raging Ravine. That said, I freakin love Treetop Village too much to let it go so I'm sticking with 2 in my mana base until something changes for me.
The choice of whether to run a Mountain or a fourth basic land at all should be metagame dependent for everyone out there. Currently, there's only one UW control player I have to deal with locally, but if I went to a larger tourney, it would depend more on what I'm seeing online closer to the game time.
I also think we need to reconsider which matches it is fine to board out BBE - I think some matchups where we can operate just fine trading one for one - but needs to do it early and often, she might be too clunky. But it is a tough call as she does wonders wrt. turning the corner.
Check out the primer for that, I did include boarding out BBE in the SB guide.
My literal point is that a lot of Jund lists have moved to a more aggressive stance and cut the number of instant speed removal spells. This lower amount of removal, and, in some cases, discard does play out in meaningful ways. I mean we're all talking about cutting Abrupt Decay completely as well. If you're playing 0-1 Terminate, 1 Dreadbore, 2 Kolaghan's Command and maybe a Fatal Push on top of 4 Lightning Bolt, you will be softer to Infect than playing more Terminates and Abrupt Decay. I never cared about Probe if I had proper removal in hand. It just removed my ability to bluff. Keep in mind, I'm seeing the RL player and several lists from the last open going back to Spellskite main deck. I don't understand how you guys think it's still the same. I'm not concerned with their deck so much as how Jund is being constructed. Short story version: the issues I'm seeing with fast Zoo decks (traditionally good/great matchup) is just amped up with fast decks like Infect. If all of you think nothing has changed, then just ignore me.
It seems it happened the same thing here like it happened with LEH. We are on a different page on this issue. Your assessment is totally correct and I agree with it, but we have different definitions of "now". You are talking about the clunky lists cutting cheap removal and running 25 lands as the baseline of "now". What I took as a baseline for comparing "now to before" is a list similar to EctoMarks, which essentially means: 4 Bolts, 2 Pushes, 2 Terminates, 2 KCommands, 2 Pulses (or 1 Pulse and 1 Decay), 4 LoTV and which equals to 16 removal spells. If you take that approach and compare it to any period now (either pre probe ban era, which makes still more sense in my eyes, or the pre BBE unban era like you are more referring it to) you will hopefully agree with me that the difference is not that big and, respectively, quite sufficient for the matchup.
My question is: Can I get away with keeping the 2/2 split on my manlands when going down to 24 lands?
On a consistant level? No. Look at the standard 24 land base which we run. We ran only 3 manlands as tapped lands are hurting us and no treetop village. We cant afford the limitation of coloured mana when we do run 4 basics in addition to that.
I'm currently conflicted between a Duress or third Thoughtseize in the sideboard (4 IoK /2 Thoughtseize split main). On one hand, Duress helps against Burn, and in a good amount of matchups does the same thing Thoughtseize would for no life penalty. However, now that 4 Fulminators seems to be the norm and very strong with BBE, I'm tempted to use the 3rd Thoughtseize to have even more game against Tron (Wurmcoil Engine/Eldrazi) and Titan which are two weaker matchups. Also, it helps against decks with meaty threats like Eldrazi and Delve Creatures.
I'd love to hear any thoughts anyone has on either.
In my experience, 3 BBE was better bc I do not want to run 25 lands to support 4 of them since I flood wayyy too much when I do so. Also, lowering the probability of having Bob reveal a BBE is important. I decided to increase my removal count bc I kept losing to aggro decks on modo and also because Dallas meta usually has more aggro decks. Kitchen Finks main was a meta call to have an extra out main deck vs burn and other aggro decks, it can be swapped out for the 4th bbe if the meta turns into a midrange fest but at the moment i wouldnt dare... specially if storm and infect are real threats, these are matchups where we really dont want bbe
Hi Joe, surely in Dallas you had a SB Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet and not the Kalitas, Bloodchief of Ghet that mtggoldfish is reporting? Did you like that choice with your removal-heavy build, and would you run it in the list again?
Thanks for dropping by!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ò,ó
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I actually think the other way round and think you are taking my points out of context as for my understanding. But whatever, it seems we have different views on that topic. Doesn't make much more sense to go into that any further.
Joseph Herreras list looks interesting. Its very low to the ground and I like that. Thats a list I totally think works with 24 lands. Unsure about the 3 BBE only, I think it might be due to aggro decks? But I think overall 4 is still correct.
And since I consider lower to the ground lists more as being correct than clunkier builds I think aggro matchups are fine. Jadine also came to the conclusion. With her loosing to the deck is more a matter or wrong decisions (That KCommand was wrong) and variance than the normal outcome of the matchup with that removal suite for me.
Its just the next page of finding the best Jund list for me.
4x Dark Confidant
4x Tarmogoyf
2x Scavenging Ooze
4x Bloodbraid Elf
Spells (18)
4x Inquisition of Kozilek
2x Thoughtseize
4x Lightning Bolt
1x Fatal Push
3x Terminate
2x Abrupt Decay
1x Kolaghan's Command
1x Maelstrom Pulse
4x Liliana of the Veil
Land (24)
4x Verdant Catacombs
4x Bloodstained Mire
1x Wooded Foothills
2x Overgrown Tomb
1x Stomping Ground
1x Blood Crypt
4x Blackcleave Cliffs
3x Raging Ravine
1x Twilight Mire
1x Forest
2x Swamp
4x Fulminator Mage
2x Grafdigger's Cage
1x Nihil Spellbomb
1x Grim Lavamancer
1x Liliana, the Last Hope
2x Ancient Grudge
2x Collective Brutality
1x Kitchen Finks
1x Anger of the Gods
4x Dark Confidant
4x Tarmogoyf
2x Scavenging Ooze
2x Goblin Rabblemaster
4x Bloodbraid Elf
Spells(2
3x Inquisition of Kozilek
2x Thoughtseize
3x Lightning Bolt
2x Fatal Push
1x Abrupt Decay
1x Terminate
2x Kolaghan's Command
1x Maelstrom Pulse
4x Liliana of the Veil
Lands (25)
4x Verdant Catacombs
3x Bloodstained Mire
1x Wooded Foothills
2x Overgrown Tomb
1x Stomping Ground
1x Blood Crypt
4x Blackcleave Cliffs
3x Raging Ravine
2x Treetop Village
1x Twilight Mire
2x Swamp
1x Forest
3x Fulminator Mage
1x Kitchen Finks
3x Collective Brutality
1x Grim Lavamancer
1x Liliana, the Last Hope
2x Nihil Spellbomb
1x Grafdigger's Cage
2x Ancient Grudge
1x Anger of the Gods
Another Jund deck made top 32 in the classics with Rabblemaster. While I doubt this is where Jund goes, I think it warrants testing, since it saw some results. Connet was also doing extremely well day 1 of the Open.
I am still on EctoMarks list atm, having a removal suite looking like: 4 Bolt, 2 Push, 2 Terminate, 2 KCommand, 2 Pulse and 4 LoTV is alright. I could see cutting the second Pulse for a Decay going forward. But other than that, 16 removal spells alongside 6 discard seems good to me.
So, to conclude, these are main points where I am at concerning the decklist:
I completely agree. It was soon recognized that 25 lands feel much by pretty much everyone of us. I also said, that if we go to 24 lands, we can't do it without lowering the curve. If it is necessary to do so is something we will see going forward. I am just testing it and see how it goes.
Like the list, my personal changes would be -1 Decay and +1 Terminate (But you stated the reason for running 2 Decays, which is totally fine, its just me) as well as -1 Ravine and +1 Wooded Foothills.
I was trying to say that in my various textwalls from the last page, but I guess I didn't quite stress that enough. Apologies for that, we are definitely on the same page in that case
I like your list! I would personally want more unconditional removal since only 1 Pulse and 1 Terminate is too few for my tastes, but since you are running 3 Pushes, it can somewhat make up for that.
With 24 lands? Now thats cheeky
1. I want TONS of 1 mana interaction. I'm looking at playing a minimum of 12 mana spells. Currently at 5 discard and 7 removal spells - could see it being a 6/6 split instead, my local meta is just very flooded by creature decks. I keep the 6th 1 mana discard spell in the board as a Duress currently. If I were to play only 6 removal spells, I'd go with a 3/3 split of Push and Bolt, push has been great to have multiples of - I think in general we're underrating the card right now.
2. I want to reliably be able to kill 2 mana creatures. Instead of going deep on the grindy cards for the mirror match, I'm going for simple effective removal - which has the benefit of working out well against aggressive decks as well. I also want at least 3 spells to reliably deal with delve threats and the likes (2 terminates and 1 pulse maindeck for me). Also, I think dreadbore is so not worth running - the instant speed terminate is just so much better.
3. I find Liliana, the Last Hope to be a way better sideboard card than maindeck. I could see having 2 of her in the sideboard as an option - but for me at least, the one copy does the work so far. I supplement her with a Grim Lavamancer for the small creature removal package (in addition to all my maindeck removal spells).
As a new thing I'm going to try 4x fulminator's in the board. I played against a lot of decks that needed land destruction this weekend - boarded in 3 every time, but didn't see them reliably enough. In general I've hedged my list against generally useful cards (so besides the fulminators, a lot of 1 of cards). I still like the 2nd Pulse in the board to be able to board in against the decks playing creatures that are more difficult to deal with.
I also think we need to reconsider which matches it is fine to board out BBE - I think some matchups where we can operate just fine trading one for one - but needs to do it early and often, she might be too clunky. But it is a tough call as she does wonders wrt. turning the corner.
Just some thoughts - overall I think we cannot afford to skimp on 1 mana interaction spells. The postive tempo swing in dealing with threats for much less mana than the opponent spends on them is something we rely on quite a bit I think.
My literal point is that a lot of Jund lists have moved to a more aggressive stance and cut the number of instant speed removal spells. This lower amount of removal, and, in some cases, discard does play out in meaningful ways. I mean we're all talking about cutting Abrupt Decay completely as well. If you're playing 0-1 Terminate, 1 Dreadbore, 2 Kolaghan's Command and maybe a Fatal Push on top of 4 Lightning Bolt, you will be softer to Infect than playing more Terminates and Abrupt Decay. I never cared about Probe if I had proper removal in hand. It just removed my ability to bluff. Keep in mind, I'm seeing the RL player and several lists from the last open going back to Spellskite main deck. I don't understand how you guys think it's still the same. I'm not concerned with their deck so much as how Jund is being constructed. Short story version: the issues I'm seeing with fast Zoo decks (traditionally good/great matchup) is just amped up with fast decks like Infect. If all of you think nothing has changed, then just ignore me.
Why does everyone think I'm talking about one specific match on camera? Yes, I'm pointing out specifically that the Infect match up isn't as good. I also said the same thing in the past for fast, aggro decks in general. I literally spent a month testing unbans for Stoneforge Mystic, Bloodbraid Elf and Jace prior to unbanning.
My question is: Can I get away with keeping the 2/2 split on my manlands when going down to 24 lands?
I think the Mountain would be on the chopping block if I kept both Treetops. Is this ok? Am I losing too many R sources at that point? I can’t tell you how much I love Treetop. That trample and low activation cost is the real deal. Also, are we still as scared of Field of Ruin as we were? How necessary are the 4x basics and fetchable Mountain?
BRGJUNDGRB---BRHOLLOW ONERB---BGELVESGB---BRGLIVING ENDGRB---GWBOGLESWG
EDH:
BRGKARRTHUS, TYRANT OF JUNDGRB
The choice of whether to run a Mountain or a fourth basic land at all should be metagame dependent for everyone out there. Currently, there's only one UW control player I have to deal with locally, but if I went to a larger tourney, it would depend more on what I'm seeing online closer to the game time.
Maybe I will add 1 k command, leave decay at 1 and up push to 2. That way we have 12x 1 mana spells.
I do get the feeling going down to 24 is right. Everyone is getting flooded at 25. The pros obviously didn't think 4 discard was enough.
The meta will adjust after all.
Check out the primer for that, I did include boarding out BBE in the SB guide.
It seems it happened the same thing here like it happened with LEH. We are on a different page on this issue. Your assessment is totally correct and I agree with it, but we have different definitions of "now". You are talking about the clunky lists cutting cheap removal and running 25 lands as the baseline of "now". What I took as a baseline for comparing "now to before" is a list similar to EctoMarks, which essentially means: 4 Bolts, 2 Pushes, 2 Terminates, 2 KCommands, 2 Pulses (or 1 Pulse and 1 Decay), 4 LoTV and which equals to 16 removal spells. If you take that approach and compare it to any period now (either pre probe ban era, which makes still more sense in my eyes, or the pre BBE unban era like you are more referring it to) you will hopefully agree with me that the difference is not that big and, respectively, quite sufficient for the matchup.
On a consistant level? No. Look at the standard 24 land base which we run. We ran only 3 manlands as tapped lands are hurting us and no treetop village. We cant afford the limitation of coloured mana when we do run 4 basics in addition to that.
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Dark Confidant
3 Scavenging Ooze
4 Bloodbraid Elf
Noncreature Spells [20]
4 Liliana of the Veil
4 Inquisition of Kozilek
2 Thoughtseize
2 Maelstrom Pulse
4 Lightning Bolt
1 Terminate
1 Abrupt Decay
2 Kolaghan's Command
1 Forest
2 Swamp
2 Overgrown Tomb
1 Stomping Ground
1 Blood Crypt
4 Verdant Catacombs
3 Bloodstained Mire
1 Wooded Foothills
3 Blackcleave Cliffs
1 Blooming Marsh
3 Raging Ravine
2 Treetop Village
1 Twilight Mire
1 Thoughtseize
1 Kolaghan's Command
4 Fulminator Mage
1 Crumble to Dust
2 Fatal Push
2 Collective Brutality
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Liliana, the Last Hope
2 Ancient Grudge
We see Reid is also slowly going back to "normal" Jund lists.
I'd love to hear any thoughts anyone has on either.
Thanks for dropping by!