You can do it, but it will pressure you manabase more in Game 1. I would probably go up to 3 KCommand and play a Terminate mainboard to replace those 2 Lilis if I had to do it. But If you have the new Lili, then obviously go for her instead.
I also think Jund is not significantly worse against combo than Grixis. And against Control I would argue Jund being slightly better due to the implications of LoTV. Against Big Mana I like Jund a lot more due to TBR. Has stolen me plently of games already.
For Burn, it really comes a lot down to the burn player and how he handles the matchup. Its is also very draw dependant in my experience.
Regarding that Brian DeMars article: I am shocked how bad he actually plays that deck, so many little mistakes I noticed, this is not a good representation of the deck and how to play it in my opinion.
I see the points of Grixis having better game against combo, I guess this is just reality.
I do want to point out that Leyline from Ad Nauseam against us is not gg automatically. You can attack them on different axises, like going after their artifacts or lands. I have been there and done that in the past. But thats the beauty of the deck, it can fight through everything potentially.
Defish, I tried the list, I didn't like it, I missed the red a lot. I actually got smashed by some guy playing a janky, removal heavy deck and lost, managed to play him again on mtgo and beat him with the red version. K-Command was backbreakingly good, and I actually think LTLH is better suited for this deck than LOTV.
I see the points of Grixis having better game against combo, I guess this is just reality.
I do want to point out that Leyline from Ad Nauseam against us is not gg automatically. You can attack them on different axises, like going after their artifacts or lands. I have been there and done that in the past. But thats the beauty of the deck, it can fight through everything potentially.
I admit, I see more and more people are switching to the Grixis variant of the deck; however, I still think that the Jund version is still the best one. Taking the skeleton of the long time best deck in all of Modern, Jund, makes me sense than taking the skeleton of Grixis Delver is good but better than the cards that Jund has available. Jund has Abrupt Decay, Grixis has counter spells (though not against Abrupt Decay ). Jund just version has more answers against threats then Grixis unfortunately, and from me a Grixis Delver player.
[quote from="FlyingDelver »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/tier-1-modern/772090-deaths-shadow-jund?comment=607"]
I admit, I see more and more people are switching to the Grixis variant of the deck; however, I still think that the Jund version is still the best one. Taking the skeleton of the long time best deck in all of Modern, Jund, makes me sense than taking the skeleton of Grixis Delver is good but better than the cards that Jund has available. Jund has Abrupt Decay, Grixis has counter spells (though not against Abrupt Decay ). Jund just version has more answers against threats then Grixis unfortunately, and from me a Grixis Delver player.
That is true, Jund has the answers. Also, what slightly strikes me off playing Grixis, is their inability to destroy enchantments (only exception would be Engineered Explosives which kills enchantments on 1, 2 or 3, but not 4 or higher obviously).
I've never said Brian DeMars is like the best player and everything he says is true but he's definitely good one and I would give some credit to what he says. I agree though that some lines he made on the video were questionable though. I would like to a video of Magnus Lantto playing this deck but unfortunately it doesn't seem he's streaming.
Thats why I was shocked, I also think he is a respectable player. Perhaps its just that he never really played the deck before, but I really think those little aspects are important to do right in this deck. He got lucky often times, but I think he could have executed it better in a lot of games.
I think discard spells are more important in this deck than in other BGx decks since it has low threat density and you need to protect your creatures from removal.
It doesn't have low threat density compared to regular jund when we account for the 8-9 cantrips and deck-thinning effect of 12 fetchlands.
Traditional Jund runs 13-14 creatures, 1-2 K-Command to recur then, 3-4 manlands, and 4-5 planeswalkers in the main deck. For comparison, DS Jund runs 8 creatures (Street Wraith doesn't count), 1-2 K-Command, no manlands, and 2-3 planeswalkers. Both decks increase their threat count by 4-7 post-board, depending on where your sideboard is at. Cantrips don't increase the raw number of creatures that we have access to, and most midrange and control decks pack at least 4-6 removal spells that hit DS and Goyf, with the blue decks playing Snapcaster on top of that. We also lack an equivalent creature to Dark Confidant that can just generate card advantage the longer it lives and put us in a position to win even if it dies after a couple turns.
Defish, I tried the list, I didn't like it, I missed the red a lot. I actually got smashed by some guy playing a janky, removal heavy deck and lost, managed to play him again on mtgo and beat him with the red version. K-Command was backbreakingly good, and I actually think LTLH is better suited for this deck than LOTV.
That's disappointing. I was hoping that the extra Lingering Souls in the main would offset the loss of K-Command in grindier matchups. I got to jam a bunch of games last night with a friend on Grixis Shadow and the games where I drew Lingering Souls vs when I didn't were drastically different. It felt like if I could resolve a single Souls the game because almost a cakewalk. Maybe what I really want is just 4 Souls in the 75.
Why do (almost) everyone play 8 one mana discard spells. Sheep mentality? They're horrible topdecks and will hurt us in a topdeck war.
Why do you have to insult everyone? You think it's a sheep mentality and accident that Shadow has won multiple tournaments or been in the top 8 since it's creation?
The deck runs 8 threats, dude, it doesn't matter if Wraith or Bauble thin the deck out, it can't afford to keep ramming out creatures to removal. That's almost like saying, "why does Infect run 4x Vines, 2x apostle blessing, and 2x blossoming defense?" Sounds pretty ridiculous when you think about that, don't you think?
On top of that, Shadow decks don't run a whole lot of cards that can deal with a 5 cmc creature card, so snagging Tasigurs, Gurmags, or troublesome planeswalkers, like LOTV and Gideon, Ally of Zendikar, is a huge deal. The thoughtseizes shocking for 2 furthers pumping out shadow while ruining the opponents hand. Without those discards it would also make it difficult to race against those combo decks
A lot of the old jund players in this thread used to be like, "yep, if we don't play discard followed by Goyf we're pretty much now boned". What's better than playing a discard, followed by Goyf and a huge ass Death's Shadow? We play 8 discard, statistically, we're very likely to see it in an opening hand of 7 cards.
It's also 8x 1 cmc cards, Shadow is operating like a legacy deck, it's casting all these backbreaking spells at 1 mana (except you, tarfire)---we want to be impacting the game immediately, and often, since the deck only runs 18 land
Do you have any cards in mind you'd replace discard with? How many?
Hope these talking points answer any questions you had
Traditional Jund runs 13-14 creatures, 1-2 K-Command to recur then, 3-4 manlands, and 4-5 planeswalkers in the main deck. For comparison, DS Jund runs 8 creatures (Street Wraith doesn't count), 1-2 K-Command, no manlands, and 2-3 planeswalkers. Both decks increase their threat count by 4-7 post-board, depending on where your sideboard is at. Cantrips don't increase the raw number of creatures that we have access to, and most midrange and control decks pack at least 4-6 removal spells that hit DS and Goyf, with the blue decks playing Snapcaster on top of that. We also lack an equivalent creature to Dark Confidant that can just generate card advantage the longer it lives and put us in a position to win even if it dies after a couple turns.
Defish, I tried the list, I didn't like it, I missed the red a lot. I actually got smashed by some guy playing a janky, removal heavy deck and lost, managed to play him again on mtgo and beat him with the red version. K-Command was backbreakingly good, and I actually think LTLH is better suited for this deck than LOTV.
That's disappointing. I was hoping that the extra Lingering Souls in the main would offset the loss of K-Command in grindier matchups. I got to jam a bunch of games last night with a friend on Grixis Shadow and the games where I drew Lingering Souls vs when I didn't were drastically different. It felt like if I could resolve a single Souls the game because almost a cakewalk. Maybe what I really want is just 4 Souls in the 75.
It may just just been the lingering souls kicking ass. I REALLY missed the red though, and was frustrated by the lack of it. I wasn't thrilled with 3x LOTV either. LOTV is without a doubt a better card than LTLH, but I think HOPE fits the deck better, since it fixes our issue with small creatures and removal heavy decks not exiling.
The 2x Lingering Souls definitely did not offset the K-Command, having to answer Shadow most of the time felt more important. It's also just more artifact/shock/recursion.
I've been jamming 3x Souls/1 Ranger in the Jund deck and that's felt absolutely fine in grindy matchups. I actually beat a guy two weeks ago who literally removed Death's Shadow itself over 7 times, it got so bad I had to hard cast Street Wraith. The LTLH and K-Command are just too important
If Souls is that important (which it definitely is), I'd just run 4.
I made a huge mistake ever advocating for straight up Jund Shadow, that only worked because the meta didn't adjust against slow decks, jund shadow isn't viable in an interactive meta.
As I've thought more about it this morning, I think it may have just been Lingering Souls doing it's thing. I'm willing to believe that my mediocre results when I tried out the white Jund version were due more to my own play errors and learning the deck than the deck itself, although I do also think I got a little too cute with my sideboard. I'll give the white Jund version another shot and see if I have any better luck.
I agree that the straight Jund version is pretty unreasonable in a meta adjusted for the deck, like we're seeing now.
The decks been a learning curve. I think some of us had some advantage getting into it from GBx, but it still has a large learning curve, it may just be you getting better with the deck as a whole
While tarfire doesn't wow me, I have found it relevant to burn myself, my opponent, a mana dork, activating delirium, or directing it at a planeswalker, shaving tarfire down to 2x and playing the 2nd copy of Abrupt Decay has been fantastic. While Ghor isn't bad, replacing him with a Lilly variant has also been beneficial.
For some weird ******* reason, my store has a bunch of lantern players, so I feel very forced to play 2x ancient grudges, but if your meta is fair and full of interactive decks, you could play the 4th soul
Has anyone really found Eidolon of Rhetoric or Kataki useful? I feel like I'm better off trying to pump out a large shadow
It may just just been the lingering souls kicking ass. I REALLY missed the red though, and was frustrated by the lack of it. I wasn't thrilled with 3x LOTV either. LOTV is without a doubt a better card than LTLH, but I think HOPE fits the deck better, since it fixes our issue with small creatures and removal heavy decks not exiling.
glad to see more people with the same conclusions as mine, i tried to tell that like 10 pages ago
also, LTLH its better than LOTV at grinding card advantage against decks with a lot of removal
and finaly, i think LOTV its not that good against decks where LTLH its bad, i mean against combo you still need to draw target discard, LOTV alone its not enough
That is true, Jund has the answers. Also, what slightly strikes me off playing Grixis, is their inability to destroy enchantments (only exception would be Engineered Explosives which kills enchantments on 1, 2 or 3, but not 4 or higher obviously).
Grixis colors doesn't really answers for enchantments unfortunately. The best option is Engineered Explosives which I run 2 of in my sideboard. The other answer they may have it usually permanent bounce spells like Echoing Truth, Wipe Away, Cyclonic Rift, or others I cannot think of right now.
Traditional Jund runs 13-14 creatures, 1-2 K-Command to recur then, 3-4 manlands, and 4-5 planeswalkers in the main deck. For comparison, DS Jund runs 8 creatures
+ 4 Traverse. Many lists also run a 13th creature.
EDIT: BTW, few creatures in the deck is not a very strong argument for running more discard, because you could easily switch out some discard spells with more creature spells, so you wouldn't have that problem anymore.
I could rephrase my question: Why are we running proportionately more discard relative to creatures compared to traditional jund?
Traditional Jund runs 13-14 creatures, 1-2 K-Command to recur then, 3-4 manlands, and 4-5 planeswalkers in the main deck. For comparison, DS Jund runs 8 creatures
+ 4 Traverse. Many lists also run a 13th creature.
EDIT: BTW, few creatures in the deck is not a very strong argument for running more discard, because you could easily switch out some discard spells with more creature spells, so you wouldn't have that problem anymore.
Jesus, then do what you want. I'm not sure why you're posting in the thread if you just want everyone to validate your opinion. The decks posted amazing results in paper and mtgo with the 8 discard package, if you want to do something different than test it out on mtgo or your local fnm and report back to us instead
Defish did that and posted and shared his thoughts, go do the same if you're so fundamentally against it
The decks been a learning curve. I think some of us had some advantage getting into it from GBx, but it still has a large learning curve, it may just be you getting better with the deck as a whole
While tarfire doesn't wow me, I have found it relevant to burn myself, my opponent, a mana dork, activating delirium, or directing it at a planeswalker, shaving tarfire down to 2x and playing the 2nd copy of Abrupt Decay has been fantastic. While Ghor isn't bad, replacing him with a Lilly variant has also been beneficial.
For some weird ******* reason, my store has a bunch of lantern players, so I feel very forced to play 2x ancient grudges, but if your meta is fair and full of interactive decks, you could play the 4th soul
Has anyone really found Eidolon of Rhetoric or Kataki useful? I feel like I'm better off trying to pump out a large shadow
Yeah the deck is definitely not something for everyone and requires to overcome a certain learning curve. Its obviously better for people playing midrange anyway, as those people can handle with discard usually very good for example.
I have played and am still playing Ethersworn Canonist rather than Eidolon. I think, against matchups where it matters, Ethersworn is just better, because it doesn't matter if I have a more durable creature in the form of Eidolon or not for those matchups. I am thinking of Ad Nauseam and Living End specifically here. And against those decks this card is just a blowout. Living End does have some outs as they run Beast Within but usually you can set up a fast clock up until that point. Without Ethersworn, I really think Living End is a though matchup and probably not in our favour. Ad Nauseam goes the same way, if they have the Leyline after sideboarding. We have some games against them, but Ethersworn is a really good tech against this kind of decks if you expect them.
As for Kataki, I would only run him if there was really many Affinity decks going around in my meta, but I think with KCommand, Souls and all our removal we have a great game against them already. But I do like the card for Lantern Control, definitely a nice option to have I think.
It may just just been the lingering souls kicking ass. I REALLY missed the red though, and was frustrated by the lack of it. I wasn't thrilled with 3x LOTV either. LOTV is without a doubt a better card than LTLH, but I think HOPE fits the deck better, since it fixes our issue with small creatures and removal heavy decks not exiling.
The 2x Lingering Souls definitely did not offset the K-Command, having to answer Shadow most of the time felt more important. It's also just more artifact/shock/recursion.
I've been jamming 3x Souls/1 Ranger in the Jund deck and that's felt absolutely fine in grindy matchups. I actually beat a guy two weeks ago who literally removed Death's Shadow itself over 7 times, it got so bad I had to hard cast Street Wraith. The LTLH and K-Command are just too important
If Souls is that important (which it definitely is), I'd just run 4.
I made a huge mistake ever advocating for straight up Jund Shadow, that only worked because the meta didn't adjust against slow decks, jund shadow isn't viable in an interactive meta.
I think hardcasting a Street Wraith is in some matchups totally fine, yet very good. Especially against decks which can't deal that easy with fatal push proof creatures. And thats just the amazing thing about Street Wraith. Its a free cantrip, reducing our life and can be a threat in addition to all this.
EDIT: BTW, few creatures in the deck is not a very strong argument for running more discard, because you could easily switch out some discard spells with more creature spells, so you wouldn't have that problem anymore.
I could rephrase my question: Why are we running proportionately more discard relative to creatures compared to traditional jund?
This deck operates only at 18 lands, and therefore needs to be highly efficient with its low costing cards in order to win over the opponent. There are only 2 creatures which fullfill this requirement as of now: Goyf and DS. What would you replace the discard with? TBH I really don't see the point of replacing discard (which is just fantastic and can potentially deal with anything) with mediocre creatures which would just slow our deck down. At this point you could also play traditional Jund. Discard being a bad topdeck is definitely correct. But, we need it game 1 against an open field. You can always side out some discard in grindy attrition based matchups. While playing the deck for quite a bit now, I was hardly unhappy when drawing a late discard. It often could ensure your Temur Battle Rage to attach and deal lethal damage. In that regard I would definitely compare our discard with Infects protection spells. They need them to have ensurance when they go for the kill.
For some weird ******* reason, my store has a bunch of lantern players, so I feel very forced to play 2x ancient grudges, but if your meta is fair and full of interactive decks, you could play the 4th soul
Has anyone really found Eidolon of Rhetoric or Kataki useful? I feel like I'm better off trying to pump out a large shadow
I feel your pain dude but turn 2 or 3 Kataki backed up by either a Maelstrom Pulse or Abrupt Decay has been back breaking in my limited experience against lantern.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern - E-Tron & UWControl
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For Burn, it really comes a lot down to the burn player and how he handles the matchup. Its is also very draw dependant in my experience.
Regarding that Brian DeMars article: I am shocked how bad he actually plays that deck, so many little mistakes I noticed, this is not a good representation of the deck and how to play it in my opinion.
I do want to point out that Leyline from Ad Nauseam against us is not gg automatically. You can attack them on different axises, like going after their artifacts or lands. I have been there and done that in the past. But thats the beauty of the deck, it can fight through everything potentially.
I admit, I see more and more people are switching to the Grixis variant of the deck; however, I still think that the Jund version is still the best one. Taking the skeleton of the long time best deck in all of Modern, Jund, makes me sense than taking the skeleton of Grixis Delver is good but better than the cards that Jund has available. Jund has Abrupt Decay, Grixis has counter spells (though not against Abrupt Decay ). Jund just version has more answers against threats then Grixis unfortunately, and from me a Grixis Delver player.
That is true, Jund has the answers. Also, what slightly strikes me off playing Grixis, is their inability to destroy enchantments (only exception would be Engineered Explosives which kills enchantments on 1, 2 or 3, but not 4 or higher obviously).
Thats why I was shocked, I also think he is a respectable player. Perhaps its just that he never really played the deck before, but I really think those little aspects are important to do right in this deck. He got lucky often times, but I think he could have executed it better in a lot of games.
UWRUWR Delver/Lynx TempoUWR-------UWRUWR Midrange GeistUWR-------UWRUWR Nahiri ControlUWR-------UWRUWR SaheeliUWR
BGRJund / Jund ShadowBGR-------BGWAbzan / Abzan ShadowBGW
Commander (Leviathan/MTGO): UWGeist of Saint TraftUW
It doesn't have low threat density compared to regular jund when we account for the 8-9 cantrips and deck-thinning effect of 12 fetchlands.
UWRUWR Delver/Lynx TempoUWR-------UWRUWR Midrange GeistUWR-------UWRUWR Nahiri ControlUWR-------UWRUWR SaheeliUWR
BGRJund / Jund ShadowBGR-------BGWAbzan / Abzan ShadowBGW
Commander (Leviathan/MTGO): UWGeist of Saint TraftUW
That's disappointing. I was hoping that the extra Lingering Souls in the main would offset the loss of K-Command in grindier matchups. I got to jam a bunch of games last night with a friend on Grixis Shadow and the games where I drew Lingering Souls vs when I didn't were drastically different. It felt like if I could resolve a single Souls the game because almost a cakewalk. Maybe what I really want is just 4 Souls in the 75.
Why do you have to insult everyone? You think it's a sheep mentality and accident that Shadow has won multiple tournaments or been in the top 8 since it's creation?
The deck runs 8 threats, dude, it doesn't matter if Wraith or Bauble thin the deck out, it can't afford to keep ramming out creatures to removal. That's almost like saying, "why does Infect run 4x Vines, 2x apostle blessing, and 2x blossoming defense?" Sounds pretty ridiculous when you think about that, don't you think?
On top of that, Shadow decks don't run a whole lot of cards that can deal with a 5 cmc creature card, so snagging Tasigurs, Gurmags, or troublesome planeswalkers, like LOTV and Gideon, Ally of Zendikar, is a huge deal. The thoughtseizes shocking for 2 furthers pumping out shadow while ruining the opponents hand. Without those discards it would also make it difficult to race against those combo decks
A lot of the old jund players in this thread used to be like, "yep, if we don't play discard followed by Goyf we're pretty much now boned". What's better than playing a discard, followed by Goyf and a huge ass Death's Shadow? We play 8 discard, statistically, we're very likely to see it in an opening hand of 7 cards.
It's also 8x 1 cmc cards, Shadow is operating like a legacy deck, it's casting all these backbreaking spells at 1 mana (except you, tarfire)---we want to be impacting the game immediately, and often, since the deck only runs 18 land
Do you have any cards in mind you'd replace discard with? How many?
Hope these talking points answer any questions you had
It may just just been the lingering souls kicking ass. I REALLY missed the red though, and was frustrated by the lack of it. I wasn't thrilled with 3x LOTV either. LOTV is without a doubt a better card than LTLH, but I think HOPE fits the deck better, since it fixes our issue with small creatures and removal heavy decks not exiling.
The 2x Lingering Souls definitely did not offset the K-Command, having to answer Shadow most of the time felt more important. It's also just more artifact/shock/recursion.
I've been jamming 3x Souls/1 Ranger in the Jund deck and that's felt absolutely fine in grindy matchups. I actually beat a guy two weeks ago who literally removed Death's Shadow itself over 7 times, it got so bad I had to hard cast Street Wraith. The LTLH and K-Command are just too important
If Souls is that important (which it definitely is), I'd just run 4.
I made a huge mistake ever advocating for straight up Jund Shadow, that only worked because the meta didn't adjust against slow decks, jund shadow isn't viable in an interactive meta.
I agree that the straight Jund version is pretty unreasonable in a meta adjusted for the deck, like we're seeing now.
While tarfire doesn't wow me, I have found it relevant to burn myself, my opponent, a mana dork, activating delirium, or directing it at a planeswalker, shaving tarfire down to 2x and playing the 2nd copy of Abrupt Decay has been fantastic. While Ghor isn't bad, replacing him with a Lilly variant has also been beneficial.
For some weird ******* reason, my store has a bunch of lantern players, so I feel very forced to play 2x ancient grudges, but if your meta is fair and full of interactive decks, you could play the 4th soul
Has anyone really found Eidolon of Rhetoric or Kataki useful? I feel like I'm better off trying to pump out a large shadow
glad to see more people with the same conclusions as mine, i tried to tell that like 10 pages ago
also, LTLH its better than LOTV at grinding card advantage against decks with a lot of removal
and finaly, i think LOTV its not that good against decks where LTLH its bad, i mean against combo you still need to draw target discard, LOTV alone its not enough
Grixis colors doesn't really answers for enchantments unfortunately. The best option is Engineered Explosives which I run 2 of in my sideboard. The other answer they may have it usually permanent bounce spells like Echoing Truth, Wipe Away, Cyclonic Rift, or others I cannot think of right now.
+ 4 Traverse. Many lists also run a 13th creature.
EDIT: BTW, few creatures in the deck is not a very strong argument for running more discard, because you could easily switch out some discard spells with more creature spells, so you wouldn't have that problem anymore.
I could rephrase my question: Why are we running proportionately more discard relative to creatures compared to traditional jund?
UWRUWR Delver/Lynx TempoUWR-------UWRUWR Midrange GeistUWR-------UWRUWR Nahiri ControlUWR-------UWRUWR SaheeliUWR
BGRJund / Jund ShadowBGR-------BGWAbzan / Abzan ShadowBGW
Commander (Leviathan/MTGO): UWGeist of Saint TraftUW
Jesus, then do what you want. I'm not sure why you're posting in the thread if you just want everyone to validate your opinion. The decks posted amazing results in paper and mtgo with the 8 discard package, if you want to do something different than test it out on mtgo or your local fnm and report back to us instead
Defish did that and posted and shared his thoughts, go do the same if you're so fundamentally against it
Yeah the deck is definitely not something for everyone and requires to overcome a certain learning curve. Its obviously better for people playing midrange anyway, as those people can handle with discard usually very good for example.
I have played and am still playing Ethersworn Canonist rather than Eidolon. I think, against matchups where it matters, Ethersworn is just better, because it doesn't matter if I have a more durable creature in the form of Eidolon or not for those matchups. I am thinking of Ad Nauseam and Living End specifically here. And against those decks this card is just a blowout. Living End does have some outs as they run Beast Within but usually you can set up a fast clock up until that point. Without Ethersworn, I really think Living End is a though matchup and probably not in our favour. Ad Nauseam goes the same way, if they have the Leyline after sideboarding. We have some games against them, but Ethersworn is a really good tech against this kind of decks if you expect them.
As for Kataki, I would only run him if there was really many Affinity decks going around in my meta, but I think with KCommand, Souls and all our removal we have a great game against them already. But I do like the card for Lantern Control, definitely a nice option to have I think.
I think hardcasting a Street Wraith is in some matchups totally fine, yet very good. Especially against decks which can't deal that easy with fatal push proof creatures. And thats just the amazing thing about Street Wraith. Its a free cantrip, reducing our life and can be a threat in addition to all this.
This deck operates only at 18 lands, and therefore needs to be highly efficient with its low costing cards in order to win over the opponent. There are only 2 creatures which fullfill this requirement as of now: Goyf and DS. What would you replace the discard with? TBH I really don't see the point of replacing discard (which is just fantastic and can potentially deal with anything) with mediocre creatures which would just slow our deck down. At this point you could also play traditional Jund. Discard being a bad topdeck is definitely correct. But, we need it game 1 against an open field. You can always side out some discard in grindy attrition based matchups. While playing the deck for quite a bit now, I was hardly unhappy when drawing a late discard. It often could ensure your Temur Battle Rage to attach and deal lethal damage. In that regard I would definitely compare our discard with Infects protection spells. They need them to have ensurance when they go for the kill.
I feel your pain dude but turn 2 or 3 Kataki backed up by either a Maelstrom Pulse or Abrupt Decay has been back breaking in my limited experience against lantern.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT