I view Grixis "Control" as I view Faeries (ie Aggro/Control). Its on the spectrum, but if you want to call it pure control you're not really getting the point behind why some people want a "real" control deck. The joy behind playing that kind of deck is outgrinding and playing the long game. Decks like Faeries and Grixis don't really want to play the long game, they're not equipped to do it. But that's mostly a feature of modern, racing is better than outgrinding people. And that's fine for what it is, but let's call a spade a spade and not just use revisionism to say that midrange and agro/control are suddenly "reactive" control. They might take that role in modern because of how fast and aggressive it is, but that doesn't really turn them into the reactive decks people think of when the term "control" is used.
When someone wants to play a reactive deck in modern and you tell them to play an agro/control deck instead and that should be "good enough", that's kind of missing the point. Is a pure reactive control deck ever going to be viable? Probably not, barring Wizards making some kind of enabler (ie something like Fact or Fiction) but I don't really think that's ever going to happen.
For what its worth, I think the best place to be in modern is playing a "I'm going to kill you asap so try and stop me" strategy due to the open nature of the format.
I think the best way to differentiate control from mudrange is this.
Midrange uses attrition to draw out the game, while also moving toward victory. Most often this takes the form of a jund/k player abrubt decaying a blocker then swinging with goyf. The thing is, this is unsustainable against a fully functional control strategy. In the late game the control deck will have too much card advantage for attrition to be a viable strategy. Hense the name midrange, slower than aggro, but still not as late-game oriented as say ramp or control.
Which brings us to control. They try to draw out the game as well, but they do so often, not while advancing toward a win-condition directly. Instead they try to accumulate card advantage. Damnation killing 2-3 creatures, snap-kcommanding, electrolyzeing 1-2 dudes. Etc. Which is why so many people dislike grixis control and call it midrange. It relies on large delve creatures that come down early to do the heavy lifting. This is especially counter to control strategem considering delve makes it harder to get that additional value from snap and kcommand. Though i dont think it actually is just another mudrange deck, rather its some kinda hybrid.
However, there are 2 important points to be made here. A proper control deck doesn't need a single counter spell or unconditionally draw spell. Despite this, thats exactly what many people try to define a control deck by, is unconditional counters and draw. When, if anything, the quintessential control spell would be wrath of god or Damnation style effects. Even pyroclasm.
There are far more control decks in modern than people realise. But they just completely ignore them solely due to not relying on a solid blue core or being reactive over proactive. And because of this lack of interest in any control but the most superficial version thereof, all other control decks have suffered in isolation. Little attention, little testing, little experimentation. Etc.
I view Grixis "Control" as I view Faeries (ie Aggro/Control). Its on the spectrum, but if you want to call it pure control you're not really getting the point behind why some people want a "real" control deck. The joy behind playing that kind of deck is outgrinding and playing the long game. Decks like Faeries and Grixis don't really want to play the long game, they're not equipped to do it. But that's mostly a feature of modern, racing is better than outgrinding people. And that's fine for what it is, but let's call a spade a spade and not just use revisionism to say that midrange and agro/control are suddenly "reactive" control. They might take that role in modern because of how fast and aggressive it is, but that doesn't really turn them into the reactive decks people think of when the term "control" is used.
When someone wants to play a reactive deck in modern and you tell them to play an agro/control deck instead and that should be "good enough", that's kind of missing the point. Is a pure reactive control deck ever going to be viable? Probably not, barring Wizards making some kind of enabler (ie something like Fact or Fiction) but I don't really think that's ever going to happen.
For what its worth, I think the best place to be in modern is playing a "I'm going to kill you asap so try and stop me" strategy due to the open nature of the format.
I feel the same way. In Affinity vs. Infect, Affinity often takes the "control" role. But, Affinity should never be called "control." In the Burn vs. Affinity match, Burn takes on the "control" role, but we shouldn't really be calling Burn, "control."
Some people here will say that "true Aggro" is not around and Aggro players have to play substitutes or "true Midrange" is not around, so they're forced to play substitutes. Not even taking into account that Standard is fully Midrange, Modern has plenty of these other Archetypes. Honestly if players who haven't played for the past 10 years, Control is a dying Archetype for whatever reason. Those players are left in the cold unless they want to play Legacy Miracles or a subStandard version of Control in Standard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
That's the thing, though: how would that be the fault of Snapcaster? If a spell is so powerful that Snapcaster flashing it back is game breaking, is that not the fault of the spell itself? Sure, Snapcaster can act as a spell 5-8 (with 2 mana on top of each casting), but so does just drawing those spells.
they banned pod, because of design restricting reasons, why would they handle snap any different?
he is different from pod but brings similar problems for the design department.
snapcaster doesn't tutor cards out of your library.
That is just a matter of opinion though. I for one see the deck as control and so do probably a lot of other people. Otherwise the deck wouldn't haven't been named as such if it would be so obviously wrong, would it?
So who is right and who is wrong here? Yeah, that's the whole issue that always arises with these "true" control discussions and why they become tiresome and basically run in circles ever time the topic is brought up.
I normally try to avoid these kind of conversations but here goes. Even Patrick Chapin has said that the deck isn't a pure control deck: "I think this is not a true control deck at all, I think this is definitely a straight up aggro-control deck" (26:03, TurnOneThoughtseize ep 14). He also says that a true control deck isn't viable in modern and I am inclined to agree with him, given we have only had one true draw-go control deck in the format in McClaren's pro-tour deck.
Overall I don't think an old-style control deck will ever be viable in modern without a big change in standards current direction (or they open up a supplemental product for Modern, but that is a discussion for another time and place), in the same way I don't think we will ever have a true prison deck either. Control is probably always going to be part of a hybrid in modern because the format is so diverse and our answers are conditional and/or narrow making a fully reactive deck difficult to build, that isn't necessarily a bad thing but some players really like draw-go and want to play it without the cost of legacy or standard.
For the record Grixis control is by far my favorite deck in the format at the moment but it does play more like midrange-control then draw-go control.
Which brings us to control. They try to draw out the game as well, but they do so often, not while advancing toward a win-condition directly. Instead they try to accumulate card advantage. Damnation killing 2-3 creatures, snap-kcommanding, electrolyzeing 1-2 dudes. Etc. Which is why so many people dislike grixis control and call it midrange. It relies on large delve creatures that come down early to do the heavy lifting. This is especially counter to control strategem considering delve makes it harder to get that additional value from snap and kcommand. Though i dont think it actually is just another mudrange deck, rather its some kinda hybrid.
However, there are 2 important points to be made here. A proper control deck doesn't need a single counter spell or unconditionally draw spell. Despite this, thats exactly what many people try to define a control deck by, is unconditional counters and draw. When, if anything, the quintessential control spell would be wrath of god or Damnation style effects. Even pyroclasm.
There are far more control decks in modern than people realise. But they just completely ignore them solely due to not relying on a solid blue core or being reactive over proactive. And because of this lack of interest in any control but the most superficial version thereof, all other control decks have suffered in isolation. Little attention, little testing, little experimentation. Etc.
You're right that control doesn't need to have counters to work, but historically, the best control decks have had counters. Best control decks in Modern? Grixis and UWR Control, which both had counters. Best control deck in Standard? In recent years, I'll go to Caw-Blade, which had Mana Leak among others like Spell Pierce. Legacy? Miracles and Stoneblade come to mind, which use counters like Force, Spell Pierce, and Daze, not to mention that Miracles has the whole Counter-Top package. Yes, these decks all do play sweepers, which is fine and well, but they also do play counters. They also all had/have draw spells ranging from Preordain to Brainstorm, or cards like Electrolyze and Cryptic.
For a lot of control decks, accumulating card advantage isn't always the best way to win. It's certainly strong, but card selection matters a bunch too. Look at, say, UWR Control. It usually plays Bolt, Helix, Electrolyze, Cryptic, Mana Leak, Spell Snare, Supreme Verdict, and Path. One of the issues with the deck is that not all these cards are good all the time. If you're, for instance, staring down your opponent casting a Goyf, then Bolt, Helix, and Electrolyze all turn off. Cryptic and Verdict are usually too expensive at the time, and you often don't want to Path early Goyf and give the BGx player more mana to work with. Mana Leak and Spell Snare in the early game are fantastic, but again, only if you're drawing them.
I played UWR Control for a long time, and the biggest problem was getting the right cards. With no good 1-drop draw spell, you often just passed turn 1, and couldn't really afford to draw cards early. Think Twice was often too slow, because it meant you didn't get to interact and would have to 2-for-1 them later. Electrolyze isn't always good, and you're only getting one card out of it on turn 3. Control decks usually rely on drawing enough lands to get to Cryptic on turn 4, but without enough early draw spells, it's not as reliable as you'd think. The one mana draw spell does so much work for these decks because it doesn't require a whole turn to do. You can Ponder and Bolt on turn 2, or Brainstorm and Mana Leak on turn 3, as examples. I lost a large number of games keeping two land hands and not getting enough lands. These decks actually do rely on cards like Ponder to smooth out draws. That's partially why Grixis Control plays Serum Visions. Granted, 21 lands is a big shift from 26 that UWR Control plays, but the sentiment is the same.
A lot of other control decks struggle from similar problems. I play UW Tron myself, and the biggest problem the deck has is a lack of good card selection. Serum Visions, quite frankly, isn't that good. I've played against a fair number of other control decks, like Death and Taxes or Top Control, for instance, and they all just suck for various reasons. Like I pointed out earlier, blue has historically been the best control colour, and it's not a coincidence. Turns out counters and draw spells are good for the person trying to be reactive.
That is just a matter of opinion though. I for one see the deck as control and so do probably a lot of other people. Otherwise the deck wouldn't haven't been named as such if it would be so obviously wrong, would it?
So who is right and who is wrong here? Yeah, that's the whole issue that always arises with these "true" control discussions and why they become tiresome and basically run in circles ever time the topic is brought up.
I normally try to avoid these kind of conversations but here goes. Even Patrick Chapin has said that the deck isn't a pure control deck: "I think this is not a true control deck at all, I think this is definitely a straight up aggro-control deck" (26:03, TurnOneThoughtseize ep 14). He also says that a true control deck isn't viable in modern and I am inclined to agree with him, given we have only had one true draw-go control deck in the format in McClaren's pro-tour deck.
Overall I don't think an old-style control deck will ever be viable in modern without a big change in standards current direction (or they open up a supplemental product for Modern, but that is a discussion for another time and place), in the same way I don't think we will ever have a true prison deck either. Control is probably always going to be part of a hybrid in modern because the format is so diverse and our answers are conditional and/or narrow making a fully reactive deck difficult to build, that isn't necessarily a bad thing but some players really like draw-go and want to play it without the cost of legacy or standard.
For the record Grixis control is by far my favorite deck in the format at the moment but it does play more like midrange-control then draw-go control.
Grixis Control as name tells itself is some kind of control deck. It's not any like draw control style deck as Jeskai control but it certainly contains control elements and that much more of them than aggro pieces. It is aggro-control deck but I would say it's still control on the first place and after that anything else. It has everything usual control does with only exception it has possibility to end game fast which control normally doesn't. But like Galerion said this is only question of personal opinion on what people define as a control. Some may say it doesn't contain what control should while others see it as perfectly fine control deck.
The name is perfectly fine, it is a control deck but not a pure control deck (small edit on my previous post to make that clearer) in the old-school sense. A lot of older players consider pure control to be draw-go decks similar to something Randy Buehler would have played in the late 90's (in particular Draw-Go and Forbidian), in someways this style of deck is still alive and well in both standard and legacy but has failed to translate into a long-standing, competitive modern deck.
I think a lot of the confusion arises from control being a fairly robust term that can cover a lot deck styles, from Abzan control in standard to Miracles in legacy. None of this stops Grixis Control from being a control deck but it does stop it from being a certain style of control deck.
Ultimately arguing over deck names and archetype semantics is a moot point, some people what to play certain styles of deck regardless of what it is called.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In play: Jund Death Shadow, Grixis Control, Eldrazi Stompy, Ponza
In the yard: RUG Delver, Kiki-Chord, Grixis Twin, Mardu Control, Smallpox, Jeskai Control, Jeskai Delver, Assault Loam, Elves, Deathcloud, Eggs, Storm
As far as I'm concerned, I don't see a huge difference in arguing between jund being a control deck and grixis control being a control deck. They're both claiming the same elements make them control decks. This doesn't stop them from being actually midrange.
In any case the point is irrelevant since when people talk about control in modern, they're using it as a shorthand term for draw go. Since that's what they're talking about missing despite it existing in other formats, it's super irrelevant when someone immediately shouts "but modern has other forms of control! Like merfolk control or amulet control!"
Which brings us to control. They try to draw out the game as well, but they do so often, not while advancing toward a win-condition directly. Instead they try to accumulate card advantage. Damnation killing 2-3 creatures, snap-kcommanding, electrolyzeing 1-2 dudes. Etc. Which is why so many people dislike grixis control and call it midrange. It relies on large delve creatures that come down early to do the heavy lifting. This is especially counter to control strategem considering delve makes it harder to get that additional value from snap and kcommand. Though i dont think it actually is just another mudrange deck, rather its some kinda hybrid.
However, there are 2 important points to be made here. A proper control deck doesn't need a single counter spell or unconditionally draw spell. Despite this, thats exactly what many people try to define a control deck by, is unconditional counters and draw. When, if anything, the quintessential control spell would be wrath of god or Damnation style effects. Even pyroclasm.
There are far more control decks in modern than people realise. But they just completely ignore them solely due to not relying on a solid blue core or being reactive over proactive. And because of this lack of interest in any control but the most superficial version thereof, all other control decks have suffered in isolation. Little attention, little testing, little experimentation. Etc.
You're right that control doesn't need to have counters to work, but historically, the best control decks have had counters. Best control decks in Modern? Grixis and UWR Control, which both had counters. Best control deck in Standard? In recent years, I'll go to Caw-Blade, which had Mana Leak among others like Spell Pierce. Legacy? Miracles and Stoneblade come to mind, which use counters like Force, Spell Pierce, and Daze, not to mention that Miracles has the whole Counter-Top package. Yes, these decks all do play sweepers, which is fine and well, but they also do play counters. They also all had/have draw spells ranging from Preordain to Brainstorm, or cards like Electrolyze and Cryptic.
For a lot of control decks, accumulating card advantage isn't always the best way to win. It's certainly strong, but card selection matters a bunch too. Look at, say, UWR Control. It usually plays Bolt, Helix, Electrolyze, Cryptic, Mana Leak, Spell Snare, Supreme Verdict, and Path. One of the issues with the deck is that not all these cards are good all the time. If you're, for instance, staring down your opponent casting a Goyf, then Bolt, Helix, and Electrolyze all turn off. Cryptic and Verdict are usually too expensive at the time, and you often don't want to Path early Goyf and give the BGx player more mana to work with. Mana Leak and Spell Snare in the early game are fantastic, but again, only if you're drawing them.
I played UWR Control for a long time, and the biggest problem was getting the right cards. With no good 1-drop draw spell, you often just passed turn 1, and couldn't really afford to draw cards early. Think Twice was often too slow, because it meant you didn't get to interact and would have to 2-for-1 them later. Electrolyze isn't always good, and you're only getting one card out of it on turn 3. Control decks usually rely on drawing enough lands to get to Cryptic on turn 4, but without enough early draw spells, it's not as reliable as you'd think. The one mana draw spell does so much work for these decks because it doesn't require a whole turn to do. You can Ponder and Bolt on turn 2, or Brainstorm and Mana Leak on turn 3, as examples. I lost a large number of games keeping two land hands and not getting enough lands. These decks actually do rely on cards like Ponder to smooth out draws. That's partially why Grixis Control plays Serum Visions. Granted, 21 lands is a big shift from 26 that UWR Control plays, but the sentiment is the same.
A lot of other control decks struggle from similar problems. I play UW Tron myself, and the biggest problem the deck has is a lack of good card selection. Serum Visions, quite frankly, isn't that good. I've played against a fair number of other control decks, like Death and Taxes or Top Control, for instance, and they all just suck for various reasons. Like I pointed out earlier, blue has historically been the best control colour, and it's not a coincidence. Turns out counters and draw spells are good for the person trying to be reactive.
Of course control has historically been blue/counter based. Historically not only did blue have damn near a monopoly on unconditional card draw, but said card draw (and most blue effects) were VERY pushed. For a long time blue was hands down the strongest color in magic. And indeed very well may still be in legacy, though i dont follow legacy close enough to say. But thats neither here nor there.
Furthermore, card selection is more necessary in more "contemporary" control as opposed to the "classic" control everyone pines for. With most modern answers being much more conditional than, say, FoW. Though it was, of course, strong in traditional control as well. The reason being is that card selection acts as virtual card advantage and in general comes at a lower cost. But its still the same principle.
Another thing to consider is that what you very well may be looking at is just a feedback loop. People only play blue/counter/reactive control. People then only consider a deck to be control when in possession of those elements. When someone goes to build a control deck they start with those superficial elements rather than the things that actually makes control work. Rinse and repeat.
A lot of older players consider pure control to be draw-go decks similar to something Randy Buehler would have played in the late 90's (in particular Draw-Go and Forbidian), in someways this style of deck is still alive and well in both standard and legacy but has failed to translate into a long-standing, competitive modern deck.
I have seen this now multiple times and I have to say something about that because it's kinda untrue.
This draw-go control that you are speaking of is generally garbage in Standard too. I have made a thread in Standard once asking about UB vs Sultai Control and the response of many people was that UB Control is bad. Even multiple Pros wrote in their articles that they wouldn't bring that deck to any serious tournament.
Go look at recent Pro Tour and look at the meta-game now. Where is this mysterious draw-go deck that does well? The only one that even shows up in these results is Esper Dragons which has as the name implies proactive elements by playing frikken Dragons so it's not even draw-go/"true" control. This deck even got a huge initial hype but it took only 1-2 weeks for the Abzan decks to adapt to put the deck into its place again.
Even in RTR-Theros Standard where UW/x was sitting at 10% that number was nothing compared to the 30% that Mono-Black Devotion had.
Innistrad-RTR Standard can be summarized with one word: Thragtusk
Those decks are playable in Standard in the same as vein as UWR Control in Modern is playable. Just don't expect your deck to dominate the meta or anything like that.
Draw Go is not as bad as people make it out to be. It does what it is supposed to do and that is beat up on the defined top decks and beat anyone trying to play an atrition game. Where the deck shows weakness is when you face an uncommon linear deck or even just a tier 2 or 3 deck you did not have room to put cards in for. It can be a bit better but nothing crazy like an insane draw spell or engine. I say a more reliable counter that is relevant all game long and a good 1 mana removal spell that is not lightning bolt. The counter will aleviate some of the problems draw go bas against big mana strategies and another good removal spell will make some of the linear matchups more manageable as well.
Will control ever be a tier 1 deck? No it will not because an anti meta deck cannot define a meta. Draw go can definitely be something to bring to big tournies and have a shot at winning if you work hard in your metagaming and deckbuilding. Does draw go need a little push? Yes it does but by little I mean little.
I dont think Control players are asking to be a huge % of the meta (hell, control will never be a huge % as a lot of ppl dont like to play it so even when it was at its peak it was still only ~10%).
Control players arent asking for it to be tier S, hell I'd be happy if it was a solid tier 1.5 deck.
But if you think that control has the tools currently in Modern to be competitive, you are just wrong. Look at the huge power creep that creatures have undertaken in the last few sets: 5/5 for 2 or 3 CMC, 4/5 for 2 CMC, 4/5+ for 2 CMC etc. While non-creature spells have been taking a huge hit.
The problem that traditional control (draw-go whatever u wanna call it) is that there is no benefit to going late. Chapin quote basically points it out: why run a control deck in Modern (or any format) when you are putting yourself at a huge disadvantage before you have even sleeved up the deck. You are trading cards like Goyf, Tasigur, Lilly, or CoCo for what?
I would love to see Counterspell reprinted or JtMS unbanned to help control; but I just do not see how control can compete against a hostile environment (both in the format and from outside by the hate it gets from both the community and WotC themselves.)
A lot of older players consider pure control to be draw-go decks similar to something Randy Buehler would have played in the late 90's (in particular Draw-Go and Forbidian), in someways this style of deck is still alive and well in both standard and legacy but has failed to translate into a long-standing, competitive modern deck.
I have seen this now multiple times and I have to say something about that because it's kinda untrue.
This draw-go control that you are speaking of is generally garbage in Standard too. I have made a thread in Standard once asking about UB vs Sultai Control and the response of many people was that UB Control is bad. Even multiple Pros wrote in their articles that they wouldn't bring that deck to any serious tournament.
Go look at recent Pro Tour and look at the meta-game now. Where is this mysterious draw-go deck that does well? The only one that even shows up in these results is Esper Dragons which has as the name implies proactive elements by playing frikken Dragons so it's not even draw-go/"true" control. This deck even got a huge initial hype but it took only 1-2 weeks for the Abzan decks to adapt to put the deck into its place again.
Even in RTR-Theros Standard where UW/x was sitting at 10% that number was nothing compared to the 30% that Mono-Black Devotion had.
Innistrad-RTR Standard can be summarized with one word: Thragtusk
Those decks are playable in Standard in the same as vein as UWR Control in Modern is playable. Just don't expect your deck to dominate the meta or anything like that.
In RTR/Theros, UWx Draw-Go was one of the top 3 decks. A few months ago in Standard, UB Draw-Go was getting many GP top 8s and got a top 4 finish at PT DTK. In contrast, WUR and Esper Control (which are the closest comparisons in Modern) are both tier 3 decks, and the last time a draw-go deck was tier 1 was over a year ago. It isn't comparable. Draw-Go regularly succeeds in Standard, and even stuff like Esper Dragons really was mostly draw-go (it played its win-con on turn 5-6 at the earliest and usually played it later). In Modern, draw-go is garbage, and if it is allowed in both Standard and Legacy, it should be allowed in Modern too.
I will openly admit that I don't play standard anymore but I don't think that is right.
Sure UB is probably bad now but it was THE control deck for both Khans and Fate before it morphed into Esper Dragons. Even then, Esper Dragons only runs ~5 dragons and they largely fill the same role as Colonnades in modern or Serra Angel in old control decks. As for UWx control in RTR-THR standard, sure it never dominated but compare it's 10% meta share to modern's WUR and Espers combined 1.4% meta share (according to Modernnexus).
But all of this is pointless anyway. Who cares if Draw-Go Control, aggro-control, combo-control or midrange-control is viable. It all boils down to standard's control tools not converting to Modern well. Sure Dissolve is great in standard when the biggest threat you have to deal with is a turn 4+ Rhino or dragon but it is terrible versus a turn 2 Goyf or a turn 3 Lili on the play. Ultimately we need a counterspell that can answer the calibre of threats we have in modern which doesn't suck ass late game (Mana Leak) or works on only some of the cards in the format (Spell Snare, Dispel), plus it would increase the hate on the fast linear decks that everyone insists on getting their knickers in a knot over. Is Counterspell the answer? I really hope so but it doesn't have to be, even something like Miscalculation would help.
At the end of the day we both play Grixis Control, are you telling me you wouldn't gnaw your own arm off to play Counterspell in that deck?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In play: Jund Death Shadow, Grixis Control, Eldrazi Stompy, Ponza
In the yard: RUG Delver, Kiki-Chord, Grixis Twin, Mardu Control, Smallpox, Jeskai Control, Jeskai Delver, Assault Loam, Elves, Deathcloud, Eggs, Storm
Is a fine example of a style of control deck that was popular during it's time. It was also quite effective and would you look at that. Not a single island. In fact I don't see any counterspells either.
At the end of the day we both play Grixis Control, are you telling me you wouldn't gnaw your own arm off to play Counterspell in that deck?
Of course I would play it.
That doesn't change that I think that Counterspell has no place in Modern design though. It's a relic from a past era of magic and belongs there.
Just like we don't get Dark Ritual anymore or Sinkhole or Wasteland or Smokestack or Stasis or Demonic Tutor or *hundreds of other cards that have no place in Modern times anymore*
Is a fine example of a style of control deck that was popular during it's time. It was also quite effective and would you look at that. Not a single island. In fact I don't see any counterspells either.
You are fighting an uphill battle, friend.
Apparently if you are not playing Islands your deck cannot be control according to some people.
The debate is mostly about draw-go blue based control such as Esper or Jeskai control and wether this is a relevant category, and if the tier 1 blue based control deck that is grixis control fits this style of play or not. I hardly see how aknowledging that monoblack control exists is relevant to this particular debate. Or we could also talk about monored control with skred decks and mono white control decks...I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion (I am starting to not see the point of this whole discussion in fact, and its place in this particular thread.)
About the counterspell in modern, I think it would not be good: I like the tension we have by chosing to play mana leak, or remand, negate in the side etc. If counterspell is legal, everybody plays counterspells, negate and mana leak see no more play and remand is only played in tempo decks.
Having played UWR control and Jund during my time in modern, I look at both decks as being controlling.
Both decks kill every creature in sight and stop the opponent from casting spells. Whether they kill a dude with Lightning Helix or Terminate is irrelevant. Whether they stop a non-creature spell with Thoughtseize or Spell Pierce is irrelevant.
What truly matters is the path they take to arrive at victory, which looks awfully similar to someone who has played both decks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
Level 2 in progress...
UUU Merfolk UUU "Above the waves you may be mighty indeed, but down here you belong to me."
-Empress Galina
UBR Cruel Control UBR "The essence of every world, every spell, and every thought is power. Nothing else matters, because nothing else exists."
-Nicol Bolas
A lot of older players consider pure control to be draw-go decks similar to something Randy Buehler would have played in the late 90's (in particular Draw-Go and Forbidian), in someways this style of deck is still alive and well in both standard and legacy but has failed to translate into a long-standing, competitive modern deck.
I have seen this now multiple times and I have to say something about that because it's kinda untrue.
This draw-go control that you are speaking of is generally garbage in Standard too. I have made a thread in Standard once asking about UB vs Sultai Control and the response of many people was that UB Control is bad. Even multiple Pros wrote in their articles that they wouldn't bring that deck to any serious tournament.
Go look at recent Pro Tour and look at the meta-game now. Where is this mysterious draw-go deck that does well? The only one that even shows up in these results is Esper Dragons which has as the name implies proactive elements by playing frikken Dragons so it's not even draw-go/"true" control. This deck even got a huge initial hype but it took only 1-2 weeks for the Abzan decks to adapt to put the deck into its place again.
Even in RTR-Theros Standard where UW/x was sitting at 10% that number was nothing compared to the 30% that Mono-Black Devotion had.
Innistrad-RTR Standard can be summarized with one word: Thragtusk
Those decks are playable in Standard in the same as vein as UWR Control in Modern is playable. Just don't expect your deck to dominate the meta or anything like that.
Eh, I actually think UWR is pretty well situated right now. Modern is very stale and predictable at the moment. You can tailor the MB to crush all the Grixis, CoCo, Zoo, Burn, fringey fair decks running around and transform your SB to be able to get games 2 and 3 against the combo decks with stuff like Clique, Meddling Mage, Runed Halo, Flashfreeze (which is insane in the format right now), Dispel, etc. I've played over 150 matches between 2-mans and 8-mans in the last week and I'm sitting at 62% win. That number would actually be a lot lower if not for newer cards like Hallowed Moonlight which are insane MB inclusions (way better than Shadow of Doubt in control shells).
I feel like Runed Halo is being underplayed again. Anyways, as to the discussion at hand - in general draw-go control ("true") in general is not super great in the format since it takes a certain type of player to do well with and takes a lot of format knowledge to do well. That means that these types of decks will never be heavily represented in large meta's. It's too skill-intensive and mentally exhausting over long tournaments for the vast majority of players, which is why I never understood why WoTC couldn't print a little better control cards like Fact or Fiction. The deck is really only missing a good early/cheap draw engine to be firmly T1. Accumulated Knowledge or Fact or Fiction would be great.
IIRC the last modern match analysis had UWR @ 56% win on Modo which is one of the higher win%'s. The meta right now is really ripe imho.
I've been smoking people with UWR control for the last month, meta is incredibly favorable right now.
They wised up though, so I gave them a spanking last night with Merfolk.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
Level 2 in progress...
UUU Merfolk UUU "Above the waves you may be mighty indeed, but down here you belong to me."
-Empress Galina
UBR Cruel Control UBR "The essence of every world, every spell, and every thought is power. Nothing else matters, because nothing else exists."
-Nicol Bolas
At the end of the day we both play Grixis Control, are you telling me you wouldn't gnaw your own arm off to play Counterspell in that deck?
Of course I would play it.
That doesn't change that I think that Counterspell has no place in Modern design though. It's a relic from a past era of magic and belongs there.
Just like we don't get Dark Ritual anymore or Sinkhole or Wasteland or Smokestack or Stasis or Demonic Tutor or *hundreds of other cards that have no place in Modern times anymore*
But the problem w that is a lot of other colours have their "counterspell" like card: Lightning Bolt, Abrupt Decay, Thoughtseize, Goyf etc while control decks have to play with subpar answers. I would agree with you that Counterspell would be too strong if the card pool for Modern was more at a Standard+ power level but right now Modern seems to be at a Legacy-lite powerlevel for particular colours and not for other colours.
At the end of the day we both play Grixis Control, are you telling me you wouldn't gnaw your own arm off to play Counterspell in that deck?
Of course I would play it.
That doesn't change that I think that Counterspell has no place in Modern design though. It's a relic from a past era of magic and belongs there.
Just like we don't get Dark Ritual anymore or Sinkhole or Wasteland or Smokestack or Stasis or Demonic Tutor or *hundreds of other cards that have no place in Modern times anymore*
But the problem w that is a lot of other colours have their "counterspell" like card: Lightning Bolt, Abrupt Decay, Thoughtseize, Goyf etc while control decks have to play with subpar answers. I would agree with you that Counterspell would be too strong if the card pool for Modern was more at a Standard+ power level but right now Modern seems to be at a Legacy-lite powerlevel for particular colours and not for other colours.
bolt, decay, seize, goyf. Those are bolts from so last year ago. If that's what your calling counterspell, then we still have 'counterspell' as always remand and cryptic.
none of the cards you mentioned hold a candle to counterspell's versatility, which is always good and basically never to be sided out if it were legal in modern. Decay is almost barely playable right now for example.
Okay, no more Counterspell reprint discussion. The "Philosophy of Control" discussion is barely on topic, so let's at least try to relate this back to the banlist.
This is the banlist thread, so let's keep it on the list, possible unbannings, and possible bannings. If people are violating this rule, don't respond: just report it and let mods look into it.
When someone wants to play a reactive deck in modern and you tell them to play an agro/control deck instead and that should be "good enough", that's kind of missing the point. Is a pure reactive control deck ever going to be viable? Probably not, barring Wizards making some kind of enabler (ie something like Fact or Fiction) but I don't really think that's ever going to happen.
For what its worth, I think the best place to be in modern is playing a "I'm going to kill you asap so try and stop me" strategy due to the open nature of the format.
Midrange uses attrition to draw out the game, while also moving toward victory. Most often this takes the form of a jund/k player abrubt decaying a blocker then swinging with goyf. The thing is, this is unsustainable against a fully functional control strategy. In the late game the control deck will have too much card advantage for attrition to be a viable strategy. Hense the name midrange, slower than aggro, but still not as late-game oriented as say ramp or control.
Which brings us to control. They try to draw out the game as well, but they do so often, not while advancing toward a win-condition directly. Instead they try to accumulate card advantage. Damnation killing 2-3 creatures, snap-kcommanding, electrolyzeing 1-2 dudes. Etc. Which is why so many people dislike grixis control and call it midrange. It relies on large delve creatures that come down early to do the heavy lifting. This is especially counter to control strategem considering delve makes it harder to get that additional value from snap and kcommand. Though i dont think it actually is just another mudrange deck, rather its some kinda hybrid.
However, there are 2 important points to be made here. A proper control deck doesn't need a single counter spell or unconditionally draw spell. Despite this, thats exactly what many people try to define a control deck by, is unconditional counters and draw. When, if anything, the quintessential control spell would be wrath of god or Damnation style effects. Even pyroclasm.
There are far more control decks in modern than people realise. But they just completely ignore them solely due to not relying on a solid blue core or being reactive over proactive. And because of this lack of interest in any control but the most superficial version thereof, all other control decks have suffered in isolation. Little attention, little testing, little experimentation. Etc.
I feel the same way. In Affinity vs. Infect, Affinity often takes the "control" role. But, Affinity should never be called "control." In the Burn vs. Affinity match, Burn takes on the "control" role, but we shouldn't really be calling Burn, "control."
Some people here will say that "true Aggro" is not around and Aggro players have to play substitutes or "true Midrange" is not around, so they're forced to play substitutes. Not even taking into account that Standard is fully Midrange, Modern has plenty of these other Archetypes. Honestly if players who haven't played for the past 10 years, Control is a dying Archetype for whatever reason. Those players are left in the cold unless they want to play Legacy Miracles or a subStandard version of Control in Standard.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)snapcaster doesn't tutor cards out of your library.
I normally try to avoid these kind of conversations but here goes. Even Patrick Chapin has said that the deck isn't a pure control deck: "I think this is not a true control deck at all, I think this is definitely a straight up aggro-control deck" (26:03, TurnOneThoughtseize ep 14). He also says that a true control deck isn't viable in modern and I am inclined to agree with him, given we have only had one true draw-go control deck in the format in McClaren's pro-tour deck.
Overall I don't think an old-style control deck will ever be viable in modern without a big change in standards current direction (or they open up a supplemental product for Modern, but that is a discussion for another time and place), in the same way I don't think we will ever have a true prison deck either. Control is probably always going to be part of a hybrid in modern because the format is so diverse and our answers are conditional and/or narrow making a fully reactive deck difficult to build, that isn't necessarily a bad thing but some players really like draw-go and want to play it without the cost of legacy or standard.
For the record Grixis control is by far my favorite deck in the format at the moment but it does play more like midrange-control then draw-go control.
Edit in bold.
In the yard: RUG Delver, Kiki-Chord, Grixis Twin, Mardu Control, Smallpox, Jeskai Control, Jeskai Delver, Assault Loam, Elves, Deathcloud, Eggs, Storm
You're right that control doesn't need to have counters to work, but historically, the best control decks have had counters. Best control decks in Modern? Grixis and UWR Control, which both had counters. Best control deck in Standard? In recent years, I'll go to Caw-Blade, which had Mana Leak among others like Spell Pierce. Legacy? Miracles and Stoneblade come to mind, which use counters like Force, Spell Pierce, and Daze, not to mention that Miracles has the whole Counter-Top package. Yes, these decks all do play sweepers, which is fine and well, but they also do play counters. They also all had/have draw spells ranging from Preordain to Brainstorm, or cards like Electrolyze and Cryptic.
For a lot of control decks, accumulating card advantage isn't always the best way to win. It's certainly strong, but card selection matters a bunch too. Look at, say, UWR Control. It usually plays Bolt, Helix, Electrolyze, Cryptic, Mana Leak, Spell Snare, Supreme Verdict, and Path. One of the issues with the deck is that not all these cards are good all the time. If you're, for instance, staring down your opponent casting a Goyf, then Bolt, Helix, and Electrolyze all turn off. Cryptic and Verdict are usually too expensive at the time, and you often don't want to Path early Goyf and give the BGx player more mana to work with. Mana Leak and Spell Snare in the early game are fantastic, but again, only if you're drawing them.
I played UWR Control for a long time, and the biggest problem was getting the right cards. With no good 1-drop draw spell, you often just passed turn 1, and couldn't really afford to draw cards early. Think Twice was often too slow, because it meant you didn't get to interact and would have to 2-for-1 them later. Electrolyze isn't always good, and you're only getting one card out of it on turn 3. Control decks usually rely on drawing enough lands to get to Cryptic on turn 4, but without enough early draw spells, it's not as reliable as you'd think. The one mana draw spell does so much work for these decks because it doesn't require a whole turn to do. You can Ponder and Bolt on turn 2, or Brainstorm and Mana Leak on turn 3, as examples. I lost a large number of games keeping two land hands and not getting enough lands. These decks actually do rely on cards like Ponder to smooth out draws. That's partially why Grixis Control plays Serum Visions. Granted, 21 lands is a big shift from 26 that UWR Control plays, but the sentiment is the same.
A lot of other control decks struggle from similar problems. I play UW Tron myself, and the biggest problem the deck has is a lack of good card selection. Serum Visions, quite frankly, isn't that good. I've played against a fair number of other control decks, like Death and Taxes or Top Control, for instance, and they all just suck for various reasons. Like I pointed out earlier, blue has historically been the best control colour, and it's not a coincidence. Turns out counters and draw spells are good for the person trying to be reactive.
Grixis Death's Shadow, Jund, UW Tron, Jeskai Control, Storm, Counters Company, Eldrazi Tron, Affinity, Living End, Infect, Merfolk, Dredge, Ad Nauseam, Amulet, Bogles, Eldrazi Tron, Mono U Tron, Lantern, Mardu Pyromancer
The name is perfectly fine, it is a control deck but not a pure control deck (small edit on my previous post to make that clearer) in the old-school sense. A lot of older players consider pure control to be draw-go decks similar to something Randy Buehler would have played in the late 90's (in particular Draw-Go and Forbidian), in someways this style of deck is still alive and well in both standard and legacy but has failed to translate into a long-standing, competitive modern deck.
I think a lot of the confusion arises from control being a fairly robust term that can cover a lot deck styles, from Abzan control in standard to Miracles in legacy. None of this stops Grixis Control from being a control deck but it does stop it from being a certain style of control deck.
Ultimately arguing over deck names and archetype semantics is a moot point, some people what to play certain styles of deck regardless of what it is called.
In the yard: RUG Delver, Kiki-Chord, Grixis Twin, Mardu Control, Smallpox, Jeskai Control, Jeskai Delver, Assault Loam, Elves, Deathcloud, Eggs, Storm
In any case the point is irrelevant since when people talk about control in modern, they're using it as a shorthand term for draw go. Since that's what they're talking about missing despite it existing in other formats, it's super irrelevant when someone immediately shouts "but modern has other forms of control! Like merfolk control or amulet control!"
Of course control has historically been blue/counter based. Historically not only did blue have damn near a monopoly on unconditional card draw, but said card draw (and most blue effects) were VERY pushed. For a long time blue was hands down the strongest color in magic. And indeed very well may still be in legacy, though i dont follow legacy close enough to say. But thats neither here nor there.
Furthermore, card selection is more necessary in more "contemporary" control as opposed to the "classic" control everyone pines for. With most modern answers being much more conditional than, say, FoW. Though it was, of course, strong in traditional control as well. The reason being is that card selection acts as virtual card advantage and in general comes at a lower cost. But its still the same principle.
Another thing to consider is that what you very well may be looking at is just a feedback loop. People only play blue/counter/reactive control. People then only consider a deck to be control when in possession of those elements. When someone goes to build a control deck they start with those superficial elements rather than the things that actually makes control work. Rinse and repeat.
I have seen this now multiple times and I have to say something about that because it's kinda untrue.
This draw-go control that you are speaking of is generally garbage in Standard too. I have made a thread in Standard once asking about UB vs Sultai Control and the response of many people was that UB Control is bad. Even multiple Pros wrote in their articles that they wouldn't bring that deck to any serious tournament.
Go look at recent Pro Tour and look at the meta-game now. Where is this mysterious draw-go deck that does well? The only one that even shows up in these results is Esper Dragons which has as the name implies proactive elements by playing frikken Dragons so it's not even draw-go/"true" control. This deck even got a huge initial hype but it took only 1-2 weeks for the Abzan decks to adapt to put the deck into its place again.
Even in RTR-Theros Standard where UW/x was sitting at 10% that number was nothing compared to the 30% that Mono-Black Devotion had.
Innistrad-RTR Standard can be summarized with one word: Thragtusk
Those decks are playable in Standard in the same as vein as UWR Control in Modern is playable. Just don't expect your deck to dominate the meta or anything like that.
Will control ever be a tier 1 deck? No it will not because an anti meta deck cannot define a meta. Draw go can definitely be something to bring to big tournies and have a shot at winning if you work hard in your metagaming and deckbuilding. Does draw go need a little push? Yes it does but by little I mean little.
Control players arent asking for it to be tier S, hell I'd be happy if it was a solid tier 1.5 deck.
But if you think that control has the tools currently in Modern to be competitive, you are just wrong. Look at the huge power creep that creatures have undertaken in the last few sets: 5/5 for 2 or 3 CMC, 4/5 for 2 CMC, 4/5+ for 2 CMC etc. While non-creature spells have been taking a huge hit.
The problem that traditional control (draw-go whatever u wanna call it) is that there is no benefit to going late. Chapin quote basically points it out: why run a control deck in Modern (or any format) when you are putting yourself at a huge disadvantage before you have even sleeved up the deck. You are trading cards like Goyf, Tasigur, Lilly, or CoCo for what?
I would love to see Counterspell reprinted or JtMS unbanned to help control; but I just do not see how control can compete against a hostile environment (both in the format and from outside by the hate it gets from both the community and WotC themselves.)
In RTR/Theros, UWx Draw-Go was one of the top 3 decks. A few months ago in Standard, UB Draw-Go was getting many GP top 8s and got a top 4 finish at PT DTK. In contrast, WUR and Esper Control (which are the closest comparisons in Modern) are both tier 3 decks, and the last time a draw-go deck was tier 1 was over a year ago. It isn't comparable. Draw-Go regularly succeeds in Standard, and even stuff like Esper Dragons really was mostly draw-go (it played its win-con on turn 5-6 at the earliest and usually played it later). In Modern, draw-go is garbage, and if it is allowed in both Standard and Legacy, it should be allowed in Modern too.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Sure UB is probably bad now but it was THE control deck for both Khans and Fate before it morphed into Esper Dragons. Even then, Esper Dragons only runs ~5 dragons and they largely fill the same role as Colonnades in modern or Serra Angel in old control decks. As for UWx control in RTR-THR standard, sure it never dominated but compare it's 10% meta share to modern's WUR and Espers combined 1.4% meta share (according to Modernnexus).
But all of this is pointless anyway. Who cares if Draw-Go Control, aggro-control, combo-control or midrange-control is viable. It all boils down to standard's control tools not converting to Modern well. Sure Dissolve is great in standard when the biggest threat you have to deal with is a turn 4+ Rhino or dragon but it is terrible versus a turn 2 Goyf or a turn 3 Lili on the play. Ultimately we need a counterspell that can answer the calibre of threats we have in modern which doesn't suck ass late game (Mana Leak) or works on only some of the cards in the format (Spell Snare, Dispel), plus it would increase the hate on the fast linear decks that everyone insists on getting their knickers in a knot over. Is Counterspell the answer? I really hope so but it doesn't have to be, even something like Miscalculation would help.
At the end of the day we both play Grixis Control, are you telling me you wouldn't gnaw your own arm off to play Counterspell in that deck?
In the yard: RUG Delver, Kiki-Chord, Grixis Twin, Mardu Control, Smallpox, Jeskai Control, Jeskai Delver, Assault Loam, Elves, Deathcloud, Eggs, Storm
3 Undead Gladiator
1 Visara the Dreadful
Spells (30)
2 Skeletal Scrying
4 Smother
1 Mind Sludge
2 Haunting Echoes
2 Innocent Blood
3 Chainer's Edict
3 Corrupt
3 Mutilate
4 Diabolic Tutor
4 Duress
1 Riptide Replicator
1 Mirari
23 Swamp
3 Cabal Coffers
3 Cabal Therapy
2 Engineered Plague
1 Mind Sludge
1 Mutilate
4 Nantuko Shade
1 Skeletal Scrying
1 Undead Gladiator
2 Visara the Dreadful
Is a fine example of a style of control deck that was popular during it's time. It was also quite effective and would you look at that. Not a single island. In fact I don't see any counterspells either.
Of course I would play it.
That doesn't change that I think that Counterspell has no place in Modern design though. It's a relic from a past era of magic and belongs there.
Just like we don't get Dark Ritual anymore or Sinkhole or Wasteland or Smokestack or Stasis or Demonic Tutor or *hundreds of other cards that have no place in Modern times anymore*
You are fighting an uphill battle, friend.
Apparently if you are not playing Islands your deck cannot be control according to some people.
About the counterspell in modern, I think it would not be good: I like the tension we have by chosing to play mana leak, or remand, negate in the side etc. If counterspell is legal, everybody plays counterspells, negate and mana leak see no more play and remand is only played in tempo decks.
Currently Playing:
Modern Grixis Shadow, Storm
Legacy: Grixis Delver, Sneak and Show
Duel Commander: Kess High Tide
Vintage Big blue(MTGO)
I'm a long time "Control" player. Control to me is all about stopping your opponent's game plan while advancing yours.
When the game revolved around spells Counterspell was king, but the game revolves around creatures now so Terminate or Abrupt Decay are today's Counterspell.
Having played UWR control and Jund during my time in modern, I look at both decks as being controlling.
Both decks kill every creature in sight and stop the opponent from casting spells. Whether they kill a dude with Lightning Helix or Terminate is irrelevant. Whether they stop a non-creature spell with Thoughtseize or Spell Pierce is irrelevant.
What truly matters is the path they take to arrive at victory, which looks awfully similar to someone who has played both decks.
Level 2 in progress...
UUU Merfolk UUU
"Above the waves you may be mighty indeed, but down here you belong to me."
-Empress Galina
UBR Cruel Control UBR
"The essence of every world, every spell, and every thought is power. Nothing else matters, because nothing else exists."
-Nicol Bolas
Eh, I actually think UWR is pretty well situated right now. Modern is very stale and predictable at the moment. You can tailor the MB to crush all the Grixis, CoCo, Zoo, Burn, fringey fair decks running around and transform your SB to be able to get games 2 and 3 against the combo decks with stuff like Clique, Meddling Mage, Runed Halo, Flashfreeze (which is insane in the format right now), Dispel, etc. I've played over 150 matches between 2-mans and 8-mans in the last week and I'm sitting at 62% win. That number would actually be a lot lower if not for newer cards like Hallowed Moonlight which are insane MB inclusions (way better than Shadow of Doubt in control shells).
I feel like Runed Halo is being underplayed again. Anyways, as to the discussion at hand - in general draw-go control ("true") in general is not super great in the format since it takes a certain type of player to do well with and takes a lot of format knowledge to do well. That means that these types of decks will never be heavily represented in large meta's. It's too skill-intensive and mentally exhausting over long tournaments for the vast majority of players, which is why I never understood why WoTC couldn't print a little better control cards like Fact or Fiction. The deck is really only missing a good early/cheap draw engine to be firmly T1. Accumulated Knowledge or Fact or Fiction would be great.
IIRC the last modern match analysis had UWR @ 56% win on Modo which is one of the higher win%'s. The meta right now is really ripe imho.
They wised up though, so I gave them a spanking last night with Merfolk.
Level 2 in progress...
UUU Merfolk UUU
"Above the waves you may be mighty indeed, but down here you belong to me."
-Empress Galina
UBR Cruel Control UBR
"The essence of every world, every spell, and every thought is power. Nothing else matters, because nothing else exists."
-Nicol Bolas
But the problem w that is a lot of other colours have their "counterspell" like card: Lightning Bolt, Abrupt Decay, Thoughtseize, Goyf etc while control decks have to play with subpar answers. I would agree with you that Counterspell would be too strong if the card pool for Modern was more at a Standard+ power level but right now Modern seems to be at a Legacy-lite powerlevel for particular colours and not for other colours.
bolt, decay, seize, goyf. Those are bolts from so last year ago. If that's what your calling counterspell, then we still have 'counterspell' as always remand and cryptic.
none of the cards you mentioned hold a candle to counterspell's versatility, which is always good and basically never to be sided out if it were legal in modern. Decay is almost barely playable right now for example.
This is the banlist thread, so let's keep it on the list, possible unbannings, and possible bannings. If people are violating this rule, don't respond: just report it and let mods look into it.
Carry on!