Does the deck even do anything if whir gets thoughtseized or it doesn't have one in the opening hand? Lantern runs a lot of ways to find the pieces it needs and even it still spins it's wheels sometimes, it's surprising to think that a deck with maindeck pithing needles and tormods crypts but only 5 artifact tutors really functions at all.
I really like how the deck plays chalice so that it probably has a much better mathcup vs super aggro decks like burn and probably easier time vs Storm compared to Lantern
Anyone else get a look at Thran Temporal Gate in the Dominaria spoilers? Seems like something that could be busted in Modern, hell of a lot of legendary stuff to cheat out. Not sure if it's actually going to see play, but the Johnny in me really wants to try it out.
Anyone else get a look at Thran Temporal Gate in the Dominaria spoilers? Seems like something that could be busted in Modern, hell of a lot of legendary stuff to cheat out. Not sure if it's actually going to see play, but the Johnny in me really wants to try it out.
Probably won’t see play.
There are already better ways to cheat game-winning permanents into play that don’t require an 8 mana investment. Maybe you can use this to flash in a walker… by why not just Through the Breach Emrakul into play and basically just win on the spot instead? Or just play Tron and hard cast Karns and Ugins for 8 mana?
GP Hartford is Modern, just a heads up for this weekend.
I predict, much Humans, and Hollow One.
I'm also gonna be a gambler and suggest that a glass cannon deck makes top 8 that surprises anyone, specifically affinity or dredge. I think those two decks you listed, jund and tron have the bulls eyes on them, which will lead to less gy or artifact hate (one or the other), and somebody will go on a run with one of those two lists.
It's crazy to think that staples like burn and affinity have been supplanted by archetypes that are less than a year old. It's cool, though, especially because these decks that have very narrow hate cards will benefit from having less attention on them. Lifegain is only particularly good against burn, so as it ticks a bit lower in favor of humans there will be more room to work with. Granted, that exact logic is what makes bogles good - it's strategy blanks out so much stuff to begin with that it can afford to run more narrow hate to handle the gaps.
GP Hartford is Modern, just a heads up for this weekend.
I predict, much Humans, and Hollow One.
I would also predict a general under-representation of control. The more streams I watch lately, and the more 5-0 results that come in, the more I think control's positioned is becoming slightly worse in the meta (not that it was ever great). We've seen a lot of Blue-Moon doing well in past events, and it might be the case that it is the best UR-no-x deck right now. UW also seems very strong, but both of them rely heavily on the mana denial plan. Both of them can also be soft to humans with the wrong draw ( I would say it is 45-55 or 50-50 at best)and very soft vs Hollow One, which is probably gonna be the best deck of the event.
In this environment, 3-color control decks I believe will struggle extremely, especially durdly draw-go style decks. 3-color control with alternative game-plans like including more threats might do something, but I don't expect much. I honestly hope to be proved wrong (as you can tell from my signature), but right now, I am not very hopeful.
I also hope some will finally decide to pilot faeries at a GP (and I know there will be at least 2-3 Fae players), top16/8 because the deck is crazy strong atm and criminally underplayed I believe. It is probably among the best 3 Jace decks.
GP Hartford is Modern, just a heads up for this weekend.
I predict, much Humans, and Hollow One.
Agreed. And Bogles.
I've also put down my much loved Burn deck for now. Everything out there right now is so hostile to it that you need to be incredibly lucking in your matchups.
As someone who has been pissing people off locally with a Faerie deck for the past few months, it would be nice to see it do well. Running U/B has its problems, but it's surprisingly resilient against a lot of stuff.
Every GP and major event, we see people predicting that various linear decks will overperform and that control will suck. In most cases, they are wrong and we see control do just fine with extensive midrange/combo/aggro/big mana/etc. diversity alongside. When that happens, we always hear the same justifications: "event wasn't representative," "control secretly still sucks'" "wait until next big event," etc. Then in those few cases where linear decks are clearly better, we see similar and related claims: "told you so," "this the true metagame," "ban _____"' etc. We've seen this for years.
It turns out if you predict every Modern event will be dominated by linear decks, you'll be right at least a few times and most people (yourself included) will forget/ignore the majority of missed predictions. This doesn't make the linear predictions good ones, nor does it say anything about Modern. It just means you're betting on snake-eyes every round and you'll eventually be right.
My prediction is that Hartford will have the same diversity we've seen at basically every event in 2018 and most of the 2017 events. People will be able to reframe that diversity to prove whatever point they are trying to make. For example, if a blue deck doesn't T8, "blue is bad." If it T8s but loses to a linear deck, it will "expose blue's Modern weaknesses" (i.e. "blue is bad"). If it wins, people will look to conversion rates and find them lacking, rationalizing the win as "running hot" (i.e. "blue is bad"). And if blue is categorically dominant all GP, people will say "it's an outlying event and blue is, you guessed it, secretly still bad". As with the other arguments, we've seen these ones for years too.
GP Hartford is Modern, just a heads up for this weekend.
I predict, much Humans, and Hollow One.
Agreed. And Bogles.
I've also put down my much loved Burn deck for now. Everything out there right now is so hostile to it that you need to be incredibly lucking in your matchups.
I mean that sorta is the case with every single deck right? Nothing is 50/50 against the entire field, and most of the top eight or ten decks have at least one bad matchup among the others. It prevents any one deck from dominating again and again.
And if blue is categorically dominant all GP, people will say "it's an outlying event and blue is, you guessed it, secretly still bad".
When has that ever happened in Modern? Or at least the past two and a half years? Genuinely curious, because I don't remember ever seeing this, pre or post-Twin ban.
I just posted the stats on Twitter for the deck I'm playing. 138 matches in the last 9 days. Of those 138, 9 were against control. Do the numbers. Do you think the reason no one plays control is that they are mistaken thinking it sucks.
People don't play what gives them the best chance to win. They love throwing away money in event registration, hotels, and related costs. /sarcasm
I wouldn't even try to convince anyone here otherwise. People are convinced to death that players don't care about choosing the best deck to help them win, despite numerous articles, like ones by PVVDR, that have proven otherwise. I believe you though. Yes, players play what they believe gives them the best chance to win money and "superstardom." No one, outside of Jeff Hoogland and other memers, will purposely choose a *****ty deck.
Think about it. Why would I choose Jacekai Control and sport a 50% win percentage with my play skill when I can sport a 60% win percentage with Hollow One? There's no special cookie for "looking good while you're playing," outside of maybe a local scene where you can outplay opponents to win with a ham sandwich. (I'm saying this right now because I'm eating a caramel apple cookie, lol)
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)
Control doesn't suck secretly. Control sucks very publicly.
I just posted the stats on Twitter for the deck I'm playing. 138 matches in the last 9 days. Of those 138, 9 were against control. Do the numbers. Do you think the reason no one plays control is that they are mistaken thinking it sucks.
No one in their right mind plays control right now. Yes, in a paper tournament you'll have the usual bunch composed of guys like Corey "I LITERALLY don't know how to play anything else" Burkhart and the 3 guys at SCG that figure Jeskai is as good as anything given the level of the competition there, where half the field is on meme decks. But in the actual places where people are seriously grinding everyday and finding cards is not a concern, no one plays control.
yeah those stats dont amount to control sucking. we were just talking about how the mtgo can be inbred and ktkenshinx gave a pretty good breakdown of most of the reasons; which i also believe includes a good share of groupthink.
humans and hollow one have to be good because we all agree, therefore ill play humans or hollow one. humans and hollow one win more. its self fulfilling. its the reason wizards stopped reporting comprehensive data; people flock towards what looks hot on mtgo because its easier to do, especially when the deck can blow through matches quickly.
humans, hollow one, storm, and tron may be among the best decks but even if that is the case it isnt to any significant degree. if it were otherwise it would show in paper tournaments. competitive players who want to win play good decks because good decks win more. it isnt rocket surgery.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
GP Hartford is Modern, just a heads up for this weekend.
I predict, much Humans, and Hollow One.
Agreed. And Bogles.
I've also put down my much loved Burn deck for now. Everything out there right now is so hostile to it that you need to be incredibly lucking in your matchups.
I mean that sorta is the case with every single deck right? Nothing is 50/50 against the entire field, and most of the top eight or ten decks have at least one bad matchup among the others. It prevents any one deck from dominating again and again.
Not to the same extent. I don't know if you've looked at the stats Logan Nettle's put together, but with a high level of play Burn is running 25% against the field of the most popular decks. It has a awful matchup against everything in vogue right now. And I'm not saying that's bad. Deck position comes and goes. My only point is that it's time to play something else for the next little bit.
Every GP and major event, we see people predicting that various linear decks will overperform and that control will suck. In most cases, they are wrong and we see control do just fine with extensive midrange/combo/aggro/big mana/etc. diversity alongside. When that happens, we always hear the same justifications: "event wasn't representative," "control secretly still sucks'" "wait until next big event," etc. Then in those few cases where linear decks are clearly better, we see similar and related claims: "told you so," "this the true metagame," "ban _____"' etc. We've seen this for years.
It turns out if you predict every Modern event will be dominated by linear decks, you'll be right at least a few times and most people (yourself included) will forget/ignore the majority of missed predictions. This doesn't make the linear predictions good ones, nor does it say anything about Modern. It just means you're betting on snake-eyes every round and you'll eventually be right.
My prediction is that Hartford will have the same diversity we've seen at basically every event in 2018 and most of the 2017 events. People will be able to reframe that diversity to prove whatever point they are trying to make. For example, if a blue deck doesn't T8, "blue is bad." If it T8s but loses to a linear deck, it will "expose blue's Modern weaknesses" (i.e. "blue is bad"). If it wins, people will look to conversion rates and find them lacking, rationalizing the win as "running hot" (i.e. "blue is bad"). And if blue is categorically dominant all GP, people will say "it's an outlying event and blue is, you guessed it, secretly still bad". As with the other arguments, we've seen these ones for years too.
Usually I agree with what you say but you're fighting hyperbole with hyperbole here.
If the conversion rates of deck styles or colours or builts are lower over many tournaments then those colours/deck styles/builds are 'bad'. (I hate saying bad, sub optimal choice to win a tournament)
It doesn't mean those decks don't top 8/16/32/x-2 an event it just means they're more difficult to top whatever with.
Either way C'mon Faeries and sure the to decks will be diverse.
I just posted the stats on Twitter for the deck I'm playing. 138 matches in the last 9 days. Of those 138, 9 were against control. Do the numbers. Do you think the reason no one plays control is that they are mistaken thinking it sucks.
People don't play what gives them the best chance to win. They love throwing away money in event registration, hotels, and related costs. /sarcasm
I wouldn't even try to convince anyone here otherwise. People are convinced to death that players don't care about choosing the best deck to help them win, despite numerous articles, like ones by PVVDR, that have proven otherwise. I believe you though. Yes, players play what they believe gives them the best chance to win money and "superstardom." No one, outside of Jeff Hoogland and other memers, will purposely choose a *****ty deck.
Think about it. Why would I choose Jacekai Control and sport a 50% win percentage with my play skill when I can sport a 60% win percentage with Hollow One? There's no special cookie for "looking good while you're playing," outside of maybe a local scene where you can outplay opponents to win with a ham sandwich. (I'm saying this right now because I'm eating a caramel apple cookie, lol)
Actually if you played and showed personality and charisma on stream, you'd be miles ahead of the entire pro scene and could probably cultivate your own following. The average MtG pro has the drawing power of a goldfish flopping on a table and a personality to match.
So what if blue control is bad? The format is still good.
i dont think that is the issue. its whether or not you believe you can play decks outside of the chosen few if you truly want to win long term.
if the reality is that people are handicapping themselves significantly and paper tournament results are driven by luck, then the diversity we see is a sham. is the format still good if this is true?
its clear there are people in both camps.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
I just posted the stats on Twitter for the deck I'm playing. 138 matches in the last 9 days. Of those 138, 9 were against control. Do the numbers. Do you think the reason no one plays control is that they are mistaken thinking it sucks.
People don't play what gives them the best chance to win. They love throwing away money in event registration, hotels, and related costs. /sarcasm
I wouldn't even try to convince anyone here otherwise. People are convinced to death that players don't care about choosing the best deck to help them win, despite numerous articles, like ones by PVVDR, that have proven otherwise. I believe you though. Yes, players play what they believe gives them the best chance to win money and "superstardom." No one, outside of Jeff Hoogland and other memers, will purposely choose a *****ty deck.
Think about it. Why would I choose Jacekai Control and sport a 50% win percentage with my play skill when I can sport a 60% win percentage with Hollow One? There's no special cookie for "looking good while you're playing," outside of maybe a local scene where you can outplay opponents to win with a ham sandwich. (I'm saying this right now because I'm eating a caramel apple cookie, lol)
I can tell you that, unless something radical changes between now and June, I will be taking Blue Moon to GP Vegas. However, I have absolutely no intentions of playing in the main event, and will enjoy multiple side events all week long. I have no delusions that I am giving myself the best opportunity to be successful by playing this deck. I am playing this deck because I enjoy playing it.
So what if blue control is bad? The format is still good.
Because there are some stubborn old players who need to remind people that one of the primary reasons Twin was banned was in order to promote and make blue control decks better (Remember, these decks were bad because Twin was supplanting them, not because they were just bad! ). And that they floundered between irrelevance and bottom-of-tier-2 almost indefinitely afterwards. And that Spell Queller and Search for Azcanta did more to help the colors and archetype than banning Twin or anyotherunban ever did.
I can tell you that, unless something radical changes between now and June, I will be taking Blue Moon to GP Vegas. However, I have absolutely no intentions of playing in the main event, and will enjoy multiple side events all week long. I have no delusions that I am giving myself the best opportunity to be successful by playing this deck. I am playing this deck because I enjoy playing it.
I think you can do solidly with UR Breach in the Main Event. I would strongly consider doing that. For myself if I played UR Breach, my goal would be 11-4, but yours could certainly be different. For the last Modern Las Vegas GP, my goal was top 8 and I failed at 11-4 with Titanshift. Modern has a way of making some players miss their goals, yet many surpass their goals by a lot!
I played side events in Santa Clara. I played two 3 Round Modern events for 3 days, so 18 rounds total. While the matches themselves were fun, the experience was not. I waited until the last event ended on Sunday around 5 pm, I think. The Prize Tix Wall was nearly devoid of anything worth getting, so for all the tix I got, I ended up getting mostly crap. Why did I wait so long? Because if I 6-0ed Sunday, I would technically have enough Prize Tix to buy a Volcanic Island. Little did I know, even if I had 6-0ed Sunday, those were long gone. So, think about it and ask more people about side events. I will personally try to refrain from doing that ever again. Probably if I cut off at Saturday, I should be good.
I felt better about side events in the past. They were 1 tournament per day, a large one, that went around 5 rounds or so. If I went 4-1 or 4-0-1, it was a solid amount of prize tix. I once IDd at 3-1, so 3-1-1, and it wasn't too bad either. For the 3 rounders, you really just need to keep 3-0ing, which I personally feel is tougher.
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)
To be clear, I am not saying that control is secretly good or the best deck. I think many people have interpeted my arguments to mean that I actually believe control is the secret best deck. Not so! I merely think it's one of two-dozen plus totally viable options. Modern may have 2-3 secret best decks, which is fine to acknowledge. But that should not be extended to mean that blue decks are automatically *****, UNLESS you also believe that every single other deck in that "totally viable" category is also *****. If you do believe that, that's fine, but don't single out blue within that "totally viable" category as uniquely *****ty. It's just as viable as all the other decks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Here's what looks like a million match set with hoogland
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaa1_YGSBag
At 51:30 or so we see the tech that lets them win through bridge -- cloister + tezzeret.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
Probably won’t see play.
There are already better ways to cheat game-winning permanents into play that don’t require an 8 mana investment. Maybe you can use this to flash in a walker… by why not just Through the Breach Emrakul into play and basically just win on the spot instead? Or just play Tron and hard cast Karns and Ugins for 8 mana?
I predict, much Humans, and Hollow One.
Spirits
I'm also gonna be a gambler and suggest that a glass cannon deck makes top 8 that surprises anyone, specifically affinity or dredge. I think those two decks you listed, jund and tron have the bulls eyes on them, which will lead to less gy or artifact hate (one or the other), and somebody will go on a run with one of those two lists.
It's crazy to think that staples like burn and affinity have been supplanted by archetypes that are less than a year old. It's cool, though, especially because these decks that have very narrow hate cards will benefit from having less attention on them. Lifegain is only particularly good against burn, so as it ticks a bit lower in favor of humans there will be more room to work with. Granted, that exact logic is what makes bogles good - it's strategy blanks out so much stuff to begin with that it can afford to run more narrow hate to handle the gaps.
In this environment, 3-color control decks I believe will struggle extremely, especially durdly draw-go style decks. 3-color control with alternative game-plans like including more threats might do something, but I don't expect much. I honestly hope to be proved wrong (as you can tell from my signature), but right now, I am not very hopeful.
I also hope some will finally decide to pilot faeries at a GP (and I know there will be at least 2-3 Fae players), top16/8 because the deck is crazy strong atm and criminally underplayed I believe. It is probably among the best 3 Jace decks.
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
Spirits
Agreed. And Bogles.
I've also put down my much loved Burn deck for now. Everything out there right now is so hostile to it that you need to be incredibly lucking in your matchups.
Modern: Storm
Legacy: ANT
It turns out if you predict every Modern event will be dominated by linear decks, you'll be right at least a few times and most people (yourself included) will forget/ignore the majority of missed predictions. This doesn't make the linear predictions good ones, nor does it say anything about Modern. It just means you're betting on snake-eyes every round and you'll eventually be right.
My prediction is that Hartford will have the same diversity we've seen at basically every event in 2018 and most of the 2017 events. People will be able to reframe that diversity to prove whatever point they are trying to make. For example, if a blue deck doesn't T8, "blue is bad." If it T8s but loses to a linear deck, it will "expose blue's Modern weaknesses" (i.e. "blue is bad"). If it wins, people will look to conversion rates and find them lacking, rationalizing the win as "running hot" (i.e. "blue is bad"). And if blue is categorically dominant all GP, people will say "it's an outlying event and blue is, you guessed it, secretly still bad". As with the other arguments, we've seen these ones for years too.
I mean that sorta is the case with every single deck right? Nothing is 50/50 against the entire field, and most of the top eight or ten decks have at least one bad matchup among the others. It prevents any one deck from dominating again and again.
When has that ever happened in Modern? Or at least the past two and a half years? Genuinely curious, because I don't remember ever seeing this, pre or post-Twin ban.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
So what if blue control is bad? The format is still good.
People don't play what gives them the best chance to win. They love throwing away money in event registration, hotels, and related costs. /sarcasm
I wouldn't even try to convince anyone here otherwise. People are convinced to death that players don't care about choosing the best deck to help them win, despite numerous articles, like ones by PVVDR, that have proven otherwise. I believe you though. Yes, players play what they believe gives them the best chance to win money and "superstardom." No one, outside of Jeff Hoogland and other memers, will purposely choose a *****ty deck.
Think about it. Why would I choose Jacekai Control and sport a 50% win percentage with my play skill when I can sport a 60% win percentage with Hollow One? There's no special cookie for "looking good while you're playing," outside of maybe a local scene where you can outplay opponents to win with a ham sandwich. (I'm saying this right now because I'm eating a caramel apple cookie, lol)
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)yeah those stats dont amount to control sucking. we were just talking about how the mtgo can be inbred and ktkenshinx gave a pretty good breakdown of most of the reasons; which i also believe includes a good share of groupthink.
humans and hollow one have to be good because we all agree, therefore ill play humans or hollow one. humans and hollow one win more. its self fulfilling. its the reason wizards stopped reporting comprehensive data; people flock towards what looks hot on mtgo because its easier to do, especially when the deck can blow through matches quickly.
humans, hollow one, storm, and tron may be among the best decks but even if that is the case it isnt to any significant degree. if it were otherwise it would show in paper tournaments. competitive players who want to win play good decks because good decks win more. it isnt rocket surgery.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Not to the same extent. I don't know if you've looked at the stats Logan Nettle's put together, but with a high level of play Burn is running 25% against the field of the most popular decks. It has a awful matchup against everything in vogue right now. And I'm not saying that's bad. Deck position comes and goes. My only point is that it's time to play something else for the next little bit.
Modern: Storm
Legacy: ANT
Usually I agree with what you say but you're fighting hyperbole with hyperbole here.
If the conversion rates of deck styles or colours or builts are lower over many tournaments then those colours/deck styles/builds are 'bad'. (I hate saying bad, sub optimal choice to win a tournament)
It doesn't mean those decks don't top 8/16/32/x-2 an event it just means they're more difficult to top whatever with.
Either way C'mon Faeries and sure the to decks will be diverse.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
Actually if you played and showed personality and charisma on stream, you'd be miles ahead of the entire pro scene and could probably cultivate your own following. The average MtG pro has the drawing power of a goldfish flopping on a table and a personality to match.
i dont think that is the issue. its whether or not you believe you can play decks outside of the chosen few if you truly want to win long term.
if the reality is that people are handicapping themselves significantly and paper tournament results are driven by luck, then the diversity we see is a sham. is the format still good if this is true?
its clear there are people in both camps.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)I can tell you that, unless something radical changes between now and June, I will be taking Blue Moon to GP Vegas. However, I have absolutely no intentions of playing in the main event, and will enjoy multiple side events all week long. I have no delusions that I am giving myself the best opportunity to be successful by playing this deck. I am playing this deck because I enjoy playing it.
Because there are some stubborn old players who need to remind people that one of the primary reasons Twin was banned was in order to promote and make blue control decks better (Remember, these decks were bad because Twin was supplanting them, not because they were just bad! ). And that they floundered between irrelevance and bottom-of-tier-2 almost indefinitely afterwards. And that Spell Queller and Search for Azcanta did more to help the colors and archetype than banning Twin or any other unban ever did.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I think you can do solidly with UR Breach in the Main Event. I would strongly consider doing that. For myself if I played UR Breach, my goal would be 11-4, but yours could certainly be different. For the last Modern Las Vegas GP, my goal was top 8 and I failed at 11-4 with Titanshift. Modern has a way of making some players miss their goals, yet many surpass their goals by a lot!
I played side events in Santa Clara. I played two 3 Round Modern events for 3 days, so 18 rounds total. While the matches themselves were fun, the experience was not. I waited until the last event ended on Sunday around 5 pm, I think. The Prize Tix Wall was nearly devoid of anything worth getting, so for all the tix I got, I ended up getting mostly crap. Why did I wait so long? Because if I 6-0ed Sunday, I would technically have enough Prize Tix to buy a Volcanic Island. Little did I know, even if I had 6-0ed Sunday, those were long gone. So, think about it and ask more people about side events. I will personally try to refrain from doing that ever again. Probably if I cut off at Saturday, I should be good.
I felt better about side events in the past. They were 1 tournament per day, a large one, that went around 5 rounds or so. If I went 4-1 or 4-0-1, it was a solid amount of prize tix. I once IDd at 3-1, so 3-1-1, and it wasn't too bad either. For the 3 rounders, you really just need to keep 3-0ing, which I personally feel is tougher.
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)