MTG Salvation

If you read what I said, I pointed out that it is a low impact reactive card, and that while it is EXCELLENT in the burn matchup, in most other matchups it's basically a small improvement type card. I don't object to the 1-of sideboard timely reinforcements, I myself ran it fairly recently. However, unless you want three slots devoted explicitly to burn over and above additional sideboarded leylines, I have to feel you may just want to play something different in the metagame. It's not that timely reinforcements isn't crazy good when it's good, it's that it's very, very narrow. I prefer my sideboard to have a large number of powerful answers that have broad applications rather than very narrow answers. Timely Reinforcements feels like playing legacy decks against a standard deck when you cast it and then snap it back against burn, but I'd rather those two timely reinforcements be a baneslayer and an Elspeth against, say, Jund, Value Pod, or Junk midrange.

Quote from amalek0 »

If you read what I said, I pointed out that it is a low impact reactive card, and that while it is EXCELLENT in the burn matchup, in most other matchups it's basically a small improvement type card. I don't object to the 1-of sideboard timely reinforcements, I myself ran it fairly recently. However, unless you want three slots devoted explicitly to burn over and above additional sideboarded leylines, I have to feel you may just want to play something different in the metagame. It's not that timely reinforcements isn't crazy good when it's good, it's that it's very, very narrow. I prefer my sideboard to have a large number of powerful answers that have broad applications rather than very narrow answers. Timely Reinforcements feels like playing legacy decks against a standard deck when you cast it and then snap it back against burn, but I'd rather those two timely reinforcements be a baneslayer and an Elspeth against, say, Jund, Value Pod, or Junk midrange.

i agree entirely with your philosophy, however I think you massively underestimate timley. The card is oppressive to just about anything that plays creatures pod included as it will buy you quite a lot of time baring a pontif and that's all you really need to get an oppone t to over extend into a board wipe. You will also likely make a trade or two with it as pod can't afford to take the turn off just because of some 1/1's. This goes for any non affinity creature deck timely is just plain good.

My encounter with Skred a couple pages back is in writing http://www.gatheringmagic.com/mikelinnemann-122414-change-is-good/

I used to bring in timely reinforcements against pod. You know what I discovered? The best Pod players don't give a damn about that card--they're already actively podding for and fetching flyers, or if they stick a pod they're actively pushing for the combo and forcing you to interact with their game plan. Not to mention, they almost certainly keep pontiff in because of white sun's zenith, so eh. Timely reinforcements is good against burn, no questions there. It's good against UR delver, though not quite *as* good as they can trade off pyromancer tokens, delver flies, and you chump blocking isn't that significant. Electrolyze is also a card, and if they take a page out of legacy stoneblade electrickery is also pretty good. I'm not saying it's a *bad* card against other decks, but consider timely reinforcements against hatebears, jund, junk midrange, faeries, big zoo, etc. Now, in all of those cases, imagine instead of 3x timely reinforcements you had an extra wrath, a batterskull, and a baneslayer in your SB. I know what I'd prefer in every single one of those cases except burn and *maybe* delver. That's why it's an excellent SB 1 of, it hoses one deck, is backbreaking against another, and is *relevant* against most everything else. I chose leylines to hose burn, an extra wrath for delver, and therefore my other flex slots that *also* come in against burn and delver have to carry their weight by winning games on their own elsewhere, which baneslayer and Elspeth and batterskull do.

Anyone think the new planeswalker ugin, the spirit dragon could find a home here as a 1-of finisher, probably replacing the grave titan that a lot of folks are running?

He's a powerful board wipe against almost every deck in modern, even taking out problem permanents like thrun, the last troll, kitchen finks, voice of resurgence, ect, and once he's wiped the board he'd be practically impossible to get rid of. At that point, he's a 3-damage-a-turn clock that can keep wiping the board. Granted he's 8 mana and doesn't seal the deal in 2 turns like the titan, but he should put you in a position where you don't need to win in 2 turns. Biggest weakness is probably opposing man-lands.

I like black sun's zenith + verdicts for my mass removal. Drownyard isn't good enough for modern, especially with tron running around. Dimir charm is reasonable, there's some discussion on it a few pages back, probably back during September/October of this year. Offering to Asha is bad. Hindering Light is bad. I've tested both, Hindering light is one of my pet cards. Get the 3rd and 4th colonnades. I'm not kidding, they're some of the most important cards for the deck, regardless of whether you're on the rev/dig/alchemy plan or whether you're playing mainboard discard and win cons other than WSZ. I'd dump timely reinforcements for a 4th think twice, although if you want mainboard token crap lingering souls is almost strictly better as a mainboard option.

Quote from GH0UL »

When we hit 8 mana, we probably already won.

Absolutely not always the case.

Also, I don't think you have near enough counters in your deck. You have a ton of draw and dig, but not much to actually dig for.

Quote from GH0UL »

I'd say, his biggest weakness is costing 8 mana. The nice think with Grave Titan is, that he brings 3 bodies, which can be used as blockers. A 1of maybe is okay, but I think the more competitive players won't run it. On FNMs for pure awesomeness you surely could run 1. It's not a bad card... ...its just: When we hit 8 mana, we probably allready won.

You're right that his weakness is being 8 mana. It means both he comes down later and is harder to protect with backup counter-magic. I don't think the multiple-bodies thing matters much... once you land ugin, you'll never have to block anything again. It's probably more relevant that he would take several turns to kill the opponent instead of 2-3, so they could draw an out or a combo.

To be fair, the usual win-cons (colonnade and WSZ) are all pretty mana-intensive. Colonnade often means having 9 mana (5 to activate, 4 for cryptic backup), and WSZ you want to cast for AT LEAST x=3 or 4, often also with cryptic backup, which takes 10+ mana.

I agree that the most competitive players would skip him or run grave titan instead, but feel that as you said, for pure fun and awesomeness you could get away with a 1-of Ugin at FNM (or even a larger event. I mean really... if you're pure spike, chances are you're not taking esper control to a large event anyway).

Why colonnade or wsz with cryptic backup? Just run Negate, we can deal with creatures...

Ugin isn't a serious consideration for this deck, I fear.

Quote from ashley25746 »

Quote from GH0UL »

I'd say, his biggest weakness is costing 8 mana. The nice think with Grave Titan is, that he brings 3 bodies, which can be used as blockers. A 1of maybe is okay, but I think the more competitive players won't run it. On FNMs for pure awesomeness you surely could run 1. It's not a bad card... ...its just: When we hit 8 mana, we probably allready won.

You're right that his weakness is being 8 mana. It means both he comes down later and is harder to protect with backup counter-magic. I don't think the multiple-bodies thing matters much... once you land ugin, you'll never have to block anything again. It's probably more relevant that he would take several turns to kill the opponent instead of 2-3, so they could draw an out or a combo.

To be fair, the usual win-cons (colonnade and WSZ) are all pretty mana-intensive. Colonnade often means having 9 mana (5 to activate, 4 for cryptic backup), and WSZ you want to cast for AT LEAST x=3 or 4, often also with cryptic backup, which takes 10+ mana.

I agree that the most competitive players would skip him or run grave titan instead, but feel that as you said, for pure fun and awesomeness you could get away with a 1-of Ugin at FNM (or even a larger event. I mean really... if you're pure spike, chances are you're not taking esper control to a large event anyway).

would just like to say I am a pure spike and have taken this to larger events to have a decent game against anyone I played "even beat gr from g1 with the snap beat and v clique away the pyroclasm plan with mindsencir at the first opportunity, otherwise known as become a bad agro deck. I would however say to never take this deck to a large tournament for a difrent reason, the mental fatigue from playing 8-9 rounds is insane, you will not be able to optimally play this deck for that long at a larger event and that's why I personally have moved a bit twords other decks though at a smaller tournament with a good build this deck can crush the event.

The thing about black sun's zenith isn't that it's double black--don't think of it as a cmc 3/4 wrath effect. Think of it like the second wrath effect you draw against value pod or abzan midrange--It stops persist and pretty much absolutely clears the board in those matchups. You can still snap it back if it gets discarded, but it'll be exiled instead of shuffling back. Especially if you run dig through time, BSZ is great because you can see a single copy multiple times in a game.

How did Jace perform for you? Overall the build looks like you were expecting a lot of tokens. Aside from that the part that sticks out to me the most is the lack of Esper Charm. Grats on the good finishes.

Quote from GH0UL »

Hi Josh,

I'm a bit confused about the missing Esper Charm. It is the main reason to splash black.

If you swap out the Disfigure's for Bolts (which are way better than Disfigure), the Doom Blade for a 4th Path, and drop the Alchemy's you're basically running UWr control variant.

What kind of decks were you up against?

the 25 lands is reasonable since you're running 4 cantrips (2 remand 2 shadow) which means you'll hit your land drops, the legacy rule of thumb is -1 land for every 2 cantrips and that holds in modern I've found as well. Mana leak is terrible, however you've warped your list to support it with two extra cheaper win cons to slam. I don't like the 3x think twice and 3x cryptic, that's cutting into the draw engine of the deck. I'd go -3 mana leak, bring in an extra mainboard removal spell, cut the damnation for a black sun's zenith as zenith is better if you've already committed to the black requirement (it hits persist dudes in addition to thrun), and bring in a 4th think twice and cryptic. 3 cryptics I think is fine in the dig through time builds, but in a build without dig AND only one rev, I think chaining your draws into more power is more important than ever. If you're dead set on cheap countermagic, logic knot is pretty much always better than mana leak if you fetch appropriately.

While on the topic of lands, what factors do you take into account when creating a land base for this deck? For example, how many fetch lands would you recommend if someone wanted to add lands like Glacial Fortress or Drowned Catacomb or even Sunken Ruins to dodge choke effects? Is there a rule of thumb along the lines of you should have a number of fetchable targets equal to the number of fetchlands you are running plus three or some such thing (also factoring our delve favorites Logic Knot and Dig Through Time)? Also, if one is running Damnation or Black Sun's Zenith, what is an acceptable number of black sources to support such spells?

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/frank-analysis-how-many-colored-mana-sources-do-you-need-to-consistently-cast-your-spells/
This is pretty much the definitive article on "is my manabase sufficient?". Read it soon as you finish reading this. I'm about to graduate with a math major; I don't know where you stand, or how much you understand of the methodology he uses, but in a nutshell:

The tables represent the number of colored sources you need in your deck to have that many sources of that color by a given turn. Casting cryptic command on 4 means you need 22 blue sources. As a rule of thumb, when assembling a control deck, I only consider my wraths on curve and assume everything else is going one and a half turns later, to account for tap lands and the larger number of low-cost spells like cantrips and removal. Given that, I presume that I need 12 white sources in my esper deck, with 20-21 blue sources and about ten black sources. To reliably cast BSZ, you need BB on the turn where you cast it--against delver, that may be turn three. If you have three untapped lands on three, you likely had the option to fetch for it anyway, but consider casting BB on turn four, five and six--that's 18, 16, or 15 black sources.

The reality with esper is that you can't ever fix the mana to cast everything reliably on-curve, and your best bet is to build with the idea in mind that you can continue to hit land drops (play a sufficient number of lands + cantrips) as well as ensuring that the spells you NEED to cast on curve (spell snare and path for the most part) have more than sufficient colored sources to cast them consistently on curve. Generally accepted standards are 22 blue sources, 18 white sources, and 12-14 black sources, with 25-26 lands.

RE: Fetch Lands
Fetch lands are a necessary evil in modern. I personally run six, in a 3/3 split between deltas and strands, and it's worked out well for me. I take a slight hit to the overall number of blue sources in the bargain (20 vs 21 based on the swap) but since I run logic knot as a 2 of and don't run dig through time, I don't need the delve fodder, so it's worth it to reduce the damage I take from my mana base.

In the old zendikar standards, I found in testing that if your deck was looking to end the game in the first 7-8 turns, you could run as many fetch lands as you wanted provided you had about six actual fetchable targets, and just had to be careful about what you went to find. If you were looking at a longer game, the ratio started to matter--Remember that every fetch land fixes your early mana at the cost of life, but also at the cost of reducing your odds to draw more lands later on and reducing the total quantity of lands available to you. In esper, we actively seek a late game with white sun's zenith and colonnade activations with cryptic backup. This means you want to actually have enough lands to make the late game. If you run 25 lands and 8 fetches to support your dig through times, realize that means you only have 17 actual mana sources in your deck, and later in the game you'll have on average 2-fewer lands in your deck to draw. I generally don't exceed 1 or 2 dead fetchlands in long games with 6 fetches and 11 fetchable lands, a ratio that's worked fine for me thus far in esper testing and worked well for friends on UWR control in the past.

If you want to add glacial fortress and drowned catacomb to your esper mana base, by all means do so, but if you're trying to play around choke, note that doing so will make you even softer to blood moon effects, which can be really bad for this deck. However, dodging choke effects is kind of silly--If they're playing green and don't have access to red and don't play blue themselves, assume they have access to it and play around it like a blood moon--bring in disenchant (it's never a dead card post board against anyone, ever) and hold your esper charms if possible until you have a sufficient number of basics established. Of more importance is playing around blood moon, which can be done by fetching appropriate basics and bringing in batterskull if you suspect a blood moon deck. In UWR control, I could see choke being much more restrictive and worth playing around, in which case I'd recommend something like a 6 fetch 6 shock 6 basic split with colonnades and a mix of glacial fortresses and its red/blue counterpart. BUG or Bant control have access to krosan grip, and thus if you're playing one of those shells and get caught without an answer to blood moon or choke, you deserve to lose for sideboarding like a scrub, as k-grip and abrupt decay are basically the reasons to play those color shards in a control shell.

Negate is much better than Mana Leak in this deck

I agree with cbgirardo on this one, leak is just terrible for this deck, run negates and more removal/board wipes. If your problem is with pod decks, you could consider shadow of doubt, essence scatter, or even due respect as early game interaction--I've not found many uses for due respect in general, but it can be a horrifically strong time walk in the first couple turns of the game, and later on it just cycles.

3/0 at modern weekly today, exact same 75, no changes. Played Scapeshift twice and then blue tron. Blue tron was easy, he kept a greedy 1 lander with the nuts otherwise game one and didn't see a 2nd land until I had five lands down. Clique beats got there. Game Two I played turn two stony silence, turn five baneslayer, dispel + cryptic + remand backup after the untap.

Scapeshift matches were pretty silly, first game both rounds had the mainboard leyline either in the opener or in the first few draws, and was able to resolve and protect it from opposing cryptics both times. The second game of the first round, my opponent made a really, really dumb error and tried to scapeshift with a tec edge on my side of the board and I was able to tec edge a mountain to take no damage (he tried to go off with 7 lands, me at 18). The second round, he got a quick game two on the back of a surrak dragonclaw and an inferno titan, and I resideboarded back up to 4 paths instead of the 2 I had postboard and cut down on esper charms, good call as he ended up bringing in four baloths in addition to surrak and some titans.

You take 3 damage in the Tec Edge scenario.