Seems like a subpar plan to me. The dangerous decks are the ones that won't give you a fourth turn to go dig out eight more mana. All of Tron's favorite cards stop these decks in their tracks the turn you play them without needing a second turn to activate them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
These days, some wizards are finding they have a little too much deck left at the end of their $$$.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
I'm playing with the idea of Planar Bridge too. But I also have a Mindslaver lock back up plan in my RG build, so the idea of getting a Bridge in there isn't much of a stretch for me.
It's not something you're going to jam turn 3 every time, but the games I lose in Tron, are the games where I draw all my mana, and none of my threats. This is a threat recurring engine, very similar to the way Eye of Ugin was.
I don't think I'd play more than 1, as multiples seem bad, but I like the idea of Instant speed any permanent.
Seems like a subpar plan to me. The dangerous decks are the ones that won't give you a fourth turn to go dig out eight more mana. All of Tron's favorite cards stop these decks in their tracks the turn you play them without needing a second turn to activate them.
I recognise and agree with the sentiment that luckily drawing your ideal bomb for the correct moment is always going to be better than a tutor like bridge. Yes. However tron used to be a toolbox deck. Eye of ugin allowed you to fetch the pieces you needed for the right matchups and moments. It really enabled the deck to be versatile; something that the deck is lacking right now.
Imagine the scenario: you get turn 3 tron and drop a karn. Lovely. From that point, desperate to close out the game, you're at the mercy of the top of your deck. At this point would you rather play a bridge or a random threat? Bridge gets you anything you need, roll the dice with an ancient stirrings or a chromatic star and you could get nothing, or something you didn't really need and probably not even be able to cast it that turn.
Yes, you have to topdeck the bridge in the first place, but that's part of it. It's a consistency tool. Having 2 (I reckon 2 or 3 might be the best numbers) means that on average, you get the correct bomb for the moment an extra X% of the time. You still have the quick and dirty turn 3 plays off tron (including bridge, if your opponent isn't pressuring you), but now you have an added boost in the form of a get-you-anything tool, some of the time. On paper that's better than just having pure "you get what you get" threats. In practice we'll see from rigorous testing, but at this early stage it looks decent. It's like a colourless, repeatable green sun's zenith except it also gets lands, artifacts, enchantments and planeswalkers. That's pretty good.
In the fullness of time it may fall off the radar, but at the moment I have felt like the deck's biggest problem since the eye ban is the ability to just fetch the right tool for the job. Bridge is easier to destroy or interact with than eye, but is much, much better than eye ever was if it sticks. The ability to get lands, planeswalkers, sweepers or creatures is a scary prospect for an opponent.
Seems like a subpar plan to me. The dangerous decks are the ones that won't give you a fourth turn to go dig out eight more mana. All of Tron's favorite cards stop these decks in their tracks the turn you play them without needing a second turn to activate them.
I recognise and agree with the sentiment that luckily drawing your ideal bomb for the correct moment is always going to be better than a tutor like bridge. Yes. However tron used to be a toolbox deck. Eye of ugin allowed you to fetch the pieces you needed for the right matchups and moments. It really enabled the deck to be versatile; something that the deck is lacking right now.
Imagine the scenario: you get turn 3 tron and drop a karn. Lovely. From that point, desperate to close out the game, you're at the mercy of the top of your deck. At this point would you rather play a bridge or a random threat? Bridge gets you anything you need, roll the dice with an ancient stirrings or a chromatic star and you could get nothing, or something you didn't really need and probably not even be able to cast it that turn.
Yes, you have to topdeck the bridge in the first place, but that's part of it. It's a consistency tool. Having 2 (I reckon 2 or 3 might be the best numbers) means that on average, you get the correct bomb for the moment an extra X% of the time. You still have the quick and dirty turn 3 plays off tron (including bridge, if your opponent isn't pressuring you), but now you have an added boost in the form of a get-you-anything tool, some of the time. On paper that's better than just having pure "you get what you get" threats. In practice we'll see from rigorous testing, but at this early stage it looks decent. It's like a colourless, repeatable green sun's zenith except it also gets lands, artifacts, enchantments and planeswalkers. That's pretty good.
In the fullness of time it may fall off the radar, but at the moment I have felt like the deck's biggest problem since the eye ban is the ability to just fetch the right tool for the job. Bridge is easier to destroy or interact with than eye, but is much, much better than eye ever was if it sticks. The ability to get lands, planeswalkers, sweepers or creatures is a scary prospect for an opponent.
In a format where the game can end around the fourth turn, do you really think tron can afford to play a card that doesn't have any effect on the board?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
pucatrade
big receipts
alpha mox emerald
beta time walk
4 goyfs received
3 liliana of the veil
4 karn liberated
3 force of will
4 grove of the burnwillows
snapcaster mage
3 horizon canopy
2 full art damnation
Seems like a subpar plan to me. The dangerous decks are the ones that won't give you a fourth turn to go dig out eight more mana. All of Tron's favorite cards stop these decks in their tracks the turn you play them without needing a second turn to activate them.
I recognise and agree with the sentiment that luckily drawing your ideal bomb for the correct moment is always going to be better than a tutor like bridge. Yes. However tron used to be a toolbox deck. Eye of ugin allowed you to fetch the pieces you needed for the right matchups and moments. It really enabled the deck to be versatile; something that the deck is lacking right now.
Imagine the scenario: you get turn 3 tron and drop a karn. Lovely. From that point, desperate to close out the game, you're at the mercy of the top of your deck. At this point would you rather play a bridge or a random threat? Bridge gets you anything you need, roll the dice with an ancient stirrings or a chromatic star and you could get nothing, or something you didn't really need and probably not even be able to cast it that turn.
Yes, you have to topdeck the bridge in the first place, but that's part of it. It's a consistency tool. Having 2 (I reckon 2 or 3 might be the best numbers) means that on average, you get the correct bomb for the moment an extra X% of the time. You still have the quick and dirty turn 3 plays off tron (including bridge, if your opponent isn't pressuring you), but now you have an added boost in the form of a get-you-anything tool, some of the time. On paper that's better than just having pure "you get what you get" threats. In practice we'll see from rigorous testing, but at this early stage it looks decent. It's like a colourless, repeatable green sun's zenith except it also gets lands, artifacts, enchantments and planeswalkers. That's pretty good.
In the fullness of time it may fall off the radar, but at the moment I have felt like the deck's biggest problem since the eye ban is the ability to just fetch the right tool for the job. Bridge is easier to destroy or interact with than eye, but is much, much better than eye ever was if it sticks. The ability to get lands, planeswalkers, sweepers or creatures is a scary prospect for an opponent.
In a format where the game can end around the fourth turn, do you really think tron can afford to play a card that doesn't have any effect on the board?
Absolutely. We already play cards that cost 10 or more. Your reply seems to be simplifying how the deck works for the sake of your argument.
If you are running a set of pyroclasms, and o-stones, and karns, what harm is there in adding a couple of bridges? In those games where you stabilise, bridge becomes every single useful card in your deck, at a rate of one per turn.
Bridge fixes more problems than it causes, I'm fairly certain. Now as I've said, it needs rigorous testing. Shutting the idea down before testing is a non-starter. We don't stand to gain anything as Tron players if people just shut ideas down completely. I can see some merit for the card. You don't personally have to test it, but i think as a community we have an obligation to see if it works.
There's one excellent way to solve this debate – try it out, and see how it works!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CRUGGCCCCCCCGBGBGBCCCCCCCBBUWC MODERN – LANTERN(aka Fateseal or Barbershop) Primer–Subreddit–Facebook–Decklist–Gameplay Thnkr's Content:Gameplay–Datasheet Each eye sees a different possibility for tomorrow. CWUBBCCCCCCCBGBGBGCCCCCCCGGURC
In a format where the game can end around the fourth turn, do you really think tron can afford to play a card that doesn't have any effect on the board?
Absolutely. We already play cards that cost 10 or more. Your reply seems to be simplifying how the deck works for the sake of your argument.
But how many of those 10+ mana cards don't have any effect on the board? The Ulamogs and Emrakuls have an effect. The Kozileks not so much, but then again they don't see as much play (and the latter at least, if not affecting the board state, can help lock out the opponent).
I feel you're missing their point; it wasn't about expensive cards, but about expensive cards that don't affect the board state. Look at all of our expensive cards that get played; all of them affect the board state. Our expensive stuff are sweepers (Ugin, Oblivion Stone), removal (Karn, Ulamog, World Breaker, the Emrakuls), or creatures that make it harder for the opponent to mount an offense (Wurmcoil Engine). These all have an immediate effect on the board state.
I'm not necessarily in agreement with their argument... but you're really not responding to their point. Us playing expensive spells is besides the point if those expensive spells immediately affect the board state.
While it is certainly true that bridge does nothing on the board for 6 mana i feel it can be an allstar in grindy MUs.
I have played Tron for about 2 or 2 1/2 years now. With Eye of Ugin, Control and Jund were easy to beat due to the recurring of threats over and over and over. Since Eye is gone i have lost several matches against Control (mainly Jeskai and Grixis) and Jund because they deal with everything we have. Most games i lost against them were due to flooding out or not drawing that one Ugin that would swing around the game.
I feel bridge gives us some kind of certainty against these decks again. We just know that eventually we will get to drop it and once it's down it is hard to deal with. Sure, Grixis Control has Kolaghan's Command and Jund has Kommand and Maelstrom Pulse but most lists don't even play those cards MD anymore.
Bridge is certainly no card for the Infect or Burn MU but everything that takes longer than that is improved by the bridge.
In a format where the game can end around the fourth turn, do you really think tron can afford to play a card that doesn't have any effect on the board?
Absolutely. We already play cards that cost 10 or more. Your reply seems to be simplifying how the deck works for the sake of your argument.
But how many of those 10+ mana cards don't have any effect on the board? The Ulamogs and Emrakuls have an effect. The Kozileks not so much, but then again they don't see as much play (and the latter at least, if not affecting the board state, can help lock out the opponent).
I feel you're missing their point; it wasn't about expensive cards, but about expensive cards that don't affect the board state. Look at all of our expensive cards that get played; all of them affect the board state. Our expensive stuff are sweepers (Ugin, Oblivion Stone), removal (Karn, Ulamog, World Breaker, the Emrakuls), or creatures that make it harder for the opponent to mount an offense (Wurmcoil Engine). These all have an immediate effect on the board state.
I'm not necessarily in agreement with their argument... but you're really not responding to their point. Us playing expensive spells is besides the point if those expensive spells immediately affect the board state.
i think i failed to express myself adequately, rather than misinterpret their comments.
I was making a link between Eye of Ugin and Planar Bridge.
i see now that it wasn't made explicit enough, so here goes:
- Eye is a land. its function is as a toolbox piece which is able to fetch colourless creatures. doing so requires taking a "turn off" to pay 8 mana (the pseudo-8th being tapping the eye itself). the following turn you are then able to cast your emrakul or whatever (at a slightly reduced rate, if it's an eldrazi spell)
- if you have 14 (including the pseudo 1 for tapping eye itself, which you have to count because it represents a land drop), you could fetch and play a wurmcoil engine on the same turn.
- to set up eye, you need to cast a 2 or 3 mana spell (scrying or activated map) in order to fetch the eye. this is a hidden cost, but it synergises well with the land tutoring in the deck.
now bridge:
- bridge is an artifact. its function is as a toolbox piece which is able to fetch any permanent in your deck, including lands, and put them into play at instant speed. doing so requires taking a "turn off" to pay 6 mana. the following turn you are then able to activate the bridge at a flat rate of 8, regardless of what you are fetching.
- if you have 14 (coincidence?), you can play and activate the bridge on the same turn, getting a wurmcoi- oh wait, you can get ANYTHING YOU WANT.
- to set up bridge, you have to find it off the top of your deck using ancient stirrings and the many cantrip effects in the deck. this is a hidden cost, but it synergises well with the copious filtering effects that the deck employs.
see how similar they are?
now let's talk downsides and upsides. here i'll address directly the comments made by others:
- downside; bridge slots into your deck at the cost of a spell, rather than a land. this does mean cutting back on a couple of maindeck spells. This is the main and only complaint that has been raised so far (I.e. why would you run this over a threat that does something straight away). It's a real cost, but it's one that can be absorbed with tight play and good deckbuilding.
- upside; you probably don't have to run sanctum of ugin any more (i mean you can, but you probably don't want to overload on them). this frees up room for ghost quarter which is amazing against infect and affinity.
- downside; you probably have to run more than one bridge to get full value. 2 or more, to increase the likelihood of seeing one with a stirrings.
- upside; stirrings + bridge is still only 7 mana. you can dig for one and play it on the same turn, with only tron and a chromatic. this is not the case for Karn or other bombs in the deck, meaning you are not losing any time by making such a play - whatever you ripped off the top that cost 7 or more would be getting cast the following turn anyway, so bridge is most likely a superior play in this scenario, assuming you have access to a land drop the following turn) downside; bridge gets hit by artifact removal, and can itself be countered (unlike eye). being countered, i'm not worried about so much. getting hit by removal sucks. very few decks play maindeck kolaghan's command in great numbers, but occasionally this will rear its head. playing against grixis or jund, i'd suggest playing around their removal, to maximise your chances. jund only consistently plays 1 copy of kolaghan's command, grixis consistently runs 2. upside; if unanswered, and if you've stabilised, bridge is literally the best card in your entire deck.
i hope i've made my comparison clearer - my point is that it's bringing back something that the deck lost, and sorely needs. consistency and versatility, the ability to fetch out what you need for a given situation. since the ban i've been frustrated with Tron as a deck, because it felt like "ramp into blind topdecks" the majority of the time. adding X number of bridges will improve this, in a similar (not perfect but analogous at least) way to how eye behaved in the deck.
- upside; you probably don't have to run sanctum of ugin any more (i mean you can, but you probably don't want to overload on them). this frees up room for ghost quarter which is amazing against infect and affinity.
I would argue that running 1 GQ is enough and that the slot that Sanctum opens up should be for Geier Reach Sanitarium. It allows you to filter aswell and avoids bricking with Big M in your hand (since you want to tutor her up with a bridge). This also provides some fringe utility of protecting yourself from GQ + Surgical or Fulminator + Surgical...
I think the Sanitarium will provide more utility than a GQ.
- upside; you probably don't have to run sanctum of ugin any more (i mean you can, but you probably don't want to overload on them). this frees up room for ghost quarter which is amazing against infect and affinity.
I would argue that running 1 GQ is enough and that the slot that Sanctum opens up should be for Geier Reach Sanitarium. It allows you to filter aswell and avoids bricking with Big M in your hand (since you want to tutor her up with a bridge). This also provides some fringe utility of protecting yourself from GQ + Surgical or Fulminator + Surgical...
I think the Sanitarium will provide more utility than a GQ.
I agree, 1 gq is enough. At the moment though I've been running 2 sanctum and 0 gq because fetching up a sanctum is such a tempo loss that I wanted to naturally draw them more often.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
I don't want my question to sound too simple (or snobbish), but why do you need Planar Bridge at all?
After reading the last couple pages of discussion (a couple of times), I understand what it does, but I'm not seeing how it makes any match-up (in particular) noticeably better. I play GW and my toughest matchups are the ones where a natural turn 3 Karn isn't enough - Burn, Infect, Zoo, Ad Nauseum. Most of these decks don't even afford me the 4th-5th turn to sweep and if I miss even a simple step early, it's a lost cause. Against all of those decks, Turn 3 Bridge, Turn 4 Activation is going to be too late. [I keep looking at GR and GB as potential 'upgrades', but keep returning to GW as I feel the sideboard options are still the best].
In almost every other match-up I feel like we are able to go with our general game plan and the match-up is at least 50-55% in our favor. Early turns - develop mana, middle turns - sweep, late turns - win. Yes, I can see how an active Bridge gets you inevitability, but I find almost every threat the deck plays gives you that. Turn 3 Bridge into Turn 4 EOT Emrakul into Turn 5 win is awesome, but this deck already has the potential of Turn 3 Karn into Turn 4 Ulamog which is gg in most matches (especially if they missed a land drop along the way).
As I've read the last couple of posts, I can see where you might push a match-up from 50-55% to 52-57% in your favor, but I'm not really convinced by the arguments [I'll wait to hear testing results for a final judgement]. Specifically, to the downside mentioned - (1) Bridge taking a spell spot is HUGE. I think the generic need for Relic of Progenitus is lower, so there may be a couple spots available, but the need to NOT draw into Bridge threats is huge too. Each threat you draw minimizes the impact of a Bridge. (2) Bridge is tough because you can't rely on it, but your build needs to take it into consideration. As is pointed out, drawing a threat makes you less reliant on Bridge, but you need enough Bridges to make it relevant/worth playing. I think with the filtering, shuffle, etc. 2 should be plenty [I wouldn't play it maindeck as a 1-of and 3-4 would likely make it the focus of the deck.] (3) Artifact removal is on the rise, even maindeck. This card makes it all more relevant and powerful against us. I can see siding it out - a lot. Cards that get sided out of every match-up are usually not warranted either. Some further counterpoints to the 'upsides' - (1) Sanctum is still worth running. I run a 1-of and find it totally worth it. With 2 Bridges that I don't need to cast, Sanctum is a 'free' way to include a powerful tutor. Casting Ulamog into next turn Ulamog usually gets a concession (putting one into play won't). (2) I can probably count the number of times I'm 'mana-screwed' at 7 mana on 1 hand. I'm either color-screwed or trying to find a land to get past 8 or 9 mana to turn on Ulamog. (3) If unanswered and you stabilize, literally any threat this deck plays wins the game. In fact, sometimes you don't even need to stabilize completely with Ulamog and/or Ugin.
I'm interested to hear how testing goes and I would never try to minimize the benefits of trying new cards or strategies, but I think it's important to evaluate how much it's doing for us.
I don't want my question to sound too simple (or snobbish), but why do you need Planar Bridge at all?
After reading the last couple pages of discussion (a couple of times), I understand what it does, but I'm not seeing how it makes any match-up (in particular) noticeably better. I play GW and my toughest matchups are the ones where a natural turn 3 Karn isn't enough - Burn, Infect, Zoo, Ad Nauseum. Most of these decks don't even afford me the 4th-5th turn to sweep and if I miss even a simple step early, it's a lost cause. Against all of those decks, Turn 3 Bridge, Turn 4 Activation is going to be too late. [I keep looking at GR and GB as potential 'upgrades', but keep returning to GW as I feel the sideboard options are still the best].
In almost every other match-up I feel like we are able to go with our general game plan and the match-up is at least 50-55% in our favor. Early turns - develop mana, middle turns - sweep, late turns - win. Yes, I can see how an active Bridge gets you inevitability, but I find almost every threat the deck plays gives you that. Turn 3 Bridge into Turn 4 EOT Emrakul into Turn 5 win is awesome, but this deck already has the potential of Turn 3 Karn into Turn 4 Ulamog which is gg in most matches (especially if they missed a land drop along the way).
As I've read the last couple of posts, I can see where you might push a match-up from 50-55% to 52-57% in your favor, but I'm not really convinced by the arguments [I'll wait to hear testing results for a final judgement]. Specifically, to the downside mentioned - (1) Bridge taking a spell spot is HUGE. I think the generic need for Relic of Progenitus is lower, so there may be a couple spots available, but the need to NOT draw into Bridge threats is huge too. Each threat you draw minimizes the impact of a Bridge. (2) Bridge is tough because you can't rely on it, but your build needs to take it into consideration. As is pointed out, drawing a threat makes you less reliant on Bridge, but you need enough Bridges to make it relevant/worth playing. I think with the filtering, shuffle, etc. 2 should be plenty [I wouldn't play it maindeck as a 1-of and 3-4 would likely make it the focus of the deck.] (3) Artifact removal is on the rise, even maindeck. This card makes it all more relevant and powerful against us. I can see siding it out - a lot. Cards that get sided out of every match-up are usually not warranted either. Some further counterpoints to the 'upsides' - (1) Sanctum is still worth running. I run a 1-of and find it totally worth it. With 2 Bridges that I don't need to cast, Sanctum is a 'free' way to include a powerful tutor. Casting Ulamog into next turn Ulamog usually gets a concession (putting one into play won't). (2) I can probably count the number of times I'm 'mana-screwed' at 7 mana on 1 hand. I'm either color-screwed or trying to find a land to get past 8 or 9 mana to turn on Ulamog. (3) If unanswered and you stabilize, literally any threat this deck plays wins the game. In fact, sometimes you don't even need to stabilize completely with Ulamog and/or Ugin.
I'm interested to hear how testing goes and I would never try to minimize the benefits of trying new cards or strategies, but I think it's important to evaluate how much it's doing for us.
Very well said. I'll be feeding back on testing and making sure to record instances of bridge either working very well or being a handicap.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
Hey all! I just wanted to share my opinion as a non-tron player but as someone with a tron heavy meta on planar bridge.
I think the one thing you have to keep in mind if you add Planar Bridge into your deck is that you're most likely having to take out a threat for it while at the same time adding a card that is weak to sideboard hate that a lot of people are going to bring in against you, especially a card like Stony Silence. I know Stony isn't the greatest against tron in comparison to affinity but almost everyone is going to bring it in anyway against you guys and by taking a threat out, you're adding another card that stumbles against SB hate.
I'd honestly be pretty happy to see tron decks take out a wurmcoil which is very annoying to answer 1 for 1.
Just my 2 cents, take it with a grain of skepticism since I'm not a tron player.
Hey all! I just wanted to share my opinion as a non-tron player but as someone with a tron heavy meta on planar bridge.
I think the one thing you have to keep in mind if you add Planar Bridge into your deck is that you're most likely having to take out a threat for it while at the same time adding a card that is weak to sideboard hate that a lot of people are going to bring in against you, especially a card like Stony Silence. I know Stony isn't the greatest against tron in comparison to affinity but almost everyone is going to bring it in anyway against you guys and by taking a threat out, you're adding another card that stumbles against SB hate.
I'd honestly be pretty happy to see tron decks take out a wurmcoil which is very annoying to answer 1 for 1.
Just my 2 cents, take it with a grain of skepticism since I'm not a tron player.
Actually we have 3 flex spots just good enough to try planar instead, that is to replace the relics main and 1 skite.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MODERN
Tron variants
Eldrazi variants
Burn
Infect
Living End
Bloodwalkers
RG Ponza
I agree with purklepuff. it's the best tutor effect that we lost when eye of ugin got banned. even if you have emrakul 1.0 in your hand, on turn 4 (with 4 urza lands), you can fetch another tower to up your mana count) the best play is fetching for the ugin which can mean that you can even just have 1 ugin in your deck now (with bridge taking its slot). I think 2 is the correct number. I own only 1 so far and will be trying to incoporate it in my list but have to obtain a second. It seems odd that the GW list with rest in peace seems harder to squeeze in an emrakul 2.0 for control matchups.
anyway, on another topic, has anyone else tried Tom Ross' latest GW list? i love the gemstone caverns tech but feel that only 1 razorverge and 1 canopy might not be enough white splash colors. the talisman acts as a brushland but this build is heavily dependedn with 3 ugin so his relics and talisman doesn't get hit with a -minus effect from ugin. but this also proposes a risk with blood moon decks wherein it's hard to reach 8 mana in time wherein o-stone is lower curve and can be cracked as soon as the opponent plays a moon. I think 3 mainboard and 1 in the sideboard is better with affinity and aether vial or company decks decks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
plays Ad Nauseam and Amulet Bloom in Modern
"He traded sand for skins, skins for gold, gold for life. In the end, he traded life for sand."
—Afari, Tales
I get that Planar Bridge's ability is very powerful; it must feel amazing to pull out wins with that card. However, we're almost always better off just running another threat instead. If you say, "well, Bridge can fetch Ugin anytime we want," why not just run another Ugin in its place?
-Fewer copies of Ugin means fewer things that trigger the one tutor effect we can actually fetch reliably in Sanctum of Ugin.
-Optimal draws of turn three Bridge, turn four bomb (especially rare considering only 1-2 Bridge) mean no meaningful interaction on turn three from cards like Karn and Wurmcoil Engine before Ugin comes in to clean up.
Okay, so if not Ugin, then why not fetch or replace one of the game-ending Eldrazi?
-Planar Bridge does not enable cast triggers, one of the main reasons the big Eldrazi are competitive despite huge mana costs.
-Planar Bridge is vulnerable to all sorts of incidental hate that people play against us already: Stony Silence, Destructive Revelry, Kolaghan's Command, Pithing Needle, etc.
-Topdecking Planar Bridge at a clutch moment later in a game instead of an immediate threat will spell doom more often than it will bring a win against most of what we're likely to have trouble with already.
Well fine, what about removing some of the more flexible, low-to-ground options, like Relic or Spellskite?
-Tron lives and dies by its ability to survive the early game; there's a reason fast aggro and combo decks are atrocious for us. We must have early interaction to weather the storm, or we will never make it to the big payoffs.
-Planar Bridge, unlike either Sanctum or Eye of Ugin, is not tutorable; only card drawing and Ancient Stirrings can set it up. Therefore, its ability to affect both the early and the late game is more limited than many people realize or admit, especially as a 1-2 of. Proper meta-dependent flex cards like Relic and Spellskite are essential early and can still pay off later.
Personally, I would play any of the following cards over Planar Bridge:
-Extra copies of Wurmcoil Engine, Ugin, Oblivion Stone, or Ulamog TCH
-Spellskite
-Relic of Progenitus
-Emrakul TPE
-Thought-Knot Seer
-An extra utility land (2nd Sanctum of Ugin, Forest, or Ghost Quarter, or a single copy of Sea-Gate Wreckage or Geier Reach Sanitarium)
As much as I'd like to include such a powerful tutor ability into Gx Tron, the inconsistency Planar Bridge would bring by removing either a direct threat or a card that helps us survive, all while being slower, not tutorable itself, and weak to all sorts of incidental hate...yeah, count me out on this one. Have fun testing it, though; I bet it's a blast when it works.
Has anyone tested Fog in the sideboard for "go wide aggro" decks for GW and GB tron? It seems like Fog could potentially cover the weaknesses of these two deck variants, as it lets you stall until you can use O-Stone or Ugin.
I get that Planar Bridge's ability is very powerful; it must feel amazing to pull out wins with that card. However, we're almost always better off just running another threat instead. If you say, "well, Bridge can fetch Ugin anytime we want," why not just run another Ugin in its place?
-Fewer copies of Ugin means fewer things that trigger the one tutor effect we can actually fetch reliably in Sanctum of Ugin.
-Optimal draws of turn three Bridge, turn four bomb (especially rare considering only 1-2 Bridge) mean no meaningful interaction on turn three from cards like Karn and Wurmcoil Engine before Ugin comes in to clean up.
Okay, so if not Ugin, then why not fetch or replace one of the game-ending Eldrazi?
-Planar Bridge does not enable cast triggers, one of the main reasons the big Eldrazi are competitive despite huge mana costs.
-Planar Bridge is vulnerable to all sorts of incidental hate that people play against us already: Stony Silence, Destructive Revelry, Kolaghan's Command, Pithing Needle, etc.
-Topdecking Planar Bridge at a clutch moment later in a game instead of an immediate threat will spell doom more often than it will bring a win against most of what we're likely to have trouble with already.
Well fine, what about removing some of the more flexible, low-to-ground options, like Relic or Spellskite?
-Tron lives and dies by its ability to survive the early game; there's a reason fast aggro and combo decks are atrocious for us. We must have early interaction to weather the storm, or we will never make it to the big payoffs.
-Planar Bridge, unlike either Sanctum or Eye of Ugin, is not tutorable; only card drawing and Ancient Stirrings can set it up. Therefore, its ability to affect both the early and the late game is more limited than many people realize or admit, especially as a 1-2 of. Proper meta-dependent flex cards like Relic and Spellskite are essential early and can still pay off later.
Personally, I would play any of the following cards over Planar Bridge:
-Extra copies of Wurmcoil Engine, Ugin, Oblivion Stone, or Ulamog TCH
-Spellskite
-Relic of Progenitus
-Emrakul TPE
-Thought-Knot Seer
-An extra utility land (2nd Sanctum of Ugin, Forest, or Ghost Quarter, or a single copy of Sea-Gate Wreckage or Geier Reach Sanitarium)
As much as I'd like to include such a powerful tutor ability into Gx Tron, the inconsistency Planar Bridge would bring by removing either a direct threat or a card that helps us survive, all while being slower, not tutorable itself, and weak to all sorts of incidental hate...yeah, count me out on this one. Have fun testing it, though; I bet it's a blast when it works.
If you are playing against a deck that packs artifact hate (usually easy to know this), side them out. Maindeck hate comprises kolaghan's command and maelstrom pulse, and that's about it for modern. The decks that run them usually run 1 or 2 copies at most.
The whole "i'd rather just have another ugin" argument ignores the versatility and choice given by tutor effects such as this one. Time and again, choice has proven to be better than people initially guess - kolaghan's command itself was viewed initially by most players as a "bad blightning", and yet here we are.
Some decks build entire metagame presences on their ability to engender lots of choice and versatility in a game. Jund is a prime example of this; about as close as we can get to a 50:50 deck in modern, and pros love it for its ability to grant advantageous choices and options.
I've talked about the lesser-seen advantages of what bridge offers, so I won't go into it again. There's some testing and number-munching to be done in order to find out how best it fits into the deck, but on paper it looks like a significant power-up for the deck in terms of achieving eye of ugin-levels of versatility/choice within games. It also allows your deck to run Emrakul. I've said it before, but simply having the option there is not to be underestimated. Missing out on the cast triggers is immaterial. Instant speed EoT Emrakul, swing with annihilator 6 for 15 damage is enough. As far as other cast triggers go, the only one that matters is ulamog, and so you could quite easily read the landscape of a game and decide that back-to-back karns is what you need, or ugin followed up by Emrakul, or whatever. You have the option, which is the powerful thing. Once you see a bridge on top, your range of choices and lines of play increase a huge amount.
It's fair to dismiss the card for your own personal build and playstyle. No qualms there. You're still a valued and welcome part of the community. We all love our different styles and takes on the formula.
My big hope is that I'm able to take the positive things I can see about bridge and make good with some actual data and good results. Then we'll have more to talk about, you and I.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Seems like a subpar plan to me. The dangerous decks are the ones that won't give you a fourth turn to go dig out eight more mana. All of Tron's favorite cards stop these decks in their tracks the turn you play them without needing a second turn to activate them.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
It's not something you're going to jam turn 3 every time, but the games I lose in Tron, are the games where I draw all my mana, and none of my threats. This is a threat recurring engine, very similar to the way Eye of Ugin was.
I don't think I'd play more than 1, as multiples seem bad, but I like the idea of Instant speed any permanent.
I recognise and agree with the sentiment that luckily drawing your ideal bomb for the correct moment is always going to be better than a tutor like bridge. Yes. However tron used to be a toolbox deck. Eye of ugin allowed you to fetch the pieces you needed for the right matchups and moments. It really enabled the deck to be versatile; something that the deck is lacking right now.
Imagine the scenario: you get turn 3 tron and drop a karn. Lovely. From that point, desperate to close out the game, you're at the mercy of the top of your deck. At this point would you rather play a bridge or a random threat? Bridge gets you anything you need, roll the dice with an ancient stirrings or a chromatic star and you could get nothing, or something you didn't really need and probably not even be able to cast it that turn.
Yes, you have to topdeck the bridge in the first place, but that's part of it. It's a consistency tool. Having 2 (I reckon 2 or 3 might be the best numbers) means that on average, you get the correct bomb for the moment an extra X% of the time. You still have the quick and dirty turn 3 plays off tron (including bridge, if your opponent isn't pressuring you), but now you have an added boost in the form of a get-you-anything tool, some of the time. On paper that's better than just having pure "you get what you get" threats. In practice we'll see from rigorous testing, but at this early stage it looks decent. It's like a colourless, repeatable green sun's zenith except it also gets lands, artifacts, enchantments and planeswalkers. That's pretty good.
In the fullness of time it may fall off the radar, but at the moment I have felt like the deck's biggest problem since the eye ban is the ability to just fetch the right tool for the job. Bridge is easier to destroy or interact with than eye, but is much, much better than eye ever was if it sticks. The ability to get lands, planeswalkers, sweepers or creatures is a scary prospect for an opponent.
In a format where the game can end around the fourth turn, do you really think tron can afford to play a card that doesn't have any effect on the board?
pucatrade
big receipts
alpha mox emerald
beta time walk
4 goyfs received
3 liliana of the veil
4 karn liberated
3 force of will
4 grove of the burnwillows
snapcaster mage
3 horizon canopy
2 full art damnation
Absolutely. We already play cards that cost 10 or more. Your reply seems to be simplifying how the deck works for the sake of your argument.
If you are running a set of pyroclasms, and o-stones, and karns, what harm is there in adding a couple of bridges? In those games where you stabilise, bridge becomes every single useful card in your deck, at a rate of one per turn.
Bridge fixes more problems than it causes, I'm fairly certain. Now as I've said, it needs rigorous testing. Shutting the idea down before testing is a non-starter. We don't stand to gain anything as Tron players if people just shut ideas down completely. I can see some merit for the card. You don't personally have to test it, but i think as a community we have an obligation to see if it works.
MODERN – LANTERN (aka Fateseal or Barbershop)
Primer – Subreddit – Facebook – Decklist – Gameplay
Thnkr's Content: Gameplay – Datasheet
Each eye sees a different possibility for tomorrow.
CWUBBCCCCCCCBGBGBGCCCCCCCGGURC
Exactly my point, thank-you.
But how many of those 10+ mana cards don't have any effect on the board? The Ulamogs and Emrakuls have an effect. The Kozileks not so much, but then again they don't see as much play (and the latter at least, if not affecting the board state, can help lock out the opponent).
I feel you're missing their point; it wasn't about expensive cards, but about expensive cards that don't affect the board state. Look at all of our expensive cards that get played; all of them affect the board state. Our expensive stuff are sweepers (Ugin, Oblivion Stone), removal (Karn, Ulamog, World Breaker, the Emrakuls), or creatures that make it harder for the opponent to mount an offense (Wurmcoil Engine). These all have an immediate effect on the board state.
I'm not necessarily in agreement with their argument... but you're really not responding to their point. Us playing expensive spells is besides the point if those expensive spells immediately affect the board state.
I have played Tron for about 2 or 2 1/2 years now. With Eye of Ugin, Control and Jund were easy to beat due to the recurring of threats over and over and over. Since Eye is gone i have lost several matches against Control (mainly Jeskai and Grixis) and Jund because they deal with everything we have. Most games i lost against them were due to flooding out or not drawing that one Ugin that would swing around the game.
I feel bridge gives us some kind of certainty against these decks again. We just know that eventually we will get to drop it and once it's down it is hard to deal with. Sure, Grixis Control has Kolaghan's Command and Jund has Kommand and Maelstrom Pulse but most lists don't even play those cards MD anymore.
Bridge is certainly no card for the Infect or Burn MU but everything that takes longer than that is improved by the bridge.
BRGJundGRB
GCTronCG
WBRMardu PyromancerRBW
Legacy:
GElvesG
i think i failed to express myself adequately, rather than misinterpret their comments.
I was making a link between Eye of Ugin and Planar Bridge.
i see now that it wasn't made explicit enough, so here goes:
- Eye is a land. its function is as a toolbox piece which is able to fetch colourless creatures. doing so requires taking a "turn off" to pay 8 mana (the pseudo-8th being tapping the eye itself). the following turn you are then able to cast your emrakul or whatever (at a slightly reduced rate, if it's an eldrazi spell)
- if you have 14 (including the pseudo 1 for tapping eye itself, which you have to count because it represents a land drop), you could fetch and play a wurmcoil engine on the same turn.
- to set up eye, you need to cast a 2 or 3 mana spell (scrying or activated map) in order to fetch the eye. this is a hidden cost, but it synergises well with the land tutoring in the deck.
now bridge:
- bridge is an artifact. its function is as a toolbox piece which is able to fetch any permanent in your deck, including lands, and put them into play at instant speed. doing so requires taking a "turn off" to pay 6 mana. the following turn you are then able to activate the bridge at a flat rate of 8, regardless of what you are fetching.
- if you have 14 (coincidence?), you can play and activate the bridge on the same turn, getting a wurmcoi- oh wait, you can get ANYTHING YOU WANT.
- to set up bridge, you have to find it off the top of your deck using ancient stirrings and the many cantrip effects in the deck. this is a hidden cost, but it synergises well with the copious filtering effects that the deck employs.
see how similar they are?
now let's talk downsides and upsides. here i'll address directly the comments made by others:
- downside; bridge slots into your deck at the cost of a spell, rather than a land. this does mean cutting back on a couple of maindeck spells. This is the main and only complaint that has been raised so far (I.e. why would you run this over a threat that does something straight away). It's a real cost, but it's one that can be absorbed with tight play and good deckbuilding.
- upside; you probably don't have to run sanctum of ugin any more (i mean you can, but you probably don't want to overload on them). this frees up room for ghost quarter which is amazing against infect and affinity.
- downside; you probably have to run more than one bridge to get full value. 2 or more, to increase the likelihood of seeing one with a stirrings.
- upside; stirrings + bridge is still only 7 mana. you can dig for one and play it on the same turn, with only tron and a chromatic. this is not the case for Karn or other bombs in the deck, meaning you are not losing any time by making such a play - whatever you ripped off the top that cost 7 or more would be getting cast the following turn anyway, so bridge is most likely a superior play in this scenario, assuming you have access to a land drop the following turn)
downside; bridge gets hit by artifact removal, and can itself be countered (unlike eye). being countered, i'm not worried about so much. getting hit by removal sucks. very few decks play maindeck kolaghan's command in great numbers, but occasionally this will rear its head. playing against grixis or jund, i'd suggest playing around their removal, to maximise your chances. jund only consistently plays 1 copy of kolaghan's command, grixis consistently runs 2.
upside; if unanswered, and if you've stabilised, bridge is literally the best card in your entire deck.
i hope i've made my comparison clearer - my point is that it's bringing back something that the deck lost, and sorely needs. consistency and versatility, the ability to fetch out what you need for a given situation. since the ban i've been frustrated with Tron as a deck, because it felt like "ramp into blind topdecks" the majority of the time. adding X number of bridges will improve this, in a similar (not perfect but analogous at least) way to how eye behaved in the deck.
One thing i would like to argue though:
I would argue that running 1 GQ is enough and that the slot that Sanctum opens up should be for Geier Reach Sanitarium. It allows you to filter aswell and avoids bricking with Big M in your hand (since you want to tutor her up with a bridge). This also provides some fringe utility of protecting yourself from GQ + Surgical or Fulminator + Surgical...
I think the Sanitarium will provide more utility than a GQ.
BRGJundGRB
GCTronCG
WBRMardu PyromancerRBW
Legacy:
GElvesG
I agree, 1 gq is enough. At the moment though I've been running 2 sanctum and 0 gq because fetching up a sanctum is such a tempo loss that I wanted to naturally draw them more often.
After reading the last couple pages of discussion (a couple of times), I understand what it does, but I'm not seeing how it makes any match-up (in particular) noticeably better. I play GW and my toughest matchups are the ones where a natural turn 3 Karn isn't enough - Burn, Infect, Zoo, Ad Nauseum. Most of these decks don't even afford me the 4th-5th turn to sweep and if I miss even a simple step early, it's a lost cause. Against all of those decks, Turn 3 Bridge, Turn 4 Activation is going to be too late. [I keep looking at GR and GB as potential 'upgrades', but keep returning to GW as I feel the sideboard options are still the best].
In almost every other match-up I feel like we are able to go with our general game plan and the match-up is at least 50-55% in our favor. Early turns - develop mana, middle turns - sweep, late turns - win. Yes, I can see how an active Bridge gets you inevitability, but I find almost every threat the deck plays gives you that. Turn 3 Bridge into Turn 4 EOT Emrakul into Turn 5 win is awesome, but this deck already has the potential of Turn 3 Karn into Turn 4 Ulamog which is gg in most matches (especially if they missed a land drop along the way).
As I've read the last couple of posts, I can see where you might push a match-up from 50-55% to 52-57% in your favor, but I'm not really convinced by the arguments [I'll wait to hear testing results for a final judgement]. Specifically, to the downside mentioned - (1) Bridge taking a spell spot is HUGE. I think the generic need for Relic of Progenitus is lower, so there may be a couple spots available, but the need to NOT draw into Bridge threats is huge too. Each threat you draw minimizes the impact of a Bridge. (2) Bridge is tough because you can't rely on it, but your build needs to take it into consideration. As is pointed out, drawing a threat makes you less reliant on Bridge, but you need enough Bridges to make it relevant/worth playing. I think with the filtering, shuffle, etc. 2 should be plenty [I wouldn't play it maindeck as a 1-of and 3-4 would likely make it the focus of the deck.] (3) Artifact removal is on the rise, even maindeck. This card makes it all more relevant and powerful against us. I can see siding it out - a lot. Cards that get sided out of every match-up are usually not warranted either. Some further counterpoints to the 'upsides' - (1) Sanctum is still worth running. I run a 1-of and find it totally worth it. With 2 Bridges that I don't need to cast, Sanctum is a 'free' way to include a powerful tutor. Casting Ulamog into next turn Ulamog usually gets a concession (putting one into play won't). (2) I can probably count the number of times I'm 'mana-screwed' at 7 mana on 1 hand. I'm either color-screwed or trying to find a land to get past 8 or 9 mana to turn on Ulamog. (3) If unanswered and you stabilize, literally any threat this deck plays wins the game. In fact, sometimes you don't even need to stabilize completely with Ulamog and/or Ugin.
I'm interested to hear how testing goes and I would never try to minimize the benefits of trying new cards or strategies, but I think it's important to evaluate how much it's doing for us.
Very well said. I'll be feeding back on testing and making sure to record instances of bridge either working very well or being a handicap.
I think the one thing you have to keep in mind if you add Planar Bridge into your deck is that you're most likely having to take out a threat for it while at the same time adding a card that is weak to sideboard hate that a lot of people are going to bring in against you, especially a card like Stony Silence. I know Stony isn't the greatest against tron in comparison to affinity but almost everyone is going to bring it in anyway against you guys and by taking a threat out, you're adding another card that stumbles against SB hate.
I'd honestly be pretty happy to see tron decks take out a wurmcoil which is very annoying to answer 1 for 1.
Just my 2 cents, take it with a grain of skepticism since I'm not a tron player.
Actually we have 3 flex spots just good enough to try planar instead, that is to replace the relics main and 1 skite.
Tron variants
Eldrazi variants
Burn
Infect
Living End
Bloodwalkers
RG Ponza
LEGACY
Turbo Depths
Big Eldrazi
anyway, on another topic, has anyone else tried Tom Ross' latest GW list? i love the gemstone caverns tech but feel that only 1 razorverge and 1 canopy might not be enough white splash colors. the talisman acts as a brushland but this build is heavily dependedn with 3 ugin so his relics and talisman doesn't get hit with a -minus effect from ugin. but this also proposes a risk with blood moon decks wherein it's hard to reach 8 mana in time wherein o-stone is lower curve and can be cracked as soon as the opponent plays a moon. I think 3 mainboard and 1 in the sideboard is better with affinity and aether vial or company decks decks.
"He traded sand for skins, skins for gold, gold for life. In the end, he traded life for sand."
—Afari, Tales
-Fewer copies of Ugin means fewer things that trigger the one tutor effect we can actually fetch reliably in Sanctum of Ugin.
-Optimal draws of turn three Bridge, turn four bomb (especially rare considering only 1-2 Bridge) mean no meaningful interaction on turn three from cards like Karn and Wurmcoil Engine before Ugin comes in to clean up.
Okay, so if not Ugin, then why not fetch or replace one of the game-ending Eldrazi?
-Planar Bridge does not enable cast triggers, one of the main reasons the big Eldrazi are competitive despite huge mana costs.
-Planar Bridge is vulnerable to all sorts of incidental hate that people play against us already: Stony Silence, Destructive Revelry, Kolaghan's Command, Pithing Needle, etc.
-Topdecking Planar Bridge at a clutch moment later in a game instead of an immediate threat will spell doom more often than it will bring a win against most of what we're likely to have trouble with already.
Well fine, what about removing some of the more flexible, low-to-ground options, like Relic or Spellskite?
-Tron lives and dies by its ability to survive the early game; there's a reason fast aggro and combo decks are atrocious for us. We must have early interaction to weather the storm, or we will never make it to the big payoffs.
-Planar Bridge, unlike either Sanctum or Eye of Ugin, is not tutorable; only card drawing and Ancient Stirrings can set it up. Therefore, its ability to affect both the early and the late game is more limited than many people realize or admit, especially as a 1-2 of. Proper meta-dependent flex cards like Relic and Spellskite are essential early and can still pay off later.
Personally, I would play any of the following cards over Planar Bridge:
-Extra copies of Wurmcoil Engine, Ugin, Oblivion Stone, or Ulamog TCH
-Spellskite
-Relic of Progenitus
-Emrakul TPE
-Thought-Knot Seer
-An extra utility land (2nd Sanctum of Ugin, Forest, or Ghost Quarter, or a single copy of Sea-Gate Wreckage or Geier Reach Sanitarium)
As much as I'd like to include such a powerful tutor ability into Gx Tron, the inconsistency Planar Bridge would bring by removing either a direct threat or a card that helps us survive, all while being slower, not tutorable itself, and weak to all sorts of incidental hate...yeah, count me out on this one. Have fun testing it, though; I bet it's a blast when it works.
If you are playing against a deck that packs artifact hate (usually easy to know this), side them out. Maindeck hate comprises kolaghan's command and maelstrom pulse, and that's about it for modern. The decks that run them usually run 1 or 2 copies at most.
The whole "i'd rather just have another ugin" argument ignores the versatility and choice given by tutor effects such as this one. Time and again, choice has proven to be better than people initially guess - kolaghan's command itself was viewed initially by most players as a "bad blightning", and yet here we are.
Some decks build entire metagame presences on their ability to engender lots of choice and versatility in a game. Jund is a prime example of this; about as close as we can get to a 50:50 deck in modern, and pros love it for its ability to grant advantageous choices and options.
I've talked about the lesser-seen advantages of what bridge offers, so I won't go into it again. There's some testing and number-munching to be done in order to find out how best it fits into the deck, but on paper it looks like a significant power-up for the deck in terms of achieving eye of ugin-levels of versatility/choice within games. It also allows your deck to run Emrakul. I've said it before, but simply having the option there is not to be underestimated. Missing out on the cast triggers is immaterial. Instant speed EoT Emrakul, swing with annihilator 6 for 15 damage is enough. As far as other cast triggers go, the only one that matters is ulamog, and so you could quite easily read the landscape of a game and decide that back-to-back karns is what you need, or ugin followed up by Emrakul, or whatever. You have the option, which is the powerful thing. Once you see a bridge on top, your range of choices and lines of play increase a huge amount.
It's fair to dismiss the card for your own personal build and playstyle. No qualms there. You're still a valued and welcome part of the community. We all love our different styles and takes on the formula.
My big hope is that I'm able to take the positive things I can see about bridge and make good with some actual data and good results. Then we'll have more to talk about, you and I.