On a somewhat related note: Would people here be interested in a Discord server for Lantern Control? I've been lurking this thread and the Lantern subreddit for a while, and I manage several MTG-related Discord servers (f.i. PlayEDH or the Competitive EDH server if you've heard of those), so I'd be happy to get everything set up. From my experience, Discord servers for people dedicated to a specific deck make for some great discussion and innovations, and they're great places for people who just picked up the deck to get the info they need.
If a server for this deck is something you'd be interested in, let me know! And please tell me what you'd like to see on there.
EDIT: After hearing that people on Discord and the Lantern subreddit are interested, I went ahead and made a server - here's the link: https://discord.gg/JuQ6pSk
Did this happen today? I was just passing by lurking and now Im almost crying... it actually happened? The deck finally sits at the top of it all? It only took what? 5.5ish years? lol
I tried posting once or twice in the past months, but every time was faced with a message that I had to link twitch account before posting and since I had forgotten the twitch password I just didn't bother recovering it to post. But this was deserving enough to go through the trouble. So sweet, can't wait to put to sleep my kids to go watch the replay.
Ancient stirrings sets a pretty unfair double standard.... Getting to look at 5 cards is 40% more powerful than the blue cantrips that let you look at 3 cards that are "too powerful" for modern.
Ponder lets you look at 4 cards and has no restrictions. Or are we going to ban Commune with Dinosaurs too?
Ponder is banned in modern and let's you look at three. DOUBLE STANDARD
Public Mod Note
(Xaricore):
Infraction for ban talk outside of the appropriate thread - Xaricore
Did this happen today? I was just passing by lurking and now Im almost crying... it actually happened? The deck finally sits at the top of it all? It only took what? 5.5ish years? lol
One top to rule them all!!!
Well Played Community, well F'ing played!
Correct me if I am wrong... but didn't lantern also do extremely well at a previous GP and/or Open?
I vaguely remember it winning a major event prior.
Anyways... I've decided to test lantern.... don't judge me... it's only partially due to the PT win...
Though in honesty I've mostly been avoiding testing lantern due to it's reputation.... lol.
Any recommendations for learning lantern? Game plan and decision lines seems pretty straight forward.
I was kind of confused my the PT sideboard... so many 1 ofs. going to have to figure that out.
I was kind of confused my the PT sideboard... so many 1 ofs. going to have to figure that out.
I don't personally agree with only 2 leylines of sanctity SB, you really don't want to be hardcasting that spell against burn or discard. If you're running any of them 3 or 4 is where I'd be.
Also, Torpor Orb is suspiciously missing. It owns snapcasters and bedlam revelers which offer a way out of the lock and basically the entire humans deck as well as random cards from Elves, Living End, etc.
Modern: -UBG Lantern Control-GW or RG or R Tron - G Stompy - C KCI Combo-
EDH: -UG Ezuri-UGZegana-BRMogis-WUBRGRamos-WBREdgar-URLocust God-WUBRBreya-BMacar-WUBrago-WEvra-
As a long time control player, although of the Draw-Go variety, I have to say congratulations. The salt in Twitch from the Aggro players was so, so sweet. That was a fun match to watch.
I was kind of confused my the PT sideboard... so many 1 ofs. going to have to figure that out.
I don't personally agree with only 2 leylines of sanctity SB, you really don't want to be hardcasting that spell against burn or discard. If you're running any of them 3 or 4 is where I'd be.
Also, Torpor Orb is suspiciously missing. It owns snapcasters and bedlam revelers which offer a way out of the lock and basically the entire humans deck as well as random cards from Elves, Living End, etc.
Honestly in the current meta I could 100% see cutting orb. It hasn't really seen play since pod was banned.
against those decks ppyroclasm is just as effective.
Zerodown! Nice to see you back! It's gotta be great to see your baby of half a decade come so far so quickly.
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
Hi Lantern people! I've started to pick up this deck, and I am confused about River of Tears. Why is it good to play a River of Tears over the 4th Darkslick Shores? The PT winning list does this, and I'm finding it hard to understand under what circumstances the River is ever better than the straight up dual.
Another question (sorry for the double post but I think it warrants it).
By now probably everyone has read the lantern guide that was posted on Twitter. What do you guys think about this:
The discard is present to create a hole for the library lock and to beat hate, but if you don’t have enough actual permanents you are very vulnerable to losing to how individually weak many of your cards are. The easiest way to beat Lantern is to defeat it in detail, isolating those elements from each other which don’t do anything alone. This is also the reason why Collective Brutality, while good on paper, tends to underperform.
I'm relatively new to the whir version (I played straight G/B for a long while), and my impression was that this deck can have a problem with emptying hand quickly (imagine being stuck with multiple whirs and/or orb + leylines post board) and brutality seems like a way to circumvent that. Is this an issue one should mitigate with more careful mulligan decisions + better draw control/filtering? What does community think?
Is there any good sideboarding guides for lantern?
Been jamming a few games online. Lantern, like affinity, seems very hard to know exactly how to sb : /
@averethel and @Al_Z_Heimer, I don't really buy much into that. I've talked with him before about data gathering and whatnot, and I found that he doesn't actually track individual card performance, only the data available from the MTGO Replay Tool. Thus, lines like...
This is also the reason why Collective Brutality, while good on paper, tends to underperform.
...are based on anecdotal evidence, conjecture, and memory. Nothing actually tracked. To be fair, though, I'm also a bit dismissive because of how dismissive he was of my own work, because of the assumption that too much of my data comes from Cockatrice games, and the claim that Cockatrice isn't as reliable for good data as MTGO. You can see a comparison of win percentages comparing the two here (for matches) and here (for games). So, while I could at least respect the opinion if it were backed up by more than conjecture, I find this one to be unnecessarily dismissive, and even slightly insulting, considering the work I feel I've put in and the lack of work he presented to justify dismissing my work.
That aside, I was trying to figure out more methods to clean up the data. I've entered quite a bit more data recently from my older videos that I hadn't got around to before, and it changed some numbers that I didn't expect. I figured that maybe it had something to do with the age of the videos, in that the metagame has changed quite significantly from those days, and so did the typical Lantern list.
With that in mind, I worked on a new spreadsheet that specifically gleans data from only recent games (no older than three months). I've linked this new spreadsheet from the old one, from the "Read Me" tab. It's presented a few interesting findings that are noticeably different than the original.
Lantern is, unsuprisingly, still a top performing card when in the opening hand. However, this new spreadsheet has Inquisition of Kozilek performing much better. My hypothesis is that it's because older data, from when the deck was struggling more with fewer tools available, was dragging IoK's numbers down, while Collective Brutality didn't have that issue. Brutality still outperforms Thoughtseize, though.
Mox Opal performs a bit better in the new sheet, although still not performing as well as might be expected. Interestingly, "explosive hands" (hands where Opal is online immediately) are still in the negatives. This seems to imply that the Opal performs slightly worse than a normal land, and the data from both sheets backs that up.
Most surprising to me is how Ensnaring Bridge seems to perform here. It's actually one of the worst performing cards in the opening hand now, which is very different than the older spreadsheet. I figure that this might have something to do with Whir, seeing as how most recent data includes Whir. Thus, it seems like it is actually correct to run 4 Whir of Invention and 3 Ensnaring Bridge after all.
Likewise, Pyxis of Pandemonium and Pithing Needle also underperform when looking at only recent data. Again, this may have something to do with Whir, as having Whir seems to be strictly better, since it allows us to get it if we need it, whereas Needle and Pyxis may only be helpful in specific situations and may be dead cards in others.
Another surprising change is how Codex Shredder ranks here. I had a hypothesis as to why the original spreadsheet had Shredder underperforming, although after consideration I can see some flaws I hadn't considered before. In the original build, it was very important for us to be able to simultaneously keep the opponent off of good cards while digging to secure the lock, making cards like Bell and Pyxis much better. However, with access to so much card selection now (Bauble scry effect, Ancient Stirrings, Whir of Invention, and even Inventors' Fair) combine to make it much less likely that we need to dig so far. Again, this is just a hypothesis, and I'm not quite sure how it could be tested for accuracy. Either way, the numbers are self-evident here.
@averethel and @Al_Z_Heimer, I don't really buy much into that. I've talked with him before about data gathering and whatnot, and I found that he doesn't actually track individual card performance, only the data available from the MTGO Replay Tool. Thus, lines like...
This is also the reason why Collective Brutality, while good on paper, tends to underperform.
...are based on anecdotal evidence, conjecture, and memory. Nothing actually tracked. To be fair, though, I'm also a bit dismissive because of how dismissive he was of my own work, because of the assumption that too much of my data comes from Cockatrice games, and the claim that Cockatrice isn't as reliable for good data as MTGO. You can see a comparison of win percentages comparing the two here (for matches) and here (for games). So, while I could at least respect the opinion if it were backed up by more than conjecture, I find this one to be unnecessarily dismissive, and even slightly insulting, considering the work I feel I've put in and the lack of work he presented to justify dismissing my work.
I feel like this needs to be said, and I'm not sure how to make it not sound dismissive, but this is just true: the fact that you worked hard doesn't mean that your results are correct, and the fact that the pro community doesn't have readily-presentable data to back up their conclusions doesn't mean that they are wrong. I am not trying to shut you down, but I think that it's wrong that you use links to your data as a cudgel to dismiss other people's opinions.
The fact that any of your data comes from Cockatrice is a red flag; it's pretty well known that the player quality on free platforms is a total joke compared to MTGO. Garbage in, garbage out. Another huge concern is that the entire professional community disagrees with you. When Sam Black, BBD, Justin Cohen, and the most recent Pro Tour champion all disagree with your conclusions, you can be pretty certain that you are incorrect. To wit: the entire debate surrounding Lantern at the moment is whether or not Mox Opal is too good to be legal in Modern, and the fact that you're trying to argue that it's actually bad should make you wonder whether or not you've made a serious methodological mistake.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
On a somewhat related note: Would people here be interested in a Discord server for Lantern Control? I've been lurking this thread and the Lantern subreddit for a while, and I manage several MTG-related Discord servers (f.i. PlayEDH or the Competitive EDH server if you've heard of those), so I'd be happy to get everything set up. From my experience, Discord servers for people dedicated to a specific deck make for some great discussion and innovations, and they're great places for people who just picked up the deck to get the info they need.
If a server for this deck is something you'd be interested in, let me know! And please tell me what you'd like to see on there.
EDIT: After hearing that people on Discord and the Lantern subreddit are interested, I went ahead and made a server - here's the link: https://discord.gg/JuQ6pSk
I'm proud of Luis and everyone who helped invent the deck.
One top to rule them all!!!
Well Played Community, well F'ing played!
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
Whir turned out to be that good huh?
PS: Congratulations to Luis on the win!
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
https://scryfall.com/card/m12/73
Ponder is banned in modern and let's you look at three. DOUBLE STANDARD
Whir takes this deck to outer space. So powerful being able to get exactly what you need when you need it
Correct me if I am wrong... but didn't lantern also do extremely well at a previous GP and/or Open?
I vaguely remember it winning a major event prior.
Anyways... I've decided to test lantern.... don't judge me... it's only partially due to the PT win...
Though in honesty I've mostly been avoiding testing lantern due to it's reputation.... lol.
Any recommendations for learning lantern? Game plan and decision lines seems pretty straight forward.
I was kind of confused my the PT sideboard... so many 1 ofs. going to have to figure that out.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
I don't personally agree with only 2 leylines of sanctity SB, you really don't want to be hardcasting that spell against burn or discard. If you're running any of them 3 or 4 is where I'd be.
Also, Torpor Orb is suspiciously missing. It owns snapcasters and bedlam revelers which offer a way out of the lock and basically the entire humans deck as well as random cards from Elves, Living End, etc.
EDH: -UG Ezuri-UGZegana-BRMogis-WUBRGRamos-WBREdgar-URLocust God-WUBRBreya-BMacar-WUBrago-WEvra-
Honestly in the current meta I could 100% see cutting orb. It hasn't really seen play since pod was banned.
against those decks ppyroclasm is just as effective.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
I can appreciate the evil of the deck, and Zerodown you must be delighted.
If it couldn’t be us I’m glad it was you lot.
UR Storm
G Stompy
URSuicide Bloo
Commander: (Don't play as much as I'd like)
UBPhenax, God of Deception
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
Plus it still enables T1 discard and does not prevent from T2-T3 whir
By now probably everyone has read the lantern guide that was posted on Twitter. What do you guys think about this:
I'm relatively new to the whir version (I played straight G/B for a long while), and my impression was that this deck can have a problem with emptying hand quickly (imagine being stuck with multiple whirs and/or orb + leylines post board) and brutality seems like a way to circumvent that. Is this an issue one should mitigate with more careful mulligan decisions + better draw control/filtering? What does community think?
Been jamming a few games online. Lantern, like affinity, seems very hard to know exactly how to sb : /
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
...are based on anecdotal evidence, conjecture, and memory. Nothing actually tracked. To be fair, though, I'm also a bit dismissive because of how dismissive he was of my own work, because of the assumption that too much of my data comes from Cockatrice games, and the claim that Cockatrice isn't as reliable for good data as MTGO. You can see a comparison of win percentages comparing the two here (for matches) and here (for games). So, while I could at least respect the opinion if it were backed up by more than conjecture, I find this one to be unnecessarily dismissive, and even slightly insulting, considering the work I feel I've put in and the lack of work he presented to justify dismissing my work.
That aside, I was trying to figure out more methods to clean up the data. I've entered quite a bit more data recently from my older videos that I hadn't got around to before, and it changed some numbers that I didn't expect. I figured that maybe it had something to do with the age of the videos, in that the metagame has changed quite significantly from those days, and so did the typical Lantern list.
With that in mind, I worked on a new spreadsheet that specifically gleans data from only recent games (no older than three months). I've linked this new spreadsheet from the old one, from the "Read Me" tab. It's presented a few interesting findings that are noticeably different than the original.
Lantern is, unsuprisingly, still a top performing card when in the opening hand. However, this new spreadsheet has Inquisition of Kozilek performing much better. My hypothesis is that it's because older data, from when the deck was struggling more with fewer tools available, was dragging IoK's numbers down, while Collective Brutality didn't have that issue. Brutality still outperforms Thoughtseize, though.
Mox Opal performs a bit better in the new sheet, although still not performing as well as might be expected. Interestingly, "explosive hands" (hands where Opal is online immediately) are still in the negatives. This seems to imply that the Opal performs slightly worse than a normal land, and the data from both sheets backs that up.
Most surprising to me is how Ensnaring Bridge seems to perform here. It's actually one of the worst performing cards in the opening hand now, which is very different than the older spreadsheet. I figure that this might have something to do with Whir, seeing as how most recent data includes Whir. Thus, it seems like it is actually correct to run 4 Whir of Invention and 3 Ensnaring Bridge after all.
Likewise, Pyxis of Pandemonium and Pithing Needle also underperform when looking at only recent data. Again, this may have something to do with Whir, as having Whir seems to be strictly better, since it allows us to get it if we need it, whereas Needle and Pyxis may only be helpful in specific situations and may be dead cards in others.
Another surprising change is how Codex Shredder ranks here. I had a hypothesis as to why the original spreadsheet had Shredder underperforming, although after consideration I can see some flaws I hadn't considered before. In the original build, it was very important for us to be able to simultaneously keep the opponent off of good cards while digging to secure the lock, making cards like Bell and Pyxis much better. However, with access to so much card selection now (Bauble scry effect, Ancient Stirrings, Whir of Invention, and even Inventors' Fair) combine to make it much less likely that we need to dig so far. Again, this is just a hypothesis, and I'm not quite sure how it could be tested for accuracy. Either way, the numbers are self-evident here.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
The fact that any of your data comes from Cockatrice is a red flag; it's pretty well known that the player quality on free platforms is a total joke compared to MTGO. Garbage in, garbage out. Another huge concern is that the entire professional community disagrees with you. When Sam Black, BBD, Justin Cohen, and the most recent Pro Tour champion all disagree with your conclusions, you can be pretty certain that you are incorrect. To wit: the entire debate surrounding Lantern at the moment is whether or not Mox Opal is too good to be legal in Modern, and the fact that you're trying to argue that it's actually bad should make you wonder whether or not you've made a serious methodological mistake.