I think the biggest indicator to where the meta is will be the next modern pro tour. Every GP and every SCG tournament looks different basically. And I don't think that the meta shifts that much around.
Dont really want Damnation against Tron. We are fighting the 12 lands wich isnt gonna be happening with their insane consistancy. If we only could fight their wincons instead of their lands.
You can fight it with thoughtseize, which is our best option. I think its usually correct to target their wincons with TS rather than Eggs/Stirrings/Sylvans.
So the top 8 definitely looks barftastic from GP OKC but all in all I think the tournament was a good showing for Jund overall IMO. Midrange decks were on enough people's minds that they switched back to traditional variants of tron and titanshift. I think fewer people will be on combo and aggro moving forward and that will help even out the numbers a little bit. All that being said, I still am taking Jund to the 1k and Team Trios event this weekend and am still planning to take it to GP Santa Clara at the beginning of next month. Granted Team Trios events tend to have more aggro and combo decks than usual and less big mana decks because of it.
As for the matchups yall have been discussing, Lantern and Affinity are both extremely good matchups. For Jund that typically means 60:40 or 65:35 but still they feel very good with tight play. One thing I will say about the Affinity postboard matchup, I objectively think taking out all the LotV is wrong. It's your only clean answer (outside damnation) to Etched champion. I do shave one usually but I like to leave in 2 and treat it as an edict effect. If your opponent then attacks into it, it bought you at least 1 life as well. There are plenty of worse cards to leave in during the matchup that I'd rather cut.
As for the Lantern hate. For me it's the same reason I hate Tron. They don't actually kill you on turn 3. They just stop you from playing the game while they fumble their way to victory. There are large enough chances that you could draw out of it so you should play it out and thus you play the most miserable form of magic until you determine that your chances are gone.
@RationallyPrime: There is a lot of good stuff out there. I personally really like "Next Level Magic" by Patrick Chapin and "The Official Miser's Guide" by Michael Flores. Those are really theoretical and general aspects about playing Magic though.
A few of Reid Dukes basic articles concerning the game: "Level One: The Full Course". Its very basic, but amongs these, a really great one to mention is "The Metagame" where Reid talks about how to determine a given metagame and how to handle it.
@RationallyPrime: There is a lot of good stuff out there. I personally really like "Next Level Magic" by Patrick Chapin and "The Official Miser's Guide" by Michael Flores. Those are really theoretical and general aspects about playing Magic though.
A few of Reid Dukes basic articles concerning the game: "Level One: The Full Course". Its very basic, but amongs these, a really great one to mention is "The Metagame" where Reid talks about how to determine a given metagame and how to handle it.
Since playing Jund gets more successful if you play tight: "Tight Plays" by Jeremy Neeman. And also by him, conerning taking risks: "Risky Move".
I 100% back all these articles for Jund. Jund IMO is a deck where if you are a sub-par pilot, it'll feel like the worst deck in the world. The inverse of that is that if you are a good pilot, you will hear a lot of opponents grumbling about how you got lucky.
One thing I will say about the Affinity postboard matchup, I objectively think taking out all the LotV is wrong. It's your only clean answer (outside damnation) to Etched champion. I do shave one usually but I like to leave in 2 and treat it as an edict effect. If your opponent then attacks into it, it bought you at least 1 life as well. There are plenty of worse cards to leave in during the matchup that I'd rather cut.
An experienced Affinity player won't let you edict the Champion away. At least not with LoTV alone. That would mean you need multiple removal spells in combination with LoTV to remove Champion. I personally rather have more IOK to just plain discard it from their hand. Yes there are topdecks. Yes sometimes you would be able to edict it away. But there are also times where the opponent doesn't draw the Champion and you have your worthless Lili in hand. Ultimatly I think its correct to shave all copies of her. Leaving in 1 copy or so is not what I would call completely wrong, but am not keen on it too much personally.
One thing I will say about the Affinity postboard matchup, I objectively think taking out all the LotV is wrong. It's your only clean answer (outside damnation) to Etched champion. I do shave one usually but I like to leave in 2 and treat it as an edict effect. If your opponent then attacks into it, it bought you at least 1 life as well. There are plenty of worse cards to leave in during the matchup that I'd rather cut.
An experienced Affinity player won't let you edict the Champion away. At least not with LoTV alone. That would mean you need multiple removal spells in combination with LoTV to remove Champion. I personally rather have more IOK to just plain discard it from their hand. Yes there are topdecks. Yes sometimes you would be able to edict it away. But there are also times where the opponent doesn't draw the Champion and you have your worthless Lili in hand. Ultimatly I think its correct to shave all copies of her. Leaving in 1 copy or so is not what I would call completely wrong, but am not keen on it too much personally.
I have experienced the inverse of this. Where you draw your IOK late after you've effectively dealt with their board and now it does nothing. LotV has gotten to edict and even ultimate a lot in the matchup and even if it doesn't get to edict away the Etched Champion (which I agree happens rarely) it still gets to eat things and if not dealt with, can really cause issues for your opponent long term. IoK becomes a dead card usually after turn 2 on the draw and turn 3 on the play. That is not good enough IMO.
I think I went like this for affinity.
-3 thoughtseize, -1 confidant, -4 liliana of the veil, -1 hazoret
+1 lavamancer, +1 grudge, +4 anger, +2 fulminator mage, +1 pia and kiran
In the league where I 5-0ed, I beat storm, ad nauseoum, company, lantern control (opp misplayed and gave me a hazoret lol), and tron. Since then, I've lost to affinity twice and I lost to jeskai, but I played kind of loose.
There's a slight upside to one anger being a damnation since it covers e tron too if I come across it. I guess I could run 1 re over another anger. Idk I just want a consistent sweeper against these small creature decks, and anger also covers dredge.
Pls, just play 24 lands, or at least cut a Ravine. I think a mountain is really bad for our manabase, cant recommend running it. You want the fourth Blackcleave instead.
I think 2 Hazoret are too much, I would max run 1 maindeck. Collective Brutality is a Sideboard card fro Jund, if you want to run it maindeck, I would not run more than 1.
4 Anger is way too many. I would cut one 2 completely and add a Damnation and another SB card to strengthen worse matchups. We have a ton of removal naturally, you don't need 4 Anger in the side. Your GY hate is really low. You are lacking terminates completely.
So all in all I would:
-2 CB
-1 Hazoret
-1 Mountain
+1 Blackcleave
+1 Blooming Marsh/Swamp/Forest
+2 Terminate
and for the SB:
-2 Anger
-1 Grim
-1 Fulminator
-1 Lost Legacy
+1 Damnation
+1 Ancient Grudge
+1 Nihil Spellbomb
+2 CB
Am personally not a fan of Lost legacy and 4 Fulminator, but I dont consider it completely wrong if it works for you. I would personally run 2 CB instead of Lost Legacy.
Your SB plan is ok for your current list, but I think the main problem is that you have CB maindeck, no terminates and only 1 Grudge in the SB why you are doing badly vs Affinity. 4 Anger is just too many and is not the best vs. affinity. Hazoret as your big creature is also quite useless here.
Its great that you 5-0d the league, but I think your list is still suboptimal. Dont get me wrong here, props for having a finish like that, but you have to consider that 4 of your 5 matchups where actually good ones. Company must have of course felt easy as hell with 4 anger. But the thing is, the format is usually more diverse and affinity is a thing.
You are probably right about swapping out a mountain for the 4th blackcleave. 23 land has been fine for me. The 24th land would be the 4th raging ravine anyway, so going to 23 with 3 ravines doesn't cut an untapped land.
So here's my reasoning for hazoret: the format has a lot of big mana and combo decks, and we need to race them. Most of you guys seem to be doing that with rabblemaster, but he could get bolted in the midrange fights while hazoret can't be. Hazoret has haste, so the opponent has to be weary of 5 damage out of nowhere, its also able to block big guys all day until you find an answer. Hazoret is way more flexible than you're giving it credit for. It also gets around odd things like leylines and bridges and survives things like oblivion stone, which might start seeing more play again.
I don't see why we need terminate. What does terminate hit that push doesn't? Reality smasher, primeval titan, endbringer, wurmcoil (which we probably aren't beating anyway), and some odd stuff like revilark. Aside from the odd stuff (which isn't really a thing) and wurmcoil, Liliana cleans up those other threats. Push is better right now because it lets you cast multiple spells earlier, and let's you answer a turn 1 dork more often.
Brutality is similarly more flexible because it still kills a lot but it can be a burn spell or discard as well, and it sets up hazoret. I will admit brutality isn't great against tron and affunity, but it's still great against the rest of the field, and terminate is only slightly better against tron. Terminate doesn't actually solve my problem though, which is etched champion. I can kill their other threats, but champion makes it almost impossible to win because they just brick your goyfs and beat you in the air, or use a plating/ravager effect to kill you in one or two hits.
anger is my grave hate along with ooze and cage. I will have 9 discard spells along with liliana and lost legacy post board against storm. They will be going for empty the warrens most of the time (or madcap experiment), which they don't really need past in flames for anyway, and there's no other deck that uses the graveyard as an engine that isn't either soft to ooze or creature based, so anger is actually good grave hate right now, while making the small creature matchups really easy. I can see cutting one anger for flaying tendrils or kozilek's return to have a shot against etched champion, and maybe another for a damnation just incase the rb hollow one deck gets bigger, but I feel pretty strongly that the sweepers that exile are really well positioned in the meta.
2 lavamancer post board could be too many I can see cutting the one in the board for something else, a second grudge might not be a bad idea. Unravel the aether could be good as well just so we have an out to a wurmcoil engine.
If MTG is a part of your life, the formats are like relationships:
Standard/Block = The on-again, off-again holiday fling
Modern/Vintage/Legacy = Stable, homely. A ***** after absence/misreading
Limited/Sealed = Heart breaking free spirit
Commander/Cube = Agreeable, needy and expensive
Pauper/Peasant = Sweet, kind, practical, but shy and boring
For terminate there's also delve creatures (Gurmag and Tasigur), everything in natural Tron decks. My local meta has a lot of GDS and Eldrazi tron so I rely on my 3x terminates heavily.
For terminate there's also delve creatures (Gurmag and Tasigur), everything in natural Tron decks. My local meta has a lot of GDS and Eldrazi tron so I rely on my 3x terminates heavily.
My meta doesn't even have these represented in massive quantities (like I've played vs GDS at the 1k a few weekends back and it was the first time I'd played against it since like August) and even still I insist on 3 Terminates. Sometimes you just need a catch all that will kill everything no matter what.
We can't control our draws like several other decks, have no tutors and no ways to dig.
Thats one perfect argument for actually running 24 lands in my opinion. We have to naturally draw our lands to play them. Decks with loads of cantrips can cut lands. Patrick Chapin said that usually per 4 cantrip you play you can cut a land as a rule of thumb. And you are right. We are not running any (not counting Bob as a relyable cantrip) and thats why we need to hit landdrops to not loose against ourselves.
I guess that the thought of going down to 23 lands is to turn the Jund deck into a more proactive version than a reactive one. But I personally think that this basically hurts the deck. It turns the deck into one thats able to react, as well as proact, but both not executing very well compared to other decks in the format. I consider Jund to still be a reactive deck. If we now change the deck into an half aggro/ half control-ish style of deck, its basically a worse Grixis DS in my opinion. Grixis DS just does everything we want better at this point. So why mimicing the deck here? I don't see any advantage to run a Jund version of Grixis DS.
If you look at any deck with a lower land count I bet hardly you will find a deck that plays tapped lands like Ravine. I find it very weird to cut untapped lands to actually increase the chance of hitting either no land, or one tapped land. That being said, the only way I could see a 23 land version working smoothly, is to cut a Ravine. That doesnt lower the count of untapped lands at least.
Yea, but my problem with this line of thinking is that we still think all of our spells and threats are "good enough." Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think that is true any more. The strongest card in the deck to me is Liliana of the Veil with Tarmogoyf being one of the weakest. Everything else in our deck is of varying degree of useful(-less). I don't see how being the reactive the deck with generally questionable spells is a recipe for success. The only way I see Jund being good now is via accurately predicting a positive metagame for Jund. That's a huge roll of the die considering how wide-open the format is now. I've been to a few PPTQs where I just played for craps 'n giggles where I rolled out with Jund and got really luck to beat a couple Tron players and an Eldrazi Tron player. If I had known that's what the metagame would've been (or if one them was a better player), there's no way I would have left the house. Another example is Storm now. Are we sure this is still a positive match now? With Gifts Ungiven, they're just as good at playing the long game as they are at trying to kill you on turn 3 or 4.
Yea, but my problem with this line of thinking is that we still think all of our spells and threats are "good enough." Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think that is true any more. The strongest card in the deck to me is Liliana of the Veil with Tarmogoyf being one of the weakest. Everything else in our deck is of varying degree of useful(-less). I don't see how being the reactive the deck with generally questionable spells is a recipe for success. The only way I see Jund being good now is via accurately predicting a positive metagame for Jund. That's a huge roll of the die considering how wide-open the format is now. I've been to a few PPTQs where I just played for craps 'n giggles where I rolled out with Jund and got really luck to beat a couple Tron players and an Eldrazi Tron player. If I had known that's what the metagame would've been (or if one them was a better player), there's no way I would have left the house. Another example is Storm now. Are we sure this is still a positive match now? With Gifts Ungiven, they're just as good at playing the long game as they are at trying to kill you on turn 3 or 4.
I tend to agree with you on a lot of accounts except your valuation there of LotV and Goyf. I think the strongest card in the deck is IoK/TS for most matchups and our weakest card is one of our removal spells (which varies from matchup to matchup). Goyf is just a dumb beater but still a very good threat. Up til GP OKC, Jund was a pretty decent meta option for a few weeks. GP OKC was heavily slanted against that it seems. We'll see how the meta shifts going forward.
I think Storm is still 50/50 to favorable for us. It's not as favored as it once was but we have the removal for their creatures, discard to rip their hand and adequate GY hate to fight the gifts plan IMO.
The fact that sometimes Inquisition doesn't get what you want or the life loss for Thoughtseize is too much makes them both questionable to me. Yes, discard is generally good for us but only if it gets what we want. The reason I don't love Tarmogoyf any more is because it's easily killed by a lot of decks or sometimes it's easily ignored. The prevalance of graveyard hate also makes it questionable after game 1.
My point isn't to question the relevance of Storm. My point is that even the decks we're supposed to have an advantage against are getting better while we're stagnant at best and not very well positioned. Can any of you point out a metagame where Jund would dominate? I don't mean be alright in. I mean be legitimately good. I can do that for several other decks.
You are probably right about swapping out a mountain for the 4th blackcleave. 23 land has been fine for me. The 24th land would be the 4th raging ravine anyway, so going to 23 with 3 ravines doesn't cut an untapped land.
I don't see why we need terminate. What does terminate hit that push doesn't? Reality smasher, primeval titan, endbringer, wurmcoil (which we probably aren't beating anyway), and some odd stuff like revilark. Aside from the odd stuff (which isn't really a thing) and wurmcoil, Liliana cleans up those other threats. Push is better right now because it lets you cast multiple spells earlier, and let's you answer a turn 1 dork more often.
4 Ravines is not the standard in a 24 landbase. It has been 3 Ravines for a while now. The tapped land issue is the reason why 3 Ravine is the maximum we want. So in that sense, you can put it your way if you want, but considering a standard 24 landbase you are actually cutting an untapped land, not a ravine.
Fatal Push is not here to replace Terminate. But more so to replace Bolt. Bolt only very recently became good enough again, most lists were running 2 Bolts at maximum prior to this. Right now 2-3 Pushes, 2-3 Bolts as well as 3 Terminates is the concensus. You can surely change numbers around, but I would not go below 2 Terminates maindeck at any point.
Yea, but my problem with this line of thinking is that we still think all of our spells and threats are "good enough." Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think that is true any more. The strongest card in the deck to me is Liliana of the Veil with Tarmogoyf being one of the weakest. Everything else in our deck is of varying degree of useful(-less). I don't see how being the reactive the deck with generally questionable spells is a recipe for success. The only way I see Jund being good now is via accurately predicting a positive metagame for Jund. That's a huge roll of the die considering how wide-open the format is now. I've been to a few PPTQs where I just played for craps 'n giggles where I rolled out with Jund and got really luck to beat a couple Tron players and an Eldrazi Tron player. If I had known that's what the metagame would've been (or if one them was a better player), there's no way I would have left the house. Another example is Storm now. Are we sure this is still a positive match now? With Gifts Ungiven, they're just as good at playing the long game as they are at trying to kill you on turn 3 or 4.
This is a fair point, and I agree with that. Our answers are indeed not good enough sometimes. But I don't think just cutting a land and put in another of those not good enough spells will change that a lot. The problem is that our spells are weak, yeah, but we have nothing to replace them with. I do also think Goyf is very weak in general. But I think that discard is stronger than LoTV basically. I think TS is the best spell currently in the format arguably. One way to do it, and I thought about that approach, is to increase discard count and reduce on board answers. Discard will always be able to hit what we want (at least TS), and things like Push/Bolt/Terminate/Pulse can be dead or too slow/situational.
I think Storm is still decent enough for us. They are certainly able to grind, but I think its still favourable to a certain extent. Might not be a bye or anything close, but it doesnt feel 50/50 for me at least.
The fact that sometimes Inquisition doesn't get what you want or the life loss for Thoughtseize is too much makes them both questionable to me. Yes, discard is generally good for us but only if it gets what we want. The reason I don't love Tarmogoyf any more is because it's easily killed by a lot of decks or sometimes it's easily ignored. The prevalance of graveyard hate also makes it questionable after game 1.
My point isn't to question the relevance of Storm. My point is that even the decks we're supposed to have an advantage against are getting better while we're stagnant at best and not very well positioned. Can any of you point out a metagame where Jund would dominate? I don't mean be alright in. I mean be legitimately good. I can do that for several other decks.
There isn't one. But that is why Jund is a Tier 2 deck and only just came back out of the cellars of Developing Competitive. Unless they get rid of Tron altogether, there won't be a format in which Jund is extremely relevant. Currently we are playing dodge the big mana matchups and prey on Affinity, Humans, Jeskai Tempo and other creature based decks. What our goal in this thread isn't to say that Jund is the best deck in the format but work to improve our 75's to make our versions of Jund be the best they can be so that if the metagame becomes more favorable that we can be ready to dominate.
So, I'm back from Madrid and our team didn't perform well.
There was an incredible number of Affinity and unfortunatly, our Humans's player took the biggest part of them and get destroyed.
I've moved my 4th Blood Moon for a Chandra, when I bring Blood Moon post-side.
Here are my results :
Round 1 :
vs Sun & Moon
I quickly identify the deck when he plays a Calice turn 2 with just Sacred Foundry and a Mountain.
I play a big board and destroy his Ensnaring bridge to kill him in 2 turns.
For the 2°), he mulligan 5 and doesn't draw anything relevant except a Blood Moon (but I've fetched on basic turn 1 and 2)
An ultimate of Liliana closes the game
2-0
Round 2 :
vs Burn
I won the 1st thanks to an agressive hand with Turn 1 IoK on Eidolon, Turn 2 Tarmogoyf, Turn 3 Goblin Rabblemaster
The 2°) I won a lot of life thanks to Collective Brutality and Huntmaster but this last one is killed by a Searing Blaze and I don't find some other creatures.
The 3°) is closed, unfortunatly I've discarded the Skullcrack of my opponent Turn 3 before playing a Tarmogoyf then Huntmaster but my opponent draw an other Skullcrack then a Path to exile to deal with my Tarmogoyf and kill the Huntmaster the turn after. I can't come back.
1-2
Round 3 :
vs Affinity
I stabilize the board and start being aggressive at 8 life but my opponent had one Galvanic Blast and wait for the 2nd one to finish me.
The 2°) two Tarmogoyfs 5/6 end the game pretty quickly.
The 3°) I've tried to stop the aggressive start of my opponent with 2 Arcbound Ravager and 1 Etched Champion but can't balance the board and finish to die.
1-2
Round 4 :
vs Abzan Company
The first one is though, my opponent doesn't play the combo but the grindy style with 2 Kitchen Finks then Eternal Witness on Kitchen Finks, etc.
The 2°) a turn 3 Blood Moon closes the game pretty quickly while Rabblemaster floods the board.
The last one is an attrition war but my opponent finish with an empty board and an emtpy hand whereas I've got a Tarmogoyf, a Terminate in hand (in case of he found a Collective Company) and a Raging Ravine (in case of he finds a Path to Exile for my Tarmogoyf).
2-1
Round 5 :
vs Affinity
At the first one my opponent is too slow and I find enough removals to deal with his board.
The 2°) is pretty easy, I mull 6 but have a Shatterstorm and Anger of the gods in hand.
It's a butchery.
2-0
Round 6 :
vs Burn
I win the first one thanks to a slow start of my opponent and 2 IoK + an unanswered Kalitas.
The 2°) I have to mull 5 to have some effective cards against Burn, unfortunatly, I can't earn enough life to finish the game.
The last one, my opponent keeps a hand full of creatures, not the best one against Jund.
However I've finished at 2 life when he dies.
2-1
Round 7 :
vs Junk
My opponent starts the game, discards my discard, kills my Dark Confidant and then play a first Dark Confidant (that I killed) then an other one which will stay on the board.
Too much CA, I can't balance the board or his hand.
At the 2°) an early Blood Moon (turn 4) makes conceed my opponent when he doesn't have any basic whereas I play a Rabblemaster the next turn.
For the last one, we have a very long and interesting game, I play a late Blood Moon to shut down his Quagmire and slow him down.
I deal with his Lingering Souls and keep a Tarmogoyf to protect my Chandra but he finishes me with 2 Siege Rhino thanks to the reach.
1-2
Round 8 :
vs Eldra Tron
The first one is very long but a Karn finishes the game by himself.
The 2°), Blood Moon is resolved but my opponent find a Expedition Map to find a Waste.
He plays some Eldrazi but just one each turn, which is not the best plan against my hand full of removals and Liliana.
The last one, I make some agressive mulligan to find Blood Moon which is played at my turn 3 when my opponent has 4 non-basic lands.
2-1
Round 9 :
vs UR Storm
Turn 1 discard to take off Baral, Turn 2 Tarmogoyf and the next turns, Electromancer and Baral die to my removals while my Tarmogoyf beat my opponent to death.
The 2°) he plays an Empty the Warrens, unfortunatly I've got Maelstrom Pulse.
However I don't have enough pressure and die to a Grapeshot.
The last one, I manage the hand of my opponent who finally plays 4 Ritual and an Empty the Warrens "all-in" style.
At the end of his turn, I play 2 Bolt and let him at 2 life.
Draw step : I find my last Bolt and finish him !
2-1
I personnaly finish at 6-3, my Affinity team mate fnishes at 4-5 (the deck was expected so a lot of hate).
As said at the beggining, my Humans team mate suffered during all the week-end and finished at 2-7 (with 5 Affinity in his losses).
Day 2, I play a side event :
Round 1: 2-1 vs Jeskaï Tempo
Round 2 : 2-1 vs Affinity
Round 3 : 2-1 vs UW Control
Round 4 : 0-2 vs Gruul and Loss
My feedbacks of this week-end :
- Blood Moon is really strong in the actual metagame and give you the possibility to play against our bad match up (Tron or Valakut)
- Rabblemaster is an incredible clock if unanswered
- never go to a large event without silver bullet against Affinity
My next GP in Lyon will be in February, at Lyon, I will keep the same list than the one played at Madrid.
Always so happy to play Jund midrange with the possibility to deal against all decks of the format.
So I thought it might be useful to put all articles relevant for us in the primer and thus added a chapter in the Technical Play section. If there are any extra articles I forgot, please let me know.
So I thought it might be useful to put all articles relevant for us in the primer and thus added a chapter in the Technical Play section. If there are any extra articles I forgot, please let me know.
Not necessarily technical play related but Reid Duke is one of the masters of Jund and does write articles occasionally on it. IIRC he tends to go into pretty good detail about why he made those changes at the time. While those specific lists aren't exactly relevant, knowing why Jund wants to play certain cards can help people learn how to think "jund"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You can fight it with thoughtseize, which is our best option. I think its usually correct to target their wincons with TS rather than Eggs/Stirrings/Sylvans.
As for the matchups yall have been discussing, Lantern and Affinity are both extremely good matchups. For Jund that typically means 60:40 or 65:35 but still they feel very good with tight play. One thing I will say about the Affinity postboard matchup, I objectively think taking out all the LotV is wrong. It's your only clean answer (outside damnation) to Etched champion. I do shave one usually but I like to leave in 2 and treat it as an edict effect. If your opponent then attacks into it, it bought you at least 1 life as well. There are plenty of worse cards to leave in during the matchup that I'd rather cut.
As for the Lantern hate. For me it's the same reason I hate Tron. They don't actually kill you on turn 3. They just stop you from playing the game while they fumble their way to victory. There are large enough chances that you could draw out of it so you should play it out and thus you play the most miserable form of magic until you determine that your chances are gone.
About Technical play in general, by PV "Technical Play".
Specifically suited for Jund, I can recommend "Thoughtseize You" by Reid Duke.
The classical article everyone should read as a Magic player is "Who is the Beatdown" by Michael Flores and the following article: "Eight Core Principles of Who's The Beatdown". There is also "Who is the Beatdown II" by Zvi Mowshowitz.
Then I can think of a great article by Gerry Thompson, if you are interested in the topic archetypes in general: "The False Tempo Archetype".
Concerning deckbuilding (and specifically for the manabase, is relevant right now due to the 23/24 land debate): "How many coloured manasources do you need to consistantly cast your spells?".
A few of Reid Dukes basic articles concerning the game: "Level One: The Full Course". Its very basic, but amongs these, a really great one to mention is "The Metagame" where Reid talks about how to determine a given metagame and how to handle it.
I find this very appealing and useful: "Playing to win versus playing not to loose" by PV.
Again by Michael Flores: "The End of Virtual Card Advantage".
About tempo and card advantage: "Tempo and Card Advantage".
Since playing Jund gets more successful if you play tight: "Tight Plays" by Jeremy Neeman. And also by him, conerning taking risks: "Risky Move".
I 100% back all these articles for Jund. Jund IMO is a deck where if you are a sub-par pilot, it'll feel like the worst deck in the world. The inverse of that is that if you are a good pilot, you will hear a lot of opponents grumbling about how you got lucky.
An experienced Affinity player won't let you edict the Champion away. At least not with LoTV alone. That would mean you need multiple removal spells in combination with LoTV to remove Champion. I personally rather have more IOK to just plain discard it from their hand. Yes there are topdecks. Yes sometimes you would be able to edict it away. But there are also times where the opponent doesn't draw the Champion and you have your worthless Lili in hand. Ultimatly I think its correct to shave all copies of her. Leaving in 1 copy or so is not what I would call completely wrong, but am not keen on it too much personally.
I have experienced the inverse of this. Where you draw your IOK late after you've effectively dealt with their board and now it does nothing. LotV has gotten to edict and even ultimate a lot in the matchup and even if it doesn't get to edict away the Etched Champion (which I agree happens rarely) it still gets to eat things and if not dealt with, can really cause issues for your opponent long term. IoK becomes a dead card usually after turn 2 on the draw and turn 3 on the play. That is not good enough IMO.
You are probably right about swapping out a mountain for the 4th blackcleave. 23 land has been fine for me. The 24th land would be the 4th raging ravine anyway, so going to 23 with 3 ravines doesn't cut an untapped land.
So here's my reasoning for hazoret: the format has a lot of big mana and combo decks, and we need to race them. Most of you guys seem to be doing that with rabblemaster, but he could get bolted in the midrange fights while hazoret can't be. Hazoret has haste, so the opponent has to be weary of 5 damage out of nowhere, its also able to block big guys all day until you find an answer. Hazoret is way more flexible than you're giving it credit for. It also gets around odd things like leylines and bridges and survives things like oblivion stone, which might start seeing more play again.
I don't see why we need terminate. What does terminate hit that push doesn't? Reality smasher, primeval titan, endbringer, wurmcoil (which we probably aren't beating anyway), and some odd stuff like revilark. Aside from the odd stuff (which isn't really a thing) and wurmcoil, Liliana cleans up those other threats. Push is better right now because it lets you cast multiple spells earlier, and let's you answer a turn 1 dork more often.
Brutality is similarly more flexible because it still kills a lot but it can be a burn spell or discard as well, and it sets up hazoret. I will admit brutality isn't great against tron and affunity, but it's still great against the rest of the field, and terminate is only slightly better against tron. Terminate doesn't actually solve my problem though, which is etched champion. I can kill their other threats, but champion makes it almost impossible to win because they just brick your goyfs and beat you in the air, or use a plating/ravager effect to kill you in one or two hits.
anger is my grave hate along with ooze and cage. I will have 9 discard spells along with liliana and lost legacy post board against storm. They will be going for empty the warrens most of the time (or madcap experiment), which they don't really need past in flames for anyway, and there's no other deck that uses the graveyard as an engine that isn't either soft to ooze or creature based, so anger is actually good grave hate right now, while making the small creature matchups really easy. I can see cutting one anger for flaying tendrils or kozilek's return to have a shot against etched champion, and maybe another for a damnation just incase the rb hollow one deck gets bigger, but I feel pretty strongly that the sweepers that exile are really well positioned in the meta.
2 lavamancer post board could be too many I can see cutting the one in the board for something else, a second grudge might not be a bad idea. Unravel the aether could be good as well just so we have an out to a wurmcoil engine.
Standard/Block = The on-again, off-again holiday fling
Modern/Vintage/Legacy = Stable, homely. A ***** after absence/misreading
Limited/Sealed = Heart breaking free spirit
Commander/Cube = Agreeable, needy and expensive
Pauper/Peasant = Sweet, kind, practical, but shy and boring
My meta doesn't even have these represented in massive quantities (like I've played vs GDS at the 1k a few weekends back and it was the first time I'd played against it since like August) and even still I insist on 3 Terminates. Sometimes you just need a catch all that will kill everything no matter what.
Yea, but my problem with this line of thinking is that we still think all of our spells and threats are "good enough." Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think that is true any more. The strongest card in the deck to me is Liliana of the Veil with Tarmogoyf being one of the weakest. Everything else in our deck is of varying degree of useful(-less). I don't see how being the reactive the deck with generally questionable spells is a recipe for success. The only way I see Jund being good now is via accurately predicting a positive metagame for Jund. That's a huge roll of the die considering how wide-open the format is now. I've been to a few PPTQs where I just played for craps 'n giggles where I rolled out with Jund and got really luck to beat a couple Tron players and an Eldrazi Tron player. If I had known that's what the metagame would've been (or if one them was a better player), there's no way I would have left the house. Another example is Storm now. Are we sure this is still a positive match now? With Gifts Ungiven, they're just as good at playing the long game as they are at trying to kill you on turn 3 or 4.
I tend to agree with you on a lot of accounts except your valuation there of LotV and Goyf. I think the strongest card in the deck is IoK/TS for most matchups and our weakest card is one of our removal spells (which varies from matchup to matchup). Goyf is just a dumb beater but still a very good threat. Up til GP OKC, Jund was a pretty decent meta option for a few weeks. GP OKC was heavily slanted against that it seems. We'll see how the meta shifts going forward.
I think Storm is still 50/50 to favorable for us. It's not as favored as it once was but we have the removal for their creatures, discard to rip their hand and adequate GY hate to fight the gifts plan IMO.
My point isn't to question the relevance of Storm. My point is that even the decks we're supposed to have an advantage against are getting better while we're stagnant at best and not very well positioned. Can any of you point out a metagame where Jund would dominate? I don't mean be alright in. I mean be legitimately good. I can do that for several other decks.
4 Ravines is not the standard in a 24 landbase. It has been 3 Ravines for a while now. The tapped land issue is the reason why 3 Ravine is the maximum we want. So in that sense, you can put it your way if you want, but considering a standard 24 landbase you are actually cutting an untapped land, not a ravine.
Fatal Push is not here to replace Terminate. But more so to replace Bolt. Bolt only very recently became good enough again, most lists were running 2 Bolts at maximum prior to this. Right now 2-3 Pushes, 2-3 Bolts as well as 3 Terminates is the concensus. You can surely change numbers around, but I would not go below 2 Terminates maindeck at any point.
This is a fair point, and I agree with that. Our answers are indeed not good enough sometimes. But I don't think just cutting a land and put in another of those not good enough spells will change that a lot. The problem is that our spells are weak, yeah, but we have nothing to replace them with. I do also think Goyf is very weak in general. But I think that discard is stronger than LoTV basically. I think TS is the best spell currently in the format arguably. One way to do it, and I thought about that approach, is to increase discard count and reduce on board answers. Discard will always be able to hit what we want (at least TS), and things like Push/Bolt/Terminate/Pulse can be dead or too slow/situational.
I think Storm is still decent enough for us. They are certainly able to grind, but I think its still favourable to a certain extent. Might not be a bye or anything close, but it doesnt feel 50/50 for me at least.
There isn't one. But that is why Jund is a Tier 2 deck and only just came back out of the cellars of Developing Competitive. Unless they get rid of Tron altogether, there won't be a format in which Jund is extremely relevant. Currently we are playing dodge the big mana matchups and prey on Affinity, Humans, Jeskai Tempo and other creature based decks. What our goal in this thread isn't to say that Jund is the best deck in the format but work to improve our 75's to make our versions of Jund be the best they can be so that if the metagame becomes more favorable that we can be ready to dominate.
There was an incredible number of Affinity and unfortunatly, our Humans's player took the biggest part of them and get destroyed.
Here is the list that I've finally brought :
2 Swamp
1 Forest
4 Blackcleave Cliffs
1 Blood Crypt
4 Bloodstained Mire
1 Overgrown Tomb
3 Raging Ravine
1 Stomping Ground
4 Verdant Catacombs
2 Wooded Foothills
Creatures
4 Dark Confidant
2 Scavenging Ooze
4 Tarmogoyf
2 Goblin Rabblemaster
1 Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet
4 Liliana of the Veil
1 Liliana, the Last Hope
Instants
3 Fatal Push
3 Lightning Bolt
2 Abrupt Decay
3 Terminate
1 Kolaghan's Command
Sorceries
3 Inquisition of Kozilek
3 Thoughtseize
1 Maelstrom Pulse
1 Huntmaster of the Fells
1 Chandra, Torch of Defiance
2 Nihil Spellbomb
3 Blood Moon
1 Ancient Grudge
3 Collective Brutality
2 Anger of the Gods
1 Damnation
1 Shatterstorm
I've moved my 4th Blood Moon for a Chandra, when I bring Blood Moon post-side.
Here are my results :
Round 1 :
vs Sun & Moon
I quickly identify the deck when he plays a Calice turn 2 with just Sacred Foundry and a Mountain.
I play a big board and destroy his Ensnaring bridge to kill him in 2 turns.
For the 2°), he mulligan 5 and doesn't draw anything relevant except a Blood Moon (but I've fetched on basic turn 1 and 2)
An ultimate of Liliana closes the game
2-0
Round 2 :
vs Burn
I won the 1st thanks to an agressive hand with Turn 1 IoK on Eidolon, Turn 2 Tarmogoyf, Turn 3 Goblin Rabblemaster
The 2°) I won a lot of life thanks to Collective Brutality and Huntmaster but this last one is killed by a Searing Blaze and I don't find some other creatures.
The 3°) is closed, unfortunatly I've discarded the Skullcrack of my opponent Turn 3 before playing a Tarmogoyf then Huntmaster but my opponent draw an other Skullcrack then a Path to exile to deal with my Tarmogoyf and kill the Huntmaster the turn after. I can't come back.
1-2
Round 3 :
vs Affinity
I stabilize the board and start being aggressive at 8 life but my opponent had one Galvanic Blast and wait for the 2nd one to finish me.
The 2°) two Tarmogoyfs 5/6 end the game pretty quickly.
The 3°) I've tried to stop the aggressive start of my opponent with 2 Arcbound Ravager and 1 Etched Champion but can't balance the board and finish to die.
1-2
Round 4 :
vs Abzan Company
The first one is though, my opponent doesn't play the combo but the grindy style with 2 Kitchen Finks then Eternal Witness on Kitchen Finks, etc.
The 2°) a turn 3 Blood Moon closes the game pretty quickly while Rabblemaster floods the board.
The last one is an attrition war but my opponent finish with an empty board and an emtpy hand whereas I've got a Tarmogoyf, a Terminate in hand (in case of he found a Collective Company) and a Raging Ravine (in case of he finds a Path to Exile for my Tarmogoyf).
2-1
Round 5 :
vs Affinity
At the first one my opponent is too slow and I find enough removals to deal with his board.
The 2°) is pretty easy, I mull 6 but have a Shatterstorm and Anger of the gods in hand.
It's a butchery.
2-0
Round 6 :
vs Burn
I win the first one thanks to a slow start of my opponent and 2 IoK + an unanswered Kalitas.
The 2°) I have to mull 5 to have some effective cards against Burn, unfortunatly, I can't earn enough life to finish the game.
The last one, my opponent keeps a hand full of creatures, not the best one against Jund.
However I've finished at 2 life when he dies.
2-1
Round 7 :
vs Junk
My opponent starts the game, discards my discard, kills my Dark Confidant and then play a first Dark Confidant (that I killed) then an other one which will stay on the board.
Too much CA, I can't balance the board or his hand.
At the 2°) an early Blood Moon (turn 4) makes conceed my opponent when he doesn't have any basic whereas I play a Rabblemaster the next turn.
For the last one, we have a very long and interesting game, I play a late Blood Moon to shut down his Quagmire and slow him down.
I deal with his Lingering Souls and keep a Tarmogoyf to protect my Chandra but he finishes me with 2 Siege Rhino thanks to the reach.
1-2
Round 8 :
vs Eldra Tron
The first one is very long but a Karn finishes the game by himself.
The 2°), Blood Moon is resolved but my opponent find a Expedition Map to find a Waste.
He plays some Eldrazi but just one each turn, which is not the best plan against my hand full of removals and Liliana.
The last one, I make some agressive mulligan to find Blood Moon which is played at my turn 3 when my opponent has 4 non-basic lands.
2-1
Round 9 :
vs UR Storm
Turn 1 discard to take off Baral, Turn 2 Tarmogoyf and the next turns, Electromancer and Baral die to my removals while my Tarmogoyf beat my opponent to death.
The 2°) he plays an Empty the Warrens, unfortunatly I've got Maelstrom Pulse.
However I don't have enough pressure and die to a Grapeshot.
The last one, I manage the hand of my opponent who finally plays 4 Ritual and an Empty the Warrens "all-in" style.
At the end of his turn, I play 2 Bolt and let him at 2 life.
Draw step : I find my last Bolt and finish him !
2-1
I personnaly finish at 6-3, my Affinity team mate fnishes at 4-5 (the deck was expected so a lot of hate).
As said at the beggining, my Humans team mate suffered during all the week-end and finished at 2-7 (with 5 Affinity in his losses).
Day 2, I play a side event :
Round 1:
2-1 vs Jeskaï Tempo
Round 2 :
2-1 vs Affinity
Round 3 :
2-1 vs UW Control
Round 4 :
0-2 vs Gruul and Loss
My feedbacks of this week-end :
- Blood Moon is really strong in the actual metagame and give you the possibility to play against our bad match up (Tron or Valakut)
- Rabblemaster is an incredible clock if unanswered
- never go to a large event without silver bullet against Affinity
My next GP in Lyon will be in February, at Lyon, I will keep the same list than the one played at Madrid.
Always so happy to play Jund midrange with the possibility to deal against all decks of the format.
Gus
Not necessarily technical play related but Reid Duke is one of the masters of Jund and does write articles occasionally on it. IIRC he tends to go into pretty good detail about why he made those changes at the time. While those specific lists aren't exactly relevant, knowing why Jund wants to play certain cards can help people learn how to think "jund"