I went and got a MM17 box from the local LGS. I got a Liliana of the Veil, Inquisition of Kozilek and Scavenging Ooze. I'd like to build BGx in paper so it definitely helps getting the pieces here and there. I don't like the local LGS though because they tend to be very insular towards outsiders and the guys behind the register are jackasses. It will still be a long time before I play paper but I'm happy with the pulls. The sad thing is that the price isn't holding me back from playing paper, it's the toxic local scene.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern URGifts StormUR URBlue MoonUR URKiln FiendUR
Burkhart's Grixis is pretty new. Before that, the decks were muddling around in more midrange/"Blue Jund" territory and trying to walk the line between discard and countermagic. His version is more focused, and has really only been around since GP Dallas (in part because it couldn't exist until the Ancestral Vision unban). I'm of the opinion that it's a worse matchup for Jund than any of the "Blue Jund" decks ever were.
I recall an entire season filled with reactive Grixis decks that were playing the control like two or three years ago. I distinctly remember because Patrick Chapin started a wave of people playing that old-school style of "Gotcha"/Draw-Go Grixis which was around the time of Blue Jund that Gerry T popularized. Ancestral Vision didn't change the nature of the deck, and I know there are still debates over whether or not it should be included. Regardless, Grixis control is still doing what it always does. Is this not similar to Corey Burkhart's list?
Burn is indeed up thanks to Death's Shadow, but its share is not higher than the big mana decks put together, which Jund really struggles against (whereas Shadow is fine, from what I hear). Taking a hit in 6-7% of your matchups to boost 8-9% (which is what Tron and Titanshift have together) from "hopeless" to "winnable" is a pretty big net plus in my book, local meta factors notwithstanding. I also have no evidence to suggest that Affinity is a tangibly worse matchup for Death's Shadow than it is for Jund. They have plenty of discard and removal to hang in there G1, and they typically pack Lingering Souls in the sideboard, which is huge against Affinity. If you can provide evidence to the contrary, that would be neat.
I find this sentiment humorous personally because trying to improve those matchups is laughable (especially Tron). The only solid way to do that is to play a different deck, but that's just based on what Brad Nelson has told his Jund disciples and my own experience. If you could find the tech to do that while still playing Jund, I would be giddier than a kid on Santa's lap.
As far as Affinity goes, I've only seen that matchup played out online a few times. It seems like it's rarely played live or just doesn't make it to Day 2 of most major events.
I would expect Jund to be favored against Shadow, but not by much. Matchup looks pretty even on either side. The skill ceiling argument is a legitimate one, but it clearly isn't stopping that many people from doing well with it. It's not only pros piloting the deck to success.
I didn't say only pros are playing it. I'm saying most of them are the only ones who have the time to test for and play it in an open field. I mean I'm sure I could sleeve it up and fumble my way through an FNM. From just watching people stream while playing Grixis or Jund Death's Shadow and listening to them, some of them aren't really certain of what they should be doing or even have an idea of what line will give them a better percentage to do "X" while (most importantly) balancing their life total. If you look at the metagame numbers, it barely cracks into the tier 1 at 2.9% of the metagame. That's not an overwhelming rate in my opinion.
There's one person at my LGS who has played the deck online and live, and he still finds it exhausting at times to play 4 or 5 rounds with it. Sometimes he gets matched up against Tron and it's easy mode. Sometimes he gets the Jund or Esper control and it's not.
I'm not trying to say that it's a bad deck or a bad article, but there were some points I thought your article missed or glossed over. That's all.
Wait, 2.9%? What metagame numbers are you looking at? ModernNexus? Because that's hopelessly out of date. Note that it only tracks data through Feb. 5. We just recently put up a more current metagame analysis that has it at close to 8%, and that's DOWN from a mid-week high of close to 11% (possibly because the deck is hard to play). The people have switched over en masse. Your perspective makes more sense based on your comments, though - you're operating on outdated information.
And while the list you linked to is similar in outlook to Corey's list, it's missing many particulars. Corey would never reach for something like Young Pyromancer, as it's too vulnerable when there are few other threats to draw removal away from it. The lower amount of Cryptics also stands out to me. People cycled through Chapin's list, went through a "Blue Jund" phase, and then came back to draw-go once Ancestral Vision was unbanned.
Wait, 2.9%? What metagame numbers are you looking at? ModernNexus? Because that's hopelessly out of date. Note that it only tracks data through Feb. 5. We just recently put up a more current metagame analysis that has it at close to 8%, and that's DOWN from a mid-week high of close to 11% (possibly because the deck is hard to play). The people have switched over en masse. Your perspective makes more sense based on your comments, though - you're operating on outdated information.
And while the list you linked to is similar in outlook to Corey's list, it's missing many particulars. Corey would never reach for something like Young Pyromancer, as it's too vulnerable when there are few other threats to draw removal away from it. The lower amount of Cryptics also stands out to me. People cycled through Chapin's list, went through a "Blue Jund" phase, and then came back to draw-go once Ancestral Vision was unbanned.
That makes more sense as far as the metagame numbers. When did Modern Nexus metagame info stop updating? That makes me question other info I get there.
And I agree Corey wouldn't. I believe even Patrick Chapin didn't like it. I think he ended up removing them completely at the next event he went to. The point was that Corey Burkhart's list isn't really new.
That makes more sense as far as the metagame numbers. When did Modern Nexus metagame info stop updating? That makes me question other info I get there.
They technically haven't stopped, their updates have just gotten slow and unreliable. Hence why we're trying to plug the gap.
In games when I side in Night of Souls' Betrayal, do I take out all my Dark Confidants? E.g. against Abzan, Affinity.
I think you need Bobs for the CA in Affinity either way, I wouldn't cut them. Abzan, same story. Hedging your bets on a 4-mana spell you might never draw in exchange for the best card engine in your deck doesn't seem right.
I have to say Rothgar13 is correct. I didn't realize you were still looking at modern nexus; that website has been very unreliable ever since Sheridan left.
Take a look on mtgo, Jund is literally at 3.02%, paper events are beginning to reflect this, too.
Austin Bersavich never plays modern, literally picked up the deck a week before Dallas, and won the whole thing. The deck is a little difficult to play, but not THAT difficult.
The way you have to look at Shadow is that it has a cohesive plan, it's cantripping, it's ripping an opponents hands to shred, and dropping Shadow or an oversized Goyf very early.
How many times have we kept a good hand in the dark consisting of something like 2 land, 1x Abrupt Decay, 1x Lightning bolt, 1x IOK, 1x Scavenging Ooze, and 1x terminate, only to find out we're playing a blue control deck or ramp deck? That doesn't really happen with DSJ, and what experienced modern players know is that being proactive>reactive. DSJ is complete gas and proactivity while having just enough to interact, interrupt and have massive reach
I think sadly this is where Jund is going, it's not that traditional Jund is bad or it's becoming bad, but it's adapting to the meta now. It's also stuck in an awkward spot where it's slower than DSJ, but it's not as grindy as Junk. Junk has become significantly less clunky with the release of Blooming Marsh, Fatal Push, Nobles and Flayers (a year ago, you'd see me in the Jund thread calling Junk a crappy GBx deck).
I'm a little shocked you haven't sleeved it up and at least tried it out, I think you're very much overestimating the matchup, it feels very 50/50.
So then the question is, do we really need NOSB in the current meta? Yes it wrecks Affinity but it's too slow to make a difference sometimes.
The main Souls deck is Abzan and we don't really wanna bring it in there.
It's good against Bant Eldrazi but again, I'd rather have the CA.
It's an autowin against Infect but who even plays that anymore?
I never liked NOSB (although I do own a copy)
It's slow against Eldrazi, and I feel like jund has so many tools to deal with infect, I'd rather use Grim Lavamancer, who can ping them non-stop along with being brought in a ton of creature matchups.
Against Affinity, I don't want to be relying on the 4 drop, I just want mass removal in large numbers. It also doesn't stop Etched Champion and platings
I have played it. I think it's really good in the matches Jund isn't but I find it underwhelming against interactive decks.
The only reason I like looking at metagame data is to see how I should skew my sideboard and main deck flex options. I didn't pay attention to how recently they updated because it never seemed to be a problem in the past, especially when major events happened. /shrug
Btw I think I would be alright with that hand versus either of those decks. It's a medium hand but it could be so much worse.
I cut Night of Souls' Betrayal a couple weeks ago. I have a local Infect pilot that's still kicking but I rarely need it. I'm more in the market for cheap, efficient spells. If there were also Abzan decks, I would probably bring it back but it seems all flavors of Abzan aren't that popular locally.
Yeah i also cut nosb a while back now. Infect is not a deck right now and affinity is a deck that we have game against anyway. For the Rest its underwhelming atm.
Grim Lavamancer is not at its best right now, would suggest to run him atm. A single Fatal Push would be better I think. Or just another creature like ooze.
Grim Lavamancer is not at its best right now, would suggest to run him atm. A single Fatal Push would be better I think. Or just another creature like ooze.
He's not right now, but let's be honest, neither is lightning bolt or jund. Bolt is still hands down one of the best cards in all of modern, it's just on a downslope right now.
I disagree with Alyius, fatal push is fantastic in this meta, BUT, I believe Jund benefits more from terminate, since Eldrazi is a real deck that's here to stay.
In games when I side in Night of Souls' Betrayal, do I take out all my Dark Confidants? E.g. against Abzan, Affinity.
The idea proposed by some players is that Liliana, the Last Hope effectively replaces Night of Souls' Betrayal, and since the matchups where Liliana of the Veil would be coming out and replaced by sweepers, the planeswalker uniqueness rule wouldn't be a huge problem. I'm not quite on board, yet. NoSB can catch you up if you fall behind against a lot of x/1s, where Liliana, the Last Hope will just die if you cast it onto a field of 10 elfs/lingering souls tokens/etc. But, it also has the upside of not killing Dark Confidant, or even more annoying, killing Tarmogoyf after a Relic of Progenitus get's popped.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The worst part isn't the pain, or the smell, or even the fear of death. It's hearing the clatter of bone on stone and knowing the bones are yours."BRG
In games when I side in Night of Souls' Betrayal, do I take out all my Dark Confidants? E.g. against Abzan, Affinity.
The idea proposed by some players is that Liliana, the Last Hope effectively replaces Night of Souls' Betrayal, and since the matchups where Liliana of the Veil would be coming out and replaced by sweepers, the planeswalker uniqueness rule wouldn't be a huge problem. I'm not quite on board, yet. NoSB can catch you up if you fall behind against a lot of x/1s, where Liliana, the Last Hope will just die if you cast it onto a field of 10 elfs/lingering souls tokens/etc. But, it also has the upside of not killing Dark Confidant, or even more annoying, killing Tarmogoyf after a Relic of Progenitus get's popped.
If you let the board state get that bad without knowingly letting it get that bad with a damnation/anger in hand, you were doing a poor job and were going to lose regardless. Jund is supposed to 1 for 1 opponents (Duke Reid's words, not mine).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
URGifts StormUR
URBlue MoonUR
URKiln FiendUR
BURStormBUR
I recall an entire season filled with reactive Grixis decks that were playing the control like two or three years ago. I distinctly remember because Patrick Chapin started a wave of people playing that old-school style of "Gotcha"/Draw-Go Grixis which was around the time of Blue Jund that Gerry T popularized. Ancestral Vision didn't change the nature of the deck, and I know there are still debates over whether or not it should be included. Regardless, Grixis control is still doing what it always does. Is this not similar to Corey Burkhart's list?
I find this sentiment humorous personally because trying to improve those matchups is laughable (especially Tron). The only solid way to do that is to play a different deck, but that's just based on what Brad Nelson has told his Jund disciples and my own experience. If you could find the tech to do that while still playing Jund, I would be giddier than a kid on Santa's lap.
As far as Affinity goes, I've only seen that matchup played out online a few times. It seems like it's rarely played live or just doesn't make it to Day 2 of most major events.
I didn't say only pros are playing it. I'm saying most of them are the only ones who have the time to test for and play it in an open field. I mean I'm sure I could sleeve it up and fumble my way through an FNM. From just watching people stream while playing Grixis or Jund Death's Shadow and listening to them, some of them aren't really certain of what they should be doing or even have an idea of what line will give them a better percentage to do "X" while (most importantly) balancing their life total. If you look at the metagame numbers, it barely cracks into the tier 1 at 2.9% of the metagame. That's not an overwhelming rate in my opinion.
There's one person at my LGS who has played the deck online and live, and he still finds it exhausting at times to play 4 or 5 rounds with it. Sometimes he gets matched up against Tron and it's easy mode. Sometimes he gets the Jund or Esper control and it's not.
I'm not trying to say that it's a bad deck or a bad article, but there were some points I thought your article missed or glossed over. That's all.
And while the list you linked to is similar in outlook to Corey's list, it's missing many particulars. Corey would never reach for something like Young Pyromancer, as it's too vulnerable when there are few other threats to draw removal away from it. The lower amount of Cryptics also stands out to me. People cycled through Chapin's list, went through a "Blue Jund" phase, and then came back to draw-go once Ancestral Vision was unbanned.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
That makes more sense as far as the metagame numbers. When did Modern Nexus metagame info stop updating? That makes me question other info I get there.
And I agree Corey wouldn't. I believe even Patrick Chapin didn't like it. I think he ended up removing them completely at the next event he went to. The point was that Corey Burkhart's list isn't really new.
They technically haven't stopped, their updates have just gotten slow and unreliable. Hence why we're trying to plug the gap.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
I think you need Bobs for the CA in Affinity either way, I wouldn't cut them. Abzan, same story. Hedging your bets on a 4-mana spell you might never draw in exchange for the best card engine in your deck doesn't seem right.
Abzan Traverse / Traverse Shadow / UR Kiki
No you need bobs against them so nosb is a card you simply can not bring in vs abzan.
The main Souls deck is Abzan and we don't really wanna bring it in there.
It's good against Bant Eldrazi but again, I'd rather have the CA.
It's an autowin against Infect but who even plays that anymore?
Abzan Traverse / Traverse Shadow / UR Kiki
Take a look on mtgo, Jund is literally at 3.02%, paper events are beginning to reflect this, too.
Austin Bersavich never plays modern, literally picked up the deck a week before Dallas, and won the whole thing. The deck is a little difficult to play, but not THAT difficult.
The way you have to look at Shadow is that it has a cohesive plan, it's cantripping, it's ripping an opponents hands to shred, and dropping Shadow or an oversized Goyf very early.
How many times have we kept a good hand in the dark consisting of something like 2 land, 1x Abrupt Decay, 1x Lightning bolt, 1x IOK, 1x Scavenging Ooze, and 1x terminate, only to find out we're playing a blue control deck or ramp deck? That doesn't really happen with DSJ, and what experienced modern players know is that being proactive>reactive. DSJ is complete gas and proactivity while having just enough to interact, interrupt and have massive reach
I think sadly this is where Jund is going, it's not that traditional Jund is bad or it's becoming bad, but it's adapting to the meta now. It's also stuck in an awkward spot where it's slower than DSJ, but it's not as grindy as Junk. Junk has become significantly less clunky with the release of Blooming Marsh, Fatal Push, Nobles and Flayers (a year ago, you'd see me in the Jund thread calling Junk a crappy GBx deck).
I'm a little shocked you haven't sleeved it up and at least tried it out, I think you're very much overestimating the matchup, it feels very 50/50.
I never liked NOSB (although I do own a copy)
It's slow against Eldrazi, and I feel like jund has so many tools to deal with infect, I'd rather use Grim Lavamancer, who can ping them non-stop along with being brought in a ton of creature matchups.
Against Affinity, I don't want to be relying on the 4 drop, I just want mass removal in large numbers. It also doesn't stop Etched Champion and platings
4 Mana is also a lot to get to with infect.
The only reason I like looking at metagame data is to see how I should skew my sideboard and main deck flex options. I didn't pay attention to how recently they updated because it never seemed to be a problem in the past, especially when major events happened. /shrug
Btw I think I would be alright with that hand versus either of those decks. It's a medium hand but it could be so much worse.
He's not right now, but let's be honest, neither is lightning bolt or jund. Bolt is still hands down one of the best cards in all of modern, it's just on a downslope right now.
I disagree with Alyius, fatal push is fantastic in this meta, BUT, I believe Jund benefits more from terminate, since Eldrazi is a real deck that's here to stay.
The idea proposed by some players is that Liliana, the Last Hope effectively replaces Night of Souls' Betrayal, and since the matchups where Liliana of the Veil would be coming out and replaced by sweepers, the planeswalker uniqueness rule wouldn't be a huge problem. I'm not quite on board, yet. NoSB can catch you up if you fall behind against a lot of x/1s, where Liliana, the Last Hope will just die if you cast it onto a field of 10 elfs/lingering souls tokens/etc. But, it also has the upside of not killing Dark Confidant, or even more annoying, killing Tarmogoyf after a Relic of Progenitus get's popped.
If you let the board state get that bad without knowingly letting it get that bad with a damnation/anger in hand, you were doing a poor job and were going to lose regardless. Jund is supposed to 1 for 1 opponents (Duke Reid's words, not mine).