I played last night, I'll make a more in depth post about that later. Just wanted to say, I too was mulling over taking Winding constrictor out of the deck last night. It almost seems like a win more card at this point. It just ends up getting removed, or if we are ahead we are suddenly very ahead. Also, I still love kitesail after playing last night. I do think that having more than 1 Duress would be helpful though. I'm thinking a 3/2 Kitesail/duress split in the total 75 for me, but that might change if I take Snake out entirely, or take out a negate for an extra duress. Also Harsh Scrutiny was good (even though I forgot to scry the first time I used it ) I will be running at least 1 of these mb for my next testing round, possibly 2.
Looking forward to seeing your list, I'll be posting one here in the next couple of days.
The problem with removing Constrictor altogether is that this deck is built around synergy. Temur is such a strong deck, a weak disruption package won't get the job done. Sultai Snek has the potential to go under Temur and finish the game before they can stabilize into their strong 4-/5-drops. A disruption package will affect them somewhat, but especially cards like Kitesail (which effectively only removes one of their MANY removal spells), it'll just delay the inevitable. The only way the disruption package works is if you are backing it with Control elements to play into a late game that's stronger than what Temur packs, at which point you might as well run UB Control.
I think it's fine to see if you can maindeck a disruption package, but you have to use the flex slots, and Constrictor shouldn't be considered a flex spot. I am curious how maindeck disruption affects other match-ups, but since Temur is the one to beat, you shouldn't destabilize the deck against the premier deck in the format to hedge against some other decks.
What would you consider to be the flex slots? It seems like what once were core cards are now bit players or non existent in most pro lists (Hydra, Greenhulk come to immediate mind), and especially for someone like me who doesn't have considerable play/testing time, it's hard to keep up with the evolution.
I took a pretty generic version of Seth Mansfield's Pro Tour deck out tonight. I didn't play well and also too slowly, but pulled a 3-0-1 finish. I had been dreading playing Hostage Taker, but I went for the full four and it was fun. I beat Grixis Control in 2, 4C Revolt in 2, drew with UW Gifts and beat Esper Approach in 3. I miss Hydra, but Hostage Taker is pretty good.
What would you consider to be the flex slots? It seems like what once were core cards are now bit players or non existent in most pro lists (Hydra, Greenhulk come to immediate mind), and especially for someone like me who doesn't have considerable play/testing time, it's hard to keep up with the evolution.
I think the definition of "flex slot" is dependent on if you're running a Hostage Taker build or not. I'm making the assumption that you're running Sultai instead of some of the other variations or even straight GB, since Sultai is the list that has posted result in the meta. Here's my iteration of the deck as compared to Seth Manfield's pro tour decklist:
Sideboard aside, here is an analysis of each #-drop of the deck:
One-drop slot - Some question the value of all 4 Fatal Pushes, but I don't see this as a flex spot so long as Ramunap Red is around. If you're running fewer Hostage Takers, you may not need all the Blossoming Defenses (notice my list runs 3 instead of 4). If you run more lands, you might be able to get away with one fewer Attune with Aether, but the energy synergy is important, so it probably shouldn't be less than 3.
Three-drop slot - Most lists run Rishkar, Peema Renegade as a 2-of in their 3-drop slot as well as 4 Rogue Refiner. I personally dropped Rishkar a while back, so I don't consider him a core card, but the pros still run him.
Four-drop slot - How many Hostage Takers? Seth chose 3, I choose 2, Andrew Jessup started with 4. I like Bristling Hydra, so I opted for one fewer Hostage Taker and one less Blossoming Defense to get the Hydras in.
Five-drop slot - The Scarab God is the premiere finisher in the format and the primary reason to go black over red. The question is, 1 or 2 main deck?
Lands - 21 seems to be the magic number that people run with 4 Attunes. If you drop your curve, you might get away with 20.
Based on the above, I could see the list of flex spots being:
1 Fatal Push if you think aggro is not as likely to be present
1 Blossoming Defense if only play 2 or fewer Hostage Takers
1 Walking Ballista if you think aggro is not as likely to be present
Rishkar for another 2/3 drop creature
2 Hostage Takers (I think minimum of 2 should be considered core at this point, so that leaves up 2 as flex)
Expecting heavy aggro? Probably only have 4-5 flex cards and virtually all of them are creature based. Expecting light aggro? This affords you an extra few slots, maybe 6-7 flex cards with some spells that can be brought in with creatures. Also worth noting is that if you decide to add higher CMC cards (like Gearhulk) without removing other cards (like Scarab God), then the land count will need to go to 22.
Solid analysis, thanks DRay. And yes, I am on Sultai.
This might come across as an odd question, but: why do we run Blossoming Defense while Temur doesn't? It seems that we both have creatures we would want to protect, but only Sultai actually goes that route. Why would they not? And for our purposes, are there cards we could be running instead that are less narrow in application that could strengthen our overall game plan?
I guess what I'm asking with my recent questions is more of a big picture thing: what is this deck's defined role? By way of framing, Ram Red is the beatdown basically 100% of the time, Approach is the control 100% of the time. Temur is arguably this format's primary midrange deck. Where does that put Sultai?
My recent play and building experience is that we are trying to be a "deck of all trades". I've seen it posited around other forums as well as here that we try to build to have no truly terrible matchups, with the flip side being that we have to fight harder for more of our wins. I would also argue that we have a bit of an identity crisis. Longtusk Cub, Winding Constrictor, Glint-Sleeve Siohoner and Blossoming Defense suggest that we want to be the beatdown, but then we start adding things like Hostage Taker which is decidedly not an aggro card, and Scarab God which further pushes us to the late game where frankly I'm not sure is where we want to be. As DRay said above, Temur is the premier deck right now, and given that it solidly occupies the midrange position it seems correct that we should be angling to race it. That puts a card like Hostage Taker out of consideration for me - at least in the main - in favour of adding more aggression. And yes, that does go against the disruption idea I floated earlier.
On the other ends of the spectrum, if we build to get under Temur - which I think mostly means outgrowing them - what does that do to our game against RR, which is arguably faster than us, or Approach, which we may or may not have the speed to overcome? Is it just a matter of hoping we can get game 1 and then hoping to have the right sideboard? Or should we be looking at maindeck tools that can attack on multiple angles to shore up those matches a bit? Are there ways where we can maybe give up a small percentage against Temur to gain more than that against the other big decks in the environment?
Maybe I'm rambling a bit - been a long couple days. Maybe I'm over analyzing things? Thoughts from the more experienced welcomed!
I guess what I'm asking with my recent questions is more of a big picture thing: what is this deck's defined role? By way of framing, Ram Red is the beatdown basically 100% of the time, Approach is the control 100% of the time. Temur is arguably this format's primary midrange deck. Where does that put Sultai?
My recent play and building experience is that we are trying to be a "deck of all trades". I've seen it posited around other forums as well as here that we try to build to have no truly terrible matchups, with the flip side being that we have to fight harder for more of our wins. I would also argue that we have a bit of an identity crisis. Longtusk Cub, Winding Constrictor, Glint-Sleeve Siohoner and Blossoming Defense suggest that we want to be the beatdown, but then we start adding things like Hostage Taker which is decidedly not an aggro card, and Scarab God which further pushes us to the late game where frankly I'm not sure is where we want to be. As DRay said above, Temur is the premier deck right now, and given that it solidly occupies the midrange position it seems correct that we should be angling to race it. That puts a card like Hostage Taker out of consideration for me - at least in the main - in favour of adding more aggression. And yes, that does go against the disruption idea I floated earlier.
On the other ends of the spectrum, if we build to get under Temur - which I think mostly means outgrowing them - what does that do to our game against RR, which is arguably faster than us, or Approach, which we may or may not have the speed to overcome? Is it just a matter of hoping we can get game 1 and then hoping to have the right sideboard? Or should we be looking at maindeck tools that can attack on multiple angles to shore up those matches a bit? Are there ways where we can maybe give up a small percentage against Temur to gain more than that against the other big decks in the environment?
Maybe I'm rambling a bit - been a long couple days. Maybe I'm over analyzing things? Thoughts from the more experienced welcomed!
The article that hoser2 posted is definitely worth the read. I don't agree that 3C Temur stomps on Sultai, at least, my experience has been that I can typically beat 3C Temur. I usually drop a game, but I've won 75% or better of matches against Temur. It's possible some of those were 4C Temur and I just never saw the 4th color, but they played just like 3C Temur did if that was the case.
We actually are a jack of all trades, to a degree. It is also true that we don't have any terrible match-ups, except perhaps Approach of the Second Sun.dec, which is not unbeatable after sideboard, but definitely not the easiest match-up for us. We can be the aggressor, especially if we get Attune into Cub into Constrictor or something silly like that. We can be the more controlling deck, especially post-board, with Siphoner for card draw, Duress/Negate for disruption and control, Push and Contempt for removal, and Vraska/Scarab God for finishers. We can be a midrange deck playing value cards into bigger value cards. Temur is no different, though, which is why both of the decks are very strong decks in the meta right now.
We go under Temur by keeping aggressive hands. You don't want G3 to have no pressure on them, or you probably just lose. Sitting around and waiting for Chandra with thopter blockers or Glorybringer to stabilize the board for them is not what needs to happen. However, trying to get too aggressive can spell disaster as well, if they have multiple removal spells in hand. This is actually the reason why Blossoming Defense is so good. It is mana efficient disruption. It doesn't play as well into Temur's plan because their goal is to use their premier removal to clear the way. They have Lightning Strike, Abrade, and Harnessed Lightning at their disposal, not to mention Chandra and Glorybringer on the higher CMC side. They just don't need Blossoming Defense. In fact, they run Servant of the Conduit to accelerate into Chandra/Glorybringer because of how strong those cards are. Notice, every card listed is a red card, and therefore outside our game plan. On the flip side, we have cards like Fatal Push and Vraska's Contempt. Sure, we can play a card like Walk the Plank if we need additional removal in the deck, but line our removal up against Temur's removal, and it pales in comparison. Fatal Push is obviously good, but we can only get 4. All their removal is 2 CMC. Contempt is 4 CMC, so we don't want 4 of that. Plank is sorcery speed and color intensive, bleh. We need instant speed to combat instant speed, thus Blossoming Defense.
I don't really know that the distinction has been made clearly. The existing metaphors that I am aware of don't exactly work.
The size metaphor has us as slightly smaller than Temur with one less land and no Servants. We are relying on our 2s compared to Temur's 4s and 5s, This metaphor says that we want to to be slightly bigger or much smaller. We can't really get to be much smaller, so I usually try to load up on haymakers. They have Servants, so we are denser, but they can get to the mana to play big stuff sooner. I really find it to be draw dependant and I can't tell which way it leans. I've been brewing jank and not playing much competitively lately, so I would weight DRay's judgements higher.
The "Who's the beatdown" metaphor kind of follows size. Draw, deckbuilding and sideboarding strategy seem like they affect who is the beatdown in any given game.
The clear distinction that I don't know the vocabulary for is that we are more synergistic. The games I lose are often where I can't get more than one thing to stick. If we can get a couple of things to play together, our board can get overwhelming. When I played Temur, nothing would please me more than dropping Chandra onto an empty board. Or Glorybringer onto a board with only one opposing creature. When my Temur opponent sides into all the removal, I'm probably in trouble. We are more of a combo deck than Temur and our removal doesn't line up well with Glorybringer, so it is hard for us to be controlling in the matchup.
DRay's argument for Blossoming Defense is augmented by our need for synergy, our more comboish deck.
On Walk the Plank: I agree DRay, I've tried it and "yuk!" I'm running some Pushes, some Contempts and, from the Pro Tour decks, I fill in with Die Young. Yeah, sorcery speed, but 2 mana can deal with Hazoret, Glorybringer and Torrential Gearhulk.
Good points from both of you. And thanks for that article link.
I definitely hadn't considered placing Sultai in the role of pseudo-combo (which I know isn't totally accurate; just kinda echoing what was said above about "synergy / combo-ish deck"). If we do want to look at the deck from that angle, then yes Blossoming Defense makes total sense as it follows the mantra of "protect your combo pieces". Side note: does Heroic Intervention warrant consideration anywhere?
Following that rabbit trail further, is there room to add ways to either find or recur our "combo" pieces to improve our overall stability? OK, maybe not the search aspect (Diabolic Tutor, Razaketh's Rite and Secret Salvage all seem terrible), but recursion is a thing we might be able to work with:
In black there is Liliana, Death's Majesty as well as the first half of Claim // Fame to get our stuff back into play. Aether Hubs even let us use the back half occasionally!
These could all be terrible ideas that have already been evaluated and discarded (if I were privy to the testing processes of pro teams I wouldn't be asking). But in the interest of furthering the discussion here I figured why not bring them out and let better players than I have a go at them.
The problem with removing Constrictor altogether is that this deck is built around synergy. Temur is such a strong deck, a weak disruption package won't get the job done. Sultai Snek has the potential to go under Temur and finish the game before they can stabilize into their strong 4-/5-drops. A disruption package will affect them somewhat, but especially cards like Kitesail (which effectively only removes one of their MANY removal spells), it'll just delay the inevitable. The only way the disruption package works is if you are backing it with Control elements to play into a late game that's stronger than what Temur packs, at which point you might as well run UB Control.
I think it's fine to see if you can maindeck a disruption package, but you have to use the flex slots, and Constrictor shouldn't be considered a flex spot. I am curious how maindeck disruption affects other match-ups, but since Temur is the one to beat, you shouldn't destabilize the deck against the premier deck in the format to hedge against some other decks.
You're right about removing snek being a bad idea. I was getting a little ahead of myself. However, I'm not sure that Kitesail freebooter would be such a bad card against Temur. I don't play much against that deck, but it seems applicable there. If you target a removal spell with kitesail, they are going to have to spend a removal spell on kitesail in order to get it back. The potential for disrupting their line of play is great. Imagine temur has a Magma spray and a harnessed lighting in hand when we kitesail. We take their magma spray, forcing them to spend their better removal spell on Kitesail in order to get back their lesser spell. Either that, or kitesail sticks around getting in damage. No matter how you look at it, you will get a 1 for 1, but up on damage assuming flying gets through, which it often does. We also have a last minute blocker against Glorybringer.
Not too mention the insane potential for disruption if we have a blossoming defense in hand. We can get rid of two of their removal spells if we b. defense at the right time. Kitesail acts as a scout to protect Hostage taker too. If they have a hand full of removal, wait on taker. If we get their last removal spell with kitesail, time to play taker.
The last benefit, is recursion through The scarab god. THIS IS HUGE! It may not happen all that often, but a 4/4 flyer that potential nabs a card from the opponent's hand? invaluable.
Personally, I see kitesail taking the place of some walking ballista or perhaps a blossoming defense in the mb. Even if not in the mb, being able to bring it from the side along with negate against control is pretty great. We can kitesail an approach of the second sun then use negate/blossoming defense to keep them from having it.
I am curious as to why Walking ballista sees so much play. Is it simply to beat Ramunap Red? Is it just a combat trick that stays on the field? I can understand 1 or 2 mainboard, but 3-4 seems like a lot. I'm advocating for 1Harsh Scrutiny in place of Walking Ballista mb. I have had this card used against me to good effect. I've also received great benefit out of it playing 1 mb and 1 sideboard. Trust me, you will reach for that second sideboard copy often. Turn 1 scout opponent's hand, make them discard Glorybringer and scry 1. Make Ramunap Red discard their etb effect creatures before they get a chance. GET RID OF BRISTLING HYDRA, HAZORET OR THE SCARAB GOD FOR 1! Having a turn 1 or turn 3 2 drop+1 cost play really helps smooth out our mana curve as well.
First off, I agree with the confusion as to this deck's archetype. It's an aggro/midrange/synergy deck that can switch to control-esque after sideboarding.
Bristling Hydras are still winning me many games. The advantage of playing Hydra over Hostage Taker is that it can solidify us as a great midrange deck. We just curve out 2-3-4 with value creatures then start to decimate. We might not want to play Hostage taker turn 4, but hydra is a shoe-in. It also adds back in synergy with snake and provides an incredible energy sink.
I've already mentioned 1 harsh scrutiny over walking ballista. Take out 1 Rishkar in order to have an extra Hydra or Hostage taker. Rishkar doesn't win games on his own, hydra and taker do. Also the deck has more 1 cost spells that allow us to use leftover mana turn 3.
As to my 4 attune/22 land vs. seth's 4/21. I run 2 fetid pools and 1 drowned catacomb to accommodate more black spells mb and in the side. A higher cmc means I want that drowned catacomb to come in untapped on turn 4. I can also play it turn 1 tapped while saving attune with aether for turn 3 in order to ensure color fixing AND an untapped land turn 4. Now, I'm planning on taking out either a land or attune when sideboarding against RR/aggro decks to speed up.
Basically, my list curves out on creatures better than manfield's list on the top end. Despite being down a couple of 2 drop creatures comparatively, I can side in kitesail and walking ballista when needed. My deck has more game ending threats in the 4 cost range, an important distinction. The 22 land/4 attune allows better color fixing, more hands that you can keep, and the flexibility of going down a land or attune when not needed. I have fewer b. defense because I don't rely on it as much due to kitesail and Hydra. My list leans less on the synergy of the deck (but has more of it in Hydra) and has some much better turn 1/2 plays especially after sideboarding.
Note that the kitesail/duress/negate package means the 75 doesn't miss appetite for the unnatural. Also Cartouche of Knowledge as a serious fun-of. Gives us card advantage, a flyer and can possibly put a creature out of glorybringer/chandra/abrade/magma spray/harnessed lightning range on toughness. Don't we want flying longtusk cubs and hydras? Seems good against temur, RR and the mirror.
Looking forward to more great posts! There's been a lot of those lately
I think kitesail is dismal against temur. It sets you up to have all your good two drops smoked in one fail swoop. It’s only a good card in the aggro game plan. I currently only play the black/green snek. I don’t like hostage taker like a lot of people cause it can GET blown out just as easily as it does the blow out.
Ballista grows and can become a formidable attacker as well as an instant kill later in the game once your opponent stabilizes. He is quintessential imo. I would almost always want him off the top.
I have faced situations where hostage taker gets pushed immediately more than once. If it doesnt though, it has great tempo potential and card advantage, all wrapped into one.
@ A_E_IOwn_U: Thanks for the Walking Ballista explanation. I was probably not weighing the potential for Walking Ballista to scale up heavily enough. I agree that Hostage Taker doesn't seems as good as Bristling Hydra most of the time. I actually forgot about including Rhonas the indomitable in my above list. Playing 3-4 hydra makes this card incredible. Rhonas/hydra also gives the deck a more clear midrange/value creatures strategy that is good game 1. Yeah, you can use b. defense to protect taker, but that's a turn 5 play, not a solid turn 4 play on it's own like hydra. Also hydra protects us against Temur much better than hostage taker. Having a big creature on board that can't be targeted before Glorybringer hits will help us to go under Temur, which is what Dray was talking about in my quote from 2 posts above. I'll edit my above list to take out the 2 hostage takers for 1 hydra and 1 Rhonas.
As to Freebooter, I just don't follow people's logic that they'll just end up killing it. You also mention kitesail will just lead to all of our two drops being blown up, but in fact kitesail is one of the only ways to prevent this (besides b. defense, which works great alongside this card.) If they have a removal spell ready to kill a 2 drop, wouldn't it better to force them to spend that spell on a less critical card? I mean all of the standard 2 drops we have die to most of Temur's removal, but people aren't saying we should stop playing those. If you just play a snek, cub or glint-sleeve turn 2, they will almost certainly be able to kill it even with only 1 removal spell in hand. If we kitesail and take their one removal spell out of hand, they probably can't kill our turn 3 play. Since Temur, our worst matchup, has a lot of efficient ways to remove our creatures, it's all the more reason to play kitesail freebooter. EITHER THEY SPEND THEIR REMOVAL ON FREEBOOTER IN ORDER TO GET BACK THEIR REMOVAL AT A TEMPO DISADVANTAGE, OR WE KEEP THEIR SPELL WHILE GETTING IN DAMAGE. Freebooter is one of the best 2 drop plays because we can plan to play our more important, synergistic creatures turn 3-4 feeling better about their survival.
Perhaps freebooter should be relegated to sideboard only instead of diluting our main plan. It doesn't seem like people are saying that though, rather just that it's not a good card for the deck. The card only gets stronger with many of our sideboard cards including some duress and negate. It is a house against the approach of the second sun deck and other control decks to be sure.
A turn 3 or 4 freebooter can be pretty powerful too. On turn 3 leave up mana for blossoming defense, or play a duress before freebooter. On turn 4, save negate in hand/another freebooter. If they counter our freebooter we counter that spell plus get something else out of their hand they were trying to protect. Does Temur plan on playing chandra turn 4? Not when we have freebooter. Even when going second, we freeboot their chandra on turn 3. Their turn 4 they remove freebooter, but can no longer play chandra on curve. It's also worth noting that temur plays pretty few creature spells for a midrange creature based deck. This means more opportunity for freebooter to have a target.
Against Temur or the mirror matchup, we could get attune with aether out of their hand and screw over their land drops. The possibilities are endless.
Has anyone else actually tried playing this card yet? I think it's one of those that's better than expected when you play it. Also I haven't played against Temur since I've added the card, so I don't have actual gameplay experience against that yet.
vs B/R (target) control
+3 Duress
+2 Lifecrafter's Bestiary
-4 Fatal Push
-1 Winding Constrictor
vs Temur
+1 Harsh Scrutiny
+1 Never // Return
+1 River's Rebuke
-2 Fatal Push
-1 ???
vs Sultai
+1 Harsh Scrutiny
+1 Never // Return
-2 ???
vs RamRed
+2 Die Young
+1 Harsh Scrutiny
+1 Never // Return
-4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
vs GPG
+1 Deathgorge Scavenger
+3 Duress
+1 Never // Return
+1 River's Rebuke
-2 Blossoming Defense
-4 Fatal Push
Speaking from a place of limited testing with kitesail freebooter, you do not need a 4/3 freebooter/duress split in the 75. I wouldn't play more than 3 freebooter, because you also want to play duress and negate. Negate is important against control/approach of the second sun decks. No more than 3, maybe only 2 freebooters are needed when playing 2 duress and/or 2 negate. The problem with 4 freebooters is that they can be less effective/redundant compared to 1-2 negate.
River's rebuke is too much in this mostly b/g build potentially. I would rather play Vraska planeswalker or a better cheap tempo card than relying on river's rebuke. Double blue and 6 cost is nothing to sneeze at. I could be wrong as river's rebuke may be game winning. What deck do we need it to beat really though? Probably better to add a harsh scrutiny in my opinion.
Harsh scrutiny seems better than Never//Return. Scrutiny will give you a much better card tempo/card advantage than never/return. We want to get rid of the scariest creatures before they come down. Playing a reactionary card against Glorybringer/hazoret/the scarab god isn't so great.
2 lifecrafter's bestiary may be a bit much in this deck. We can't out card value control with bestiary on the field. We need to stop approach of the second sun, counterspells and removal in games 2/3.
I'm questioning my former statement of running 2 the scarab god mb, though having 2 in the 75 seems like a good idea. I'd replace 1 the scarab god with 1 hydra mb when running 21 land/4 attune split. I'm not sure that running a 22 land/4 or 3 attune to allow 2 the scarab god is the best decision, though I've tried it in the past. We have enough low cost cards/card draw/finishers to end the game in a timely fashion when played properly.
I keep taking out and adding Rhonas back in. This card only adds to playing 3-4 bristling hydra. I keep taking it out when modifying, then adding it back in after remembering how many games it's won.
I get your point about Freebooter vs Negate. My personal experience from playing Negates is that drawing it a turn late is worst feeling ever. I'd rather take a proactive approach in running a body that will almost always hit something of value. Plus discard has always been a favourite tactic of mine (along with land-d, but we all know how that is now) so I want to give it a try. I always have counters in my "to do list" tho, so if I find the full Freebooter plan doesn't get there I have something to revert to.
On the River's Rebuke vs Vraska (or something) idea... I'm torn here. I ran Vraska last week and despite my abysmal record, she put in some good work. But I also like River's Rebuke as a sweeper option. Not sure what direction I'll go here.
Never // Return is an additional hedge against walkers and graveyard shenanigans. You're right tho that it isn't great against hasty and hard-to-kill stuff. I could see adding another Harsh Scrutiny in this spot.
Bestiary vs control isn't something I plan to give up. Sticking one early drastically increases my chances. The scry does in fact produce a marked increase in card quality. I might have said this somewhere before, but I would love to make room for these main - they just do so much.
On a general note, looking at my proposed sideboard plans I feel like I'm heavily weighted against control decks, with only a few tools for aggro and even less than that against other energy matchups. Is that valid? And more importantly, is it correct? Or should I have more stuff to bring in for say the Temur match (and if so, what comes out? I'm at a loss on what to take out vs that and the mirror)?
Now that you mention it, 4 kitesail freebooter is pretty good with 2 the scarab god in the deck. I just wonder which match up to run all of those at the same time.
I'd say river's rebuke, a duress or a kitesail freebooter could become at least 1 negate. Freebooter isn't quite as good against approach of the second sun and counterspells. You could take out a blossoming defense to fit negate in. Negate covers b. defenses hexproof function, but can protect your creatures from being countered against an opponent. An uncounterable bristling hydra can win games.
Against Temur, I'd run 2 Harsh Scrutiny, dropping 1 fatal push and 1 glintsleeve siphoner. Add in 2 kitesail freebooter and remove 2 walking ballista. I only love ballista when I know the opponent is running powerful 1 toughness creatures, and temur has none. Besides, scrutiny is covering removal better than ballista could.
So you'd be looking at -1 glintsleeve siphoner, -3 walking ballista, +2 harsh scrutiny, +2 Kitesail freebooter. I'd remove 1 the scarab god mainboard for a bristling hydra or Rhonas the indomitable. It might be a good idea to remove Nissa for a negate or revolutionary rebuff.
With that plan you can fatal push servant of the conduit to slow them down, then freebooter away their removal, counterspells, attune with aether or chandra. Leave in 3-4 copies of blossoming defense to protect kitesail and other creatures from glorybringer's removal ability.
Perhaps we should all consider running our own copy of revolutionary rebuff in the sb? Our deck relies on being flexible. This could be good against Temur when they try to use removal, play glorybringer or do anything really. Against many decks, our deck needs to be faster and more flexible. We just need to keep the opponent from doing too well in the early and midgame. Eventually, out creatures out value their's and we win the game. Revolutionary rebuff could fill at least 1 slot, either taking the place of a negate, duress, or essence scatter.
Did a little testing this weekend. Main felt really solid. Side is a questionable mess.
Pretty sure I’ve been approaching my sideboard strategy backwards. My tendency is to look at cards I think would be good against different decks, end up with a good 30+ options, narrow it down to the subjective best 15, and then have no idea what to swap out for the awesome SB tech.
This time, I’m looking at the matchups in terms of what cards in the main are sub-optimal or just plain bad against them, and what angles of attack will be best to sub in. Then I’ll be using that to determine how many slots I have available to dedicate to each one. Bonus if I can overlap.
So far it seems like I can make about 4-5 subs for most decks, which means either overlap is essential, or I trim down sideboard options. I’ve got til Saturday morning to figure it out!
Should have some initial thoughts to share later tonight or tomorrow. Just wanted to put the plan out there for general discussion.
@ chaos021 I only play at FNM. I did look at a winning temur deck when it was mentioned that kitesail wouldn't be good against temur. Based on the deck lists and my experience, I still think a freebooter or 2 would be good against Temur. I'd love it if people with more experience would chime in more often with their own gameplay experience.
@ Technowriter in regards to what cards to take out when sideboarding:
Practice obviously helps with this. Freebooter should go in against decks with a lot of removal or other non-creature spells. For example, booter is better than walking ballista against control style decks. (Don't forget you need negate too.) When running bristling hydra, b. defense is less pertinent. I could see taking out 1 blossoming defense when playing against control, because you want negate or freebooter in its place. You want to go after more than just removal spells in that case.
Against ramunap, keep in walking ballista because they have 1 toughness creatures. Take out 1-2 the scarab god because you want to have a lower mana curve. Having a lower curve with relevant hate cards will win the game against RR. Don't forget to add Harsh scrutiny in against them as well. You might take out a vraska's contempt if you have 2 mb in order to lower the curve and play things before you die. I'd put another B. hydra in the sideboard at least. You want 4 of these vs. RR and control. You may also want to take out a glintsleeve or two or a Rogue Refiner or two in this matchup if you're still looking for cards to remove. In my experience, card advantage isn't needed against RR, just a lower mana curve. Besides, glintsleeve dies to all of their removal while snek and cub don't when played out correctly.
Don't feel bad if your board doesn't always change drastically against opponents. You still need the key components of the deck to win. Build your sideboard to specifically attack the worst matchups for the deck, or the most played deck in the meta you can't beat with your mb. Just because a card is really good against certain matchups doesn't mean there's a spot for it in the 75. It should fill a role your mb doesn't fill, and that you need to beat your more fearsome opponents.
How does this look for decklist and sideboard logic? Only maindeck change from the last time I posted a list is turning one Fatal Push into a Doomfall due to a really small pool of regulars and an abundance of oddball control-esque decks.
vs RamRed
-4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
-1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
-1 Rogue Refiner
-1 The Scarab God
+1 Bristling Hydra
+1 Cartouche of Ambition
+2 Die Young
+1 Essence Scatter
+2 Harsh Scrutiny
vs Graveyard Decks
-2 Blossoming Defense
-3 Fatal Push
-1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
+2 Deathgorge Scavenger
+2 Duress
+2 Negate
vs Fat Beats
-3 Walking Ballista
+1 Bristling Hydra
+1 Cartouche of Ambition
+1 Essence Scatter
Of the sideboard cards, the only one I'm really not sure of is Deathgorge Scavenger, simply because graveyard strategies seem to be the only decks to bring it in against. Am I mistaken there? As in, should I be bringing it in vs other decks and if so, what would come out that isn't already coming out? I spose they could come in against control because of Gearhulk silliness...
Sorry to be parachuting in here after not providing feedback earlier.
I don't like a maindeck playset of Blossoming Defense in a deck without Hostage Taker. I would move (to the sideboard) or cut up to two in favor of more threats.
I would move Nissa to the side because of how vulnerable she is to Ramunap Red.
I would bring the last Hydra into the main along with something like a Gonti.
Two other threats to consider: Skysovereign and Vraska.
The third Scavenger might be of interest for the side, as I think they are good against Ramunap Red also.
Looking forward to seeing your list, I'll be posting one here in the next couple of days.
I think it's fine to see if you can maindeck a disruption package, but you have to use the flex slots, and Constrictor shouldn't be considered a flex spot. I am curious how maindeck disruption affects other match-ups, but since Temur is the one to beat, you shouldn't destabilize the deck against the premier deck in the format to hedge against some other decks.
RNA Standard: Grixis Midrange, Jund Deathwhirler, Sultai Vannifar
GRN Standard: Red Midrange, Mono-Blue Tempo, Wr Aggro, Gruul Experimental Dinosaurs, Sultai Midrange, Jeskai Midrange
Modern: Bant Spirits
Forcing a single archetype in all formats: too many colors, bad mana.
I think the definition of "flex slot" is dependent on if you're running a Hostage Taker build or not. I'm making the assumption that you're running Sultai instead of some of the other variations or even straight GB, since Sultai is the list that has posted result in the meta. Here's my iteration of the deck as compared to Seth Manfield's pro tour decklist:
4 Longtusk Cub
4 Walking Ballista
4 Winding Constrictor
4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
4 Rogue Refiner
2 Rhonas the Indomitable
2 Bristling Hydra
2 Hostage Taker
1 The Scarab God
Non-Creature Spells (13)
4 Fatal Push
4 Attune with Aether
2 Vraska's Contempt
3 Blossoming Defense
4 Blooming Marsh
4 Botanical Sanctum
4 Aether Hub
3 Forest
3 Swamp
1 Island
2 Fetid Pools
3 Deathgorge Scavenger
1 Vraska's Contempt
3 Negate
3 Duress
2 Vraska, Relic Seeker
3 Aethersphere Harvester
4 Longtusk Cub
3 Walking Ballista
4 Winding Constrictor
4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
4 Rogue Refiner
2 Rishkar, Peema Renegade
3 Hostage Taker
1 The Scarab God
Non-Creature Spells (14)
4 Fatal Push
4 Attune with Aether
2 Vraska's Contempt
4 Blossoming Defense
4 Blooming Marsh
4 Botanical Sanctum
4 Aether Hub
4 Forest
2 Swamp
1 Island
2 Fetid Pools
3 Duress
2 Die Young
1 Essence Scatter
2 Negate
1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
1 Appetite for the Unnatural
3 Deathgorge Scavenger
1 The Scarab God
This might come across as an odd question, but: why do we run Blossoming Defense while Temur doesn't? It seems that we both have creatures we would want to protect, but only Sultai actually goes that route. Why would they not? And for our purposes, are there cards we could be running instead that are less narrow in application that could strengthen our overall game plan?
I guess what I'm asking with my recent questions is more of a big picture thing: what is this deck's defined role? By way of framing, Ram Red is the beatdown basically 100% of the time, Approach is the control 100% of the time. Temur is arguably this format's primary midrange deck. Where does that put Sultai?
My recent play and building experience is that we are trying to be a "deck of all trades". I've seen it posited around other forums as well as here that we try to build to have no truly terrible matchups, with the flip side being that we have to fight harder for more of our wins. I would also argue that we have a bit of an identity crisis. Longtusk Cub, Winding Constrictor, Glint-Sleeve Siohoner and Blossoming Defense suggest that we want to be the beatdown, but then we start adding things like Hostage Taker which is decidedly not an aggro card, and Scarab God which further pushes us to the late game where frankly I'm not sure is where we want to be. As DRay said above, Temur is the premier deck right now, and given that it solidly occupies the midrange position it seems correct that we should be angling to race it. That puts a card like Hostage Taker out of consideration for me - at least in the main - in favour of adding more aggression. And yes, that does go against the disruption idea I floated earlier.
On the other ends of the spectrum, if we build to get under Temur - which I think mostly means outgrowing them - what does that do to our game against RR, which is arguably faster than us, or Approach, which we may or may not have the speed to overcome? Is it just a matter of hoping we can get game 1 and then hoping to have the right sideboard? Or should we be looking at maindeck tools that can attack on multiple angles to shore up those matches a bit? Are there ways where we can maybe give up a small percentage against Temur to gain more than that against the other big decks in the environment?
Maybe I'm rambling a bit - been a long couple days. Maybe I'm over analyzing things? Thoughts from the more experienced welcomed!
RNA Standard: Grixis Midrange, Jund Deathwhirler, Sultai Vannifar
GRN Standard: Red Midrange, Mono-Blue Tempo, Wr Aggro, Gruul Experimental Dinosaurs, Sultai Midrange, Jeskai Midrange
Modern: Bant Spirits
Forcing a single archetype in all formats: too many colors, bad mana.
The article that hoser2 posted is definitely worth the read. I don't agree that 3C Temur stomps on Sultai, at least, my experience has been that I can typically beat 3C Temur. I usually drop a game, but I've won 75% or better of matches against Temur. It's possible some of those were 4C Temur and I just never saw the 4th color, but they played just like 3C Temur did if that was the case.
We actually are a jack of all trades, to a degree. It is also true that we don't have any terrible match-ups, except perhaps Approach of the Second Sun.dec, which is not unbeatable after sideboard, but definitely not the easiest match-up for us. We can be the aggressor, especially if we get Attune into Cub into Constrictor or something silly like that. We can be the more controlling deck, especially post-board, with Siphoner for card draw, Duress/Negate for disruption and control, Push and Contempt for removal, and Vraska/Scarab God for finishers. We can be a midrange deck playing value cards into bigger value cards. Temur is no different, though, which is why both of the decks are very strong decks in the meta right now.
We go under Temur by keeping aggressive hands. You don't want G3 to have no pressure on them, or you probably just lose. Sitting around and waiting for Chandra with thopter blockers or Glorybringer to stabilize the board for them is not what needs to happen. However, trying to get too aggressive can spell disaster as well, if they have multiple removal spells in hand. This is actually the reason why Blossoming Defense is so good. It is mana efficient disruption. It doesn't play as well into Temur's plan because their goal is to use their premier removal to clear the way. They have Lightning Strike, Abrade, and Harnessed Lightning at their disposal, not to mention Chandra and Glorybringer on the higher CMC side. They just don't need Blossoming Defense. In fact, they run Servant of the Conduit to accelerate into Chandra/Glorybringer because of how strong those cards are. Notice, every card listed is a red card, and therefore outside our game plan. On the flip side, we have cards like Fatal Push and Vraska's Contempt. Sure, we can play a card like Walk the Plank if we need additional removal in the deck, but line our removal up against Temur's removal, and it pales in comparison. Fatal Push is obviously good, but we can only get 4. All their removal is 2 CMC. Contempt is 4 CMC, so we don't want 4 of that. Plank is sorcery speed and color intensive, bleh. We need instant speed to combat instant speed, thus Blossoming Defense.
The size metaphor has us as slightly smaller than Temur with one less land and no Servants. We are relying on our 2s compared to Temur's 4s and 5s, This metaphor says that we want to to be slightly bigger or much smaller. We can't really get to be much smaller, so I usually try to load up on haymakers. They have Servants, so we are denser, but they can get to the mana to play big stuff sooner. I really find it to be draw dependant and I can't tell which way it leans. I've been brewing jank and not playing much competitively lately, so I would weight DRay's judgements higher.
The "Who's the beatdown" metaphor kind of follows size. Draw, deckbuilding and sideboarding strategy seem like they affect who is the beatdown in any given game.
The clear distinction that I don't know the vocabulary for is that we are more synergistic. The games I lose are often where I can't get more than one thing to stick. If we can get a couple of things to play together, our board can get overwhelming. When I played Temur, nothing would please me more than dropping Chandra onto an empty board. Or Glorybringer onto a board with only one opposing creature. When my Temur opponent sides into all the removal, I'm probably in trouble. We are more of a combo deck than Temur and our removal doesn't line up well with Glorybringer, so it is hard for us to be controlling in the matchup.
DRay's argument for Blossoming Defense is augmented by our need for synergy, our more comboish deck.
On Walk the Plank: I agree DRay, I've tried it and "yuk!" I'm running some Pushes, some Contempts and, from the Pro Tour decks, I fill in with Die Young. Yeah, sorcery speed, but 2 mana can deal with Hazoret, Glorybringer and Torrential Gearhulk.
RNA Standard: Grixis Midrange, Jund Deathwhirler, Sultai Vannifar
GRN Standard: Red Midrange, Mono-Blue Tempo, Wr Aggro, Gruul Experimental Dinosaurs, Sultai Midrange, Jeskai Midrange
Modern: Bant Spirits
Forcing a single archetype in all formats: too many colors, bad mana.
I definitely hadn't considered placing Sultai in the role of pseudo-combo (which I know isn't totally accurate; just kinda echoing what was said above about "synergy / combo-ish deck"). If we do want to look at the deck from that angle, then yes Blossoming Defense makes total sense as it follows the mantra of "protect your combo pieces". Side note: does Heroic Intervention warrant consideration anywhere?
Following that rabbit trail further, is there room to add ways to either find or recur our "combo" pieces to improve our overall stability? OK, maybe not the search aspect (Diabolic Tutor, Razaketh's Rite and Secret Salvage all seem terrible), but recursion is a thing we might be able to work with:
You're right about removing snek being a bad idea. I was getting a little ahead of myself. However, I'm not sure that Kitesail freebooter would be such a bad card against Temur. I don't play much against that deck, but it seems applicable there. If you target a removal spell with kitesail, they are going to have to spend a removal spell on kitesail in order to get it back. The potential for disrupting their line of play is great. Imagine temur has a Magma spray and a harnessed lighting in hand when we kitesail. We take their magma spray, forcing them to spend their better removal spell on Kitesail in order to get back their lesser spell. Either that, or kitesail sticks around getting in damage. No matter how you look at it, you will get a 1 for 1, but up on damage assuming flying gets through, which it often does. We also have a last minute blocker against Glorybringer.
Not too mention the insane potential for disruption if we have a blossoming defense in hand. We can get rid of two of their removal spells if we b. defense at the right time. Kitesail acts as a scout to protect Hostage taker too. If they have a hand full of removal, wait on taker. If we get their last removal spell with kitesail, time to play taker.
The last benefit, is recursion through The scarab god. THIS IS HUGE! It may not happen all that often, but a 4/4 flyer that potential nabs a card from the opponent's hand? invaluable.
Personally, I see kitesail taking the place of some walking ballista or perhaps a blossoming defense in the mb. Even if not in the mb, being able to bring it from the side along with negate against control is pretty great. We can kitesail an approach of the second sun then use negate/blossoming defense to keep them from having it.
I am curious as to why Walking ballista sees so much play. Is it simply to beat Ramunap Red? Is it just a combat trick that stays on the field? I can understand 1 or 2 mainboard, but 3-4 seems like a lot. I'm advocating for 1Harsh Scrutiny in place of Walking Ballista mb. I have had this card used against me to good effect. I've also received great benefit out of it playing 1 mb and 1 sideboard. Trust me, you will reach for that second sideboard copy often. Turn 1 scout opponent's hand, make them discard Glorybringer and scry 1. Make Ramunap Red discard their etb effect creatures before they get a chance. GET RID OF BRISTLING HYDRA, HAZORET OR THE SCARAB GOD FOR 1! Having a turn 1 or turn 3 2 drop+1 cost play really helps smooth out our mana curve as well.
Here's my new list with analysis following
4x Glint-sleeve Siphoner
4x Longtusk Cub
1x Walking Ballista
1x Kitesail freebooter
4x Rogue Refiner
1x Rishkar, Peema renegade
3x Bristling Hydra
2x Hostage Taker
1x The Scarab God
non-creature 13
4x Attune with Aether
2x Blossoming defense
4x Fatal Push
1x Harsh Scrutiny
2x Vraska's Contempt
4x Aether Hub
4x Blooming Marsh
4x Botanical Sanctum
2x Fetid Pools
1x Drowned Catacomb
4x forest
2x swamp
1x Island
2x Blossoming Defense
1x Die young
2x Deathgorge Scavenger
2x Negate
2x Kitesail freebooter
2x Duress
1x Harsh Scrutiny
1x The Scarab God
1x Walking Ballista
1x Cartouche of knowledge
Comparison between this deck and
4 Longtusk Cub
3 Walking Ballista
4 Winding Constrictor
4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
4 Rogue Refiner
2 Rishkar, Peema Renegade
3 Hostage Taker
1 The Scarab God
Non-Creature Spells (14)
4 Fatal Push
4 Attune with Aether
2 Vraska's Contempt
4 Blossoming Defense
4 Blooming Marsh
4 Botanical Sanctum
4 Aether Hub
4 Forest
2 Swamp
1 Island
2 Fetid Pools
3 Duress
2 Die Young
1 Essence Scatter
2 Negate
1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
1 Appetite for the Unnatural
3 Deathgorge Scavenger
1 The Scarab God
Bristling Hydras are still winning me many games. The advantage of playing Hydra over Hostage Taker is that it can solidify us as a great midrange deck. We just curve out 2-3-4 with value creatures then start to decimate. We might not want to play Hostage taker turn 4, but hydra is a shoe-in. It also adds back in synergy with snake and provides an incredible energy sink.
I've already mentioned 1 harsh scrutiny over walking ballista. Take out 1 Rishkar in order to have an extra Hydra or Hostage taker. Rishkar doesn't win games on his own, hydra and taker do. Also the deck has more 1 cost spells that allow us to use leftover mana turn 3.
As to my 4 attune/22 land vs. seth's 4/21. I run 2 fetid pools and 1 drowned catacomb to accommodate more black spells mb and in the side. A higher cmc means I want that drowned catacomb to come in untapped on turn 4. I can also play it turn 1 tapped while saving attune with aether for turn 3 in order to ensure color fixing AND an untapped land turn 4. Now, I'm planning on taking out either a land or attune when sideboarding against RR/aggro decks to speed up.
Basically, my list curves out on creatures better than manfield's list on the top end. Despite being down a couple of 2 drop creatures comparatively, I can side in kitesail and walking ballista when needed. My deck has more game ending threats in the 4 cost range, an important distinction. The 22 land/4 attune allows better color fixing, more hands that you can keep, and the flexibility of going down a land or attune when not needed. I have fewer b. defense because I don't rely on it as much due to kitesail and Hydra. My list leans less on the synergy of the deck (but has more of it in Hydra) and has some much better turn 1/2 plays especially after sideboarding.
Note that the kitesail/duress/negate package means the 75 doesn't miss appetite for the unnatural. Also Cartouche of Knowledge as a serious fun-of. Gives us card advantage, a flyer and can possibly put a creature out of glorybringer/chandra/abrade/magma spray/harnessed lightning range on toughness. Don't we want flying longtusk cubs and hydras? Seems good against temur, RR and the mirror.
Looking forward to more great posts! There's been a lot of those lately
Ballista grows and can become a formidable attacker as well as an instant kill later in the game once your opponent stabilizes. He is quintessential imo. I would almost always want him off the top.
I have faced situations where hostage taker gets pushed immediately more than once. If it doesnt though, it has great tempo potential and card advantage, all wrapped into one.
Modern: WUBRG Humans - GBW Traverse - GWU Knightfall - GRW Bushwhacker Zoo -
4 Blooming Marsh
4 Botanical Sanctum
2 Drowned Catacomb
3 Forest
1 Island
3 Swamp
4 Blossoming Defense
4 Fatal Push
2 Vraska's Contempt
1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
3 Bristling Hydra
4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
4 Longtusk Cub
4 Rogue Refiner
2 The Scarab God
3 Walking Ballista
4 Winding Constrictor
1 Deathgorge Scavenger
2 Die Young
3 Duress
1 Harsh Scrutiny
4 Kitesail Freebooter
2 Lifecrafter's Bestiary
1 Never // Return
1 River's Rebuke
I'd appreciate critique of the build as a whole, as well as suggestions to improve my sideboarding thoughts.
Sideboarding:
vs U/W (sweeper) control
+3 Duress
+4 Kitesail Freebooter
+2 Lifecrafter's Bestiary
-1 Blossoming Defense
-4 Fatal Push
-4 Winding Constrictor
vs B/R (target) control
+3 Duress
+2 Lifecrafter's Bestiary
-4 Fatal Push
-1 Winding Constrictor
vs Temur
+1 Harsh Scrutiny
+1 Never // Return
+1 River's Rebuke
-2 Fatal Push
-1 ???
vs Sultai
+1 Harsh Scrutiny
+1 Never // Return
-2 ???
vs RamRed
+2 Die Young
+1 Harsh Scrutiny
+1 Never // Return
-4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
vs GPG
+1 Deathgorge Scavenger
+3 Duress
+1 Never // Return
+1 River's Rebuke
-2 Blossoming Defense
-4 Fatal Push
As to Freebooter, I just don't follow people's logic that they'll just end up killing it. You also mention kitesail will just lead to all of our two drops being blown up, but in fact kitesail is one of the only ways to prevent this (besides b. defense, which works great alongside this card.) If they have a removal spell ready to kill a 2 drop, wouldn't it better to force them to spend that spell on a less critical card? I mean all of the standard 2 drops we have die to most of Temur's removal, but people aren't saying we should stop playing those. If you just play a snek, cub or glint-sleeve turn 2, they will almost certainly be able to kill it even with only 1 removal spell in hand. If we kitesail and take their one removal spell out of hand, they probably can't kill our turn 3 play. Since Temur, our worst matchup, has a lot of efficient ways to remove our creatures, it's all the more reason to play kitesail freebooter. EITHER THEY SPEND THEIR REMOVAL ON FREEBOOTER IN ORDER TO GET BACK THEIR REMOVAL AT A TEMPO DISADVANTAGE, OR WE KEEP THEIR SPELL WHILE GETTING IN DAMAGE. Freebooter is one of the best 2 drop plays because we can plan to play our more important, synergistic creatures turn 3-4 feeling better about their survival.
Perhaps freebooter should be relegated to sideboard only instead of diluting our main plan. It doesn't seem like people are saying that though, rather just that it's not a good card for the deck. The card only gets stronger with many of our sideboard cards including some duress and negate. It is a house against the approach of the second sun deck and other control decks to be sure.
A turn 3 or 4 freebooter can be pretty powerful too. On turn 3 leave up mana for blossoming defense, or play a duress before freebooter. On turn 4, save negate in hand/another freebooter. If they counter our freebooter we counter that spell plus get something else out of their hand they were trying to protect. Does Temur plan on playing chandra turn 4? Not when we have freebooter. Even when going second, we freeboot their chandra on turn 3. Their turn 4 they remove freebooter, but can no longer play chandra on curve. It's also worth noting that temur plays pretty few creature spells for a midrange creature based deck. This means more opportunity for freebooter to have a target.
Against Temur or the mirror matchup, we could get attune with aether out of their hand and screw over their land drops. The possibilities are endless.
Has anyone else actually tried playing this card yet? I think it's one of those that's better than expected when you play it. Also I haven't played against Temur since I've added the card, so I don't have actual gameplay experience against that yet.
River's rebuke is too much in this mostly b/g build potentially. I would rather play Vraska planeswalker or a better cheap tempo card than relying on river's rebuke. Double blue and 6 cost is nothing to sneeze at. I could be wrong as river's rebuke may be game winning. What deck do we need it to beat really though? Probably better to add a harsh scrutiny in my opinion.
Harsh scrutiny seems better than Never//Return. Scrutiny will give you a much better card tempo/card advantage than never/return. We want to get rid of the scariest creatures before they come down. Playing a reactionary card against Glorybringer/hazoret/the scarab god isn't so great.
2 lifecrafter's bestiary may be a bit much in this deck. We can't out card value control with bestiary on the field. We need to stop approach of the second sun, counterspells and removal in games 2/3.
I'm questioning my former statement of running 2 the scarab god mb, though having 2 in the 75 seems like a good idea. I'd replace 1 the scarab god with 1 hydra mb when running 21 land/4 attune split. I'm not sure that running a 22 land/4 or 3 attune to allow 2 the scarab god is the best decision, though I've tried it in the past. We have enough low cost cards/card draw/finishers to end the game in a timely fashion when played properly.
I keep taking out and adding Rhonas back in. This card only adds to playing 3-4 bristling hydra. I keep taking it out when modifying, then adding it back in after remembering how many games it's won.
I get your point about Freebooter vs Negate. My personal experience from playing Negates is that drawing it a turn late is worst feeling ever. I'd rather take a proactive approach in running a body that will almost always hit something of value. Plus discard has always been a favourite tactic of mine (along with land-d, but we all know how that is now) so I want to give it a try. I always have counters in my "to do list" tho, so if I find the full Freebooter plan doesn't get there I have something to revert to.
On the River's Rebuke vs Vraska (or something) idea... I'm torn here. I ran Vraska last week and despite my abysmal record, she put in some good work. But I also like River's Rebuke as a sweeper option. Not sure what direction I'll go here.
Never // Return is an additional hedge against walkers and graveyard shenanigans. You're right tho that it isn't great against hasty and hard-to-kill stuff. I could see adding another Harsh Scrutiny in this spot.
Bestiary vs control isn't something I plan to give up. Sticking one early drastically increases my chances. The scry does in fact produce a marked increase in card quality. I might have said this somewhere before, but I would love to make room for these main - they just do so much.
On a general note, looking at my proposed sideboard plans I feel like I'm heavily weighted against control decks, with only a few tools for aggro and even less than that against other energy matchups. Is that valid? And more importantly, is it correct? Or should I have more stuff to bring in for say the Temur match (and if so, what comes out? I'm at a loss on what to take out vs that and the mirror)?
I'd say river's rebuke, a duress or a kitesail freebooter could become at least 1 negate. Freebooter isn't quite as good against approach of the second sun and counterspells. You could take out a blossoming defense to fit negate in. Negate covers b. defenses hexproof function, but can protect your creatures from being countered against an opponent. An uncounterable bristling hydra can win games.
Against Temur, I'd run 2 Harsh Scrutiny, dropping 1 fatal push and 1 glintsleeve siphoner. Add in 2 kitesail freebooter and remove 2 walking ballista. I only love ballista when I know the opponent is running powerful 1 toughness creatures, and temur has none. Besides, scrutiny is covering removal better than ballista could.
So you'd be looking at -1 glintsleeve siphoner, -3 walking ballista, +2 harsh scrutiny, +2 Kitesail freebooter. I'd remove 1 the scarab god mainboard for a bristling hydra or Rhonas the indomitable. It might be a good idea to remove Nissa for a negate or revolutionary rebuff.
With that plan you can fatal push servant of the conduit to slow them down, then freebooter away their removal, counterspells, attune with aether or chandra. Leave in 3-4 copies of blossoming defense to protect kitesail and other creatures from glorybringer's removal ability.
Perhaps we should all consider running our own copy of revolutionary rebuff in the sb? Our deck relies on being flexible. This could be good against Temur when they try to use removal, play glorybringer or do anything really. Against many decks, our deck needs to be faster and more flexible. We just need to keep the opponent from doing too well in the early and midgame. Eventually, out creatures out value their's and we win the game. Revolutionary rebuff could fill at least 1 slot, either taking the place of a negate, duress, or essence scatter.
Pretty sure I’ve been approaching my sideboard strategy backwards. My tendency is to look at cards I think would be good against different decks, end up with a good 30+ options, narrow it down to the subjective best 15, and then have no idea what to swap out for the awesome SB tech.
This time, I’m looking at the matchups in terms of what cards in the main are sub-optimal or just plain bad against them, and what angles of attack will be best to sub in. Then I’ll be using that to determine how many slots I have available to dedicate to each one. Bonus if I can overlap.
So far it seems like I can make about 4-5 subs for most decks, which means either overlap is essential, or I trim down sideboard options. I’ve got til Saturday morning to figure it out!
Should have some initial thoughts to share later tonight or tomorrow. Just wanted to put the plan out there for general discussion.
@ Technowriter in regards to what cards to take out when sideboarding:
Practice obviously helps with this. Freebooter should go in against decks with a lot of removal or other non-creature spells. For example, booter is better than walking ballista against control style decks. (Don't forget you need negate too.) When running bristling hydra, b. defense is less pertinent. I could see taking out 1 blossoming defense when playing against control, because you want negate or freebooter in its place. You want to go after more than just removal spells in that case.
Against ramunap, keep in walking ballista because they have 1 toughness creatures. Take out 1-2 the scarab god because you want to have a lower mana curve. Having a lower curve with relevant hate cards will win the game against RR. Don't forget to add Harsh scrutiny in against them as well. You might take out a vraska's contempt if you have 2 mb in order to lower the curve and play things before you die. I'd put another B. hydra in the sideboard at least. You want 4 of these vs. RR and control. You may also want to take out a glintsleeve or two or a Rogue Refiner or two in this matchup if you're still looking for cards to remove. In my experience, card advantage isn't needed against RR, just a lower mana curve. Besides, glintsleeve dies to all of their removal while snek and cub don't when played out correctly.
Don't feel bad if your board doesn't always change drastically against opponents. You still need the key components of the deck to win. Build your sideboard to specifically attack the worst matchups for the deck, or the most played deck in the meta you can't beat with your mb. Just because a card is really good against certain matchups doesn't mean there's a spot for it in the 75. It should fill a role your mb doesn't fill, and that you need to beat your more fearsome opponents.
4 Blooming Marsh
4 Botanical Sanctum
2 Drowned Catacomb
3 Forest
1 Island
3 Swamp
4 Blossoming Defense
3 Fatal Push
2 Vraska's Contempt
1 Doomfall
1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
3 Bristling Hydra
4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
4 Longtusk Cub
4 Rogue Refiner
2 The Scarab God
3 Walking Ballista
4 Winding Constrictor
1 Bristling Hydra
1 Cartouche of Ambition
2 Deathgorge Scavenger
2 Die Young
2 Duress
1 Essence Scatter
2 Harsh Scrutiny
2 Kitesail Freebooter
2 Negate
Sideboarding:
vs U/W (sweeper) control (e.g. Approach)
-1 Blossoming Defense
-3 Fatal Push
-1 Walking Ballista
-1 Winding Constrictor
+2 Duress
+2 Kitesail Freebooter
+2 Negate
vs B/R (target) control (e.g. UB, Grixis)
-3 Fatal Push
-1 Walking Ballista
-1 Winding Constrictor
+1 Bristling Hydra
+2 Duress
+2 Negate
vs Temur/4C
-3 Fatal Push
-2 Walking Ballista
+1 Essence Scatter
+2 Harsh Scrutiny
+2 Kitesail Freebooter
vs Sultai
-2 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
-1 Walking Ballista
+1 Essence Scatter
+2 Harsh Scrutiny
vs RamRed
-4 Glint-Sleeve Siphoner
-1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
-1 Rogue Refiner
-1 The Scarab God
+1 Bristling Hydra
+1 Cartouche of Ambition
+2 Die Young
+1 Essence Scatter
+2 Harsh Scrutiny
vs Graveyard Decks
-2 Blossoming Defense
-3 Fatal Push
-1 Nissa, Steward of Elements
+2 Deathgorge Scavenger
+2 Duress
+2 Negate
vs Fat Beats
-3 Walking Ballista
+1 Bristling Hydra
+1 Cartouche of Ambition
+1 Essence Scatter
Of the sideboard cards, the only one I'm really not sure of is Deathgorge Scavenger, simply because graveyard strategies seem to be the only decks to bring it in against. Am I mistaken there? As in, should I be bringing it in vs other decks and if so, what would come out that isn't already coming out? I spose they could come in against control because of Gearhulk silliness...
RNA Standard: Grixis Midrange, Jund Deathwhirler, Sultai Vannifar
GRN Standard: Red Midrange, Mono-Blue Tempo, Wr Aggro, Gruul Experimental Dinosaurs, Sultai Midrange, Jeskai Midrange
Modern: Bant Spirits
Forcing a single archetype in all formats: too many colors, bad mana.