Where Farseek is a one-shot mana ramp, Mana Bloom is scaling, and completely reusable. If you're drawing enough cards to consistently hit land drops, then Mana Bloom isn't going to be used to make mana often, and you'll use that mana only when you need it. Sure, if you draw the second one, you could potentially have a blank, but you'd have a blank drawing Farseek in multiples as well. I'm mostly saying that with 24 lands, you're rarely in a bind for mana, and you don't want 4 Farseeks to clutter your deck and provide you with dead draws, and this is where Mana Bloom provides an advantage, as you get to play more spells that matter.
And I won't provide scenarios, as if you've played any Jund deck, you know plenty yourself. Just imagine a Mana Bloom instead of a Farseek, and see if it's any better or worse. Draw a hand and if there's a Farseek, play it as Mana Bloom.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nocturnal God of Chaos of The Æsir Probably the most random person you will ever meet. Trust me on this one. Well, I'm off to poop.
Oh, my username is the same on Xbox and Cockatrice, add me!
"For some of us, easier Magic is good Magic, but if you are one of those 'intelligent types,' feel free to play your Hive Mind mirrors. The rest of us are here for the fireworks." - Kent Ketter
Playing in Type 2...BGRJundHearted
Where Farseek is a one-shot mana ramp, Mana Bloom is scaling, and completely reusable. If you're drawing enough cards to consistently hit land drops, then Mana Bloom isn't going to be used to make mana often, and you'll use that mana only when you need it. Sure, if you draw the second one, you could potentially have a blank, but you'd have a blank drawing Farseek in multiples as well. I'm mostly saying that with 24 lands, you're rarely in a bind for mana, and you don't want 4 Farseeks to clutter your deck and provide you with dead draws, and this is where Mana Bloom provides an advantage, as you get to play more spells that matter.
And I won't provide scenarios, as if you've played any Jund deck, you know plenty yourself. Just imagine a Mana Bloom instead of a Farseek, and see if it's any better or worse. Draw a hand and if there's a Farseek, play it as Mana Bloom.
Being able to play less Mana Blooms isn't an advantage and it isn't even true. If you play Mana Bloom, you are still going to play 4 because the whole point of Mana Bloom or Farseek is to accelerate your deck a turn early in the game. You don't get to play 2 Mana Bloom and provide the same effect as 4 Farseek.
I'll play devil's advocate regarding Mana Bloom though. Perhaps if you are playing a version of the deck that maindecks Liliana, Mana Bloom can be discard fodder because it'll accelerate your deck a turn or two early in the game to hit that turn 3 Huntmaster or turn 4 Thragtusk... but then later in the game after you already have 6-7 lands in play it will probably be in your hand and it's a free card you can make your opponent discard with Liliana.
Where Farseek is a one-shot mana ramp, Mana Bloom is scaling, and completely reusable. If you're drawing enough cards to consistently hit land drops, then Mana Bloom isn't going to be used to make mana often, and you'll use that mana only when you need it. Sure, if you draw the second one, you could potentially have a blank, but you'd have a blank drawing Farseek in multiples as well. I'm mostly saying that with 24 lands, you're rarely in a bind for mana, and you don't want 4 Farseeks to clutter your deck and provide you with dead draws, and this is where Mana Bloom provides an advantage, as you get to play more spells that matter.
And I won't provide scenarios, as if you've played any Jund deck, you know plenty yourself. Just imagine a Mana Bloom instead of a Farseek, and see if it's any better or worse. Draw a hand and if there's a Farseek, play it as Mana Bloom.
Mana Bloom? Scaling? What on earth? You can use the ability only once a turn. And since you don't gain any mana the turn you cast it, it's always, very, very strickly worse than Farseek. Mana Bloom is also a one-shot spell. Like, when you play Mana Bloom, you net one more mana for X turns, and X+1 was what you payed for. When you cast Farseek, you net one more mana to your mana pool FOR THE REST OF THE GAME, always paying only 1G. Drawing multiple Farseeks is also way better, since they thin your deck.
EDIT: Just to be clear here, what on earth are you talking about mana bloom being reusable? It's not reusable, you need to PAY to make it work like a Farseek for same effect.
Where Farseek is a one-shot mana ramp, Mana Bloom is scaling, and completely reusable. If you're drawing enough cards to consistently hit land drops, then Mana Bloom isn't going to be used to make mana often, and you'll use that mana only when you need it. Sure, if you draw the second one, you could potentially have a blank, but you'd have a blank drawing Farseek in multiples as well. I'm mostly saying that with 24 lands, you're rarely in a bind for mana, and you don't want 4 Farseeks to clutter your deck and provide you with dead draws, and this is where Mana Bloom provides an advantage, as you get to play more spells that matter.
And I won't provide scenarios, as if you've played any Jund deck, you know plenty yourself. Just imagine a Mana Bloom instead of a Farseek, and see if it's any better or worse. Draw a hand and if there's a Farseek, play it as Mana Bloom.
You do realize that you can only remove one counter from Mana Bloom per turn?
It does the same thing as Farseek: each copy you draw provides one extra mana per turn on future turns. Farseek never runs out of charges, never needs to be recast, and provides an extra land for Underworld Connections. Farseek is strictly better.
Can you describe any specific scenario where Mana Bloom is better than Farseek? Be as unrealistic as you like.
Sooo....after this weekend here were our best results.
There was literally no zombies anywhere. The only aggro decks I saw were g/w. What we see is NO 3 drop outside of borderland ranger, and most decks only ran 2-3 of him. We see lots of keyrunes, lots of removal, and lots of value.
So....does our deck not need a 3 drop? It seems against control, the keyrune did enough on the games where we didn't farseek t2.
If aggro is done for....do we not need STRG t2 anymore? It seems everyone was UBER concerned about their mana...BLR, Keyrunes, Evolving Wilds, etc etc.
I think strangleroot is still necessary as control decks start to rise up. I think zombies will be still be around so you always have to account for it, like how infect was last season. 4 pillar somewhere in your 75. I don't believe you need the full 4 main anymore.
Sooo....after this weekend here were our best results.
There was literally no zombies anywhere. The only aggro decks I saw were g/w. What we see is NO 3 drop outside of borderland ranger, and most decks only ran 2-3 of him. We see lots of keyrunes, lots of removal, and lots of value.
So....does our deck not need a 3 drop? It seems against control, the keyrune did enough on the games where we didn't farseek t2.
If aggro is done for....do we not need STRG t2 anymore? It seems everyone was UBER concerned about their mana...BLR, Keyrunes, Evolving Wilds, etc etc.
Thoughts...
Thanks for posting those lists. In my opinion you really can't make any definite conclusions... It's just one tourney. Lifegain and removal might be enough to win aggro at a reasonable rate, but it's a meta game call in my opinion. The deck can be good with Geist/Avenger/Nighthawk, but it can be good with those cards as well.
It's not just one tourney, it's 2 tourneys. 2 of the first 3 of the format.
SRG is just not necessary IMO. People playing Aggro are quickly adapting the UWR Geist deck from Japan. And SRG isn't great against most of the control decks around. It gets exiled(or Terminus'ed too much). Against the UWR Geist deck, it just gets Pillared. In the mirror it does practically nothing. I can see some arguments for Avenger..it is a 3 drop(which we generally lack), it blocks Thragtusk and can survive, etc. I played with 3 MD Nighthawk last night and was pleased with it.
Thanks for posting those lists. In my opinion you really can't make any definite conclusions... It's just one tourney. Lifegain and removal might be enough to win aggro at a reasonable rate, but it's a meta game call in my opinion. The deck can be good with Geist/Avenger/Nighthawk, but it can be good with those cards as well.
I've noticed a serious lack of aggro around my two areas as well, and the few that I have seen don't tend to get higher than mid rankings. I do think aggro could work, but it's much more dependent on consistent draws, whereas we can drop a thrag/nighthawk/huntmaster and be pretty much ok.
One question I still have is: Do we have a definitive ruling on Mizzium Mortars over Bonfire of the Damned? Myself and my groups have been testing both, and we can't come to a consensus as to which is superior.
It's not just one tourney, it's 2 tourneys. 2 of the first 3 of the format.
SRG is just not necessary IMO. People playing Aggro are quickly adapting the UWR Geist deck from Japan. And SRG isn't great against most of the control decks around. It gets exiled(or Terminus'ed too much). Against the UWR Geist deck, it just gets Pillared. In the mirror it does practically nothing. I can see some arguments for Avenger..it is a 3 drop(which we generally lack), it blocks Thragtusk and can survive, etc. I played with 3 MD Nighthawk last night and was pleased with it.
Yeah, I agree that SRG is less impressive of those. I play 4 Avengers in my deck, but no Geists, so assuming that all decks have to play both or neither isn't actually true.
One question I still have is: Do we have a definitive ruling on Mizzium Mortars over Bonfire of the Damned? Myself and my groups have been testing both, and we can't come to a consensus as to which is superior.
It's meta dependent, if it's more control go for the Mortars, if its more aggro go with Bonfire.
@Ramanas: I run 2 Bonfire and 1 Mortars, which I have been happy with.
@The IT: Pretty sure that advice is exactly opposite of correct. Aggro is less likely to have guys with 5 toughness and guys with PWs, and the 'first mode' of MM will be relevant against them. So you want Mortars there. Control decks are more likely to have PWs, making the 'burn your face' aspect of Bonfire more relevant.
I see it differently, the ability to sweep for 1 or 2 is relevant more against aggro and the ability to sweep entreat. If I was afraid of planeswalkers I would run Magmaquake. Most threats I see control running have 4 or less toughness. Exceptions are Sigrada, Niv Mizzet and Angel of Serenity, which admittedly you either need to top deck a bonfire or have 11-13 mana for it. And all except Sigrada we have excellent removal for.
What do you mean 'most' control threats other than those? Those are the only ones you will ever see played against you. Plus Griselbrand and Thundermaw Hellkite, and maybe Armada Wurm. None of which Mortars can deal with. I mean like..if your 'mass removal' suite is 3 MM, you are probably boarding out 2 of them(or should be IMO) against Control decks, right?
I've seen Thragtusk, GoST, and Entreat the Angels more from control decks then those. I don't keep any removal other then Liliana and dreadbore, sever might stay in.
To all the people downplaying SRG have you actually played a significant number of games with it?
In theory it looked pretty weak in the format, but in practise its been performing phenomanally.
It was pretty one of my best cards in the san Antonio qualifier I won last weekend that I went 7-1.
Variance could be at play...
I think able to apply pressure early forces control to tap out constantly and use up their removal.
Means your bigger threats have less removal targets.
Also hasting then kessig wolfing it into a blocker, then having it recur is very relevant.
The biggest issue I have with it is it forces my mana base away from red, so my mana is occasionally an issue.
To all the people downplaying SRG have you actually played a significant number of games with it?
In theory it looked pretty weak in the format, but in practise its been performing phenomanally.
It was pretty one of my best cards in the san Antonio qualifier I won last weekend that I went 7-1.
Variance could be at play...
I think able to apply pressure early forces control to tap out constantly and use up their removal.
Means your bigger threats have less removal targets.
Also hasting then kessig wolfing it into a blocker, then having it recur is very relevant.
The biggest issue I have with it is it forces my mana base away from red, so my mana is occasionally an issue.
This, along with being a pretty weak topdeck late game (even with Kessig its not GREAT) Are why I cut mine. But mostly that...
I like the geist, it feels very good once gatecrash comes out as we get stomping ground. Right now it just makes all our red cards so much worse; Olivia, Mizzium, ect....
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
top 100 SCG Sacramento
1st place GPT Seattle
1st place GPT Anaheim
To all the people downplaying SRG have you actually played a significant number of games with it?
In theory it looked pretty weak in the format, but in practise its been performing phenomanally.
It was pretty one of my best cards in the san Antonio qualifier I won last weekend that I went 7-1.
Variance could be at play...
I think able to apply pressure early forces control to tap out constantly and use up their removal.
Means your bigger threats have less removal targets.
Also hasting then kessig wolfing it into a blocker, then having it recur is very relevant.
The biggest issue I have with it is it forces my mana base away from red, so my mana is occasionally an issue.
In practice it must not be good, because 2 decks placed well with it in the first SCG Open of the format, and no one has done so since, while Jund is putting 2+ decks into T8 every week.
The question I have been considering with this deck is..should we re-focus the MD to beat Control/other Midrange, and use the SB to beat Aggro? Aggro decks just don't seem to be as major of a factor in the metagame as we had expected them to be. But at the same time, it is much easier to beat Control G2 and G3 than it is to beat Aggro G2 and G3, because of the variance factor in Aggro decks having 'just win' hands.
@spacedog: I think that there are other cards with broader general applications that we could MD, such as Appetite for Brains or Deathrite Shaman or something, before MDing something like Slaughter Games.
In practice it must not be good, because 2 decks placed well with it in the first SCG Open of the format, and no one has done so since, while Jund is putting 2+ decks into T8 every week.
The question I have been considering with this deck is..should we re-focus the MD to beat Control/other Midrange, and use the SB to beat Aggro? Aggro decks just don't seem to be as major of a factor in the metagame as we had expected them to be. But at the same time, it is much easier to beat Control G2 and G3 than it is to beat Aggro G2 and G3, because of the variance factor in Aggro decks having 'just win' hands.
@spacedog: I think that there are other cards with broader general applications that we could MD, such as Appetite for Brains or Deathrite Shaman or something, before MDing something like Slaughter Games.
I think you're asking the right questions there. Since I don't live in the states, I personally have to mind only about my local meta, but I suppose it's different for those who take these decks to the biggest events.
My local is also sparse on zombies, so if this is gonna be true for the meta game, being mainly made up of - Midrange, Control, Rites and possibly variations of that new U/W/R Tempo deck featuring Geist of St Traft -
Has anyone considered 3-4 Liliana of the Veil in the MB -
Seems good in all the mirrors as you can only really afford to play 1 threat a turn mostly, it's a check against Geist of St Traft etc, etc...Might be something worth exploring..
Seems solid with Rakdos's Return as well
I don't think she is a bad PW, I like her, but the time may not be just right for her. You rarely get to use her -2 efficiently, and against control they will just remove her with sphere or o-ring. You gain some tempo, but it's just a 1-1. Against Frites she is horrible, really. If the deck becomes popular I may have to remove even my 1-of RR from the MD.
She is good against Traft-decks, that is true. But I haven't seen too many of those about.
EDIT: You may find yourself in an awkward spot with -1 as well. When your deck plays Rakdos's Returns and Underworld Connections, it might be actually you who gets harmed the most from using her.
EDIT2: I might see her being good against GW-based decks as well. They have less answers for her and no fast and hasty ways of getting rid of her.
And I won't provide scenarios, as if you've played any Jund deck, you know plenty yourself. Just imagine a Mana Bloom instead of a Farseek, and see if it's any better or worse. Draw a hand and if there's a Farseek, play it as Mana Bloom.
Oh, my username is the same on Xbox and Cockatrice, add me!
"For some of us, easier Magic is good Magic, but if you are one of those 'intelligent types,' feel free to play your Hive Mind mirrors. The rest of us are here for the fireworks." - Kent Ketter
Playing in Type 2...BGRJundHearted
Being able to play less Mana Blooms isn't an advantage and it isn't even true. If you play Mana Bloom, you are still going to play 4 because the whole point of Mana Bloom or Farseek is to accelerate your deck a turn early in the game. You don't get to play 2 Mana Bloom and provide the same effect as 4 Farseek.
I'll play devil's advocate regarding Mana Bloom though. Perhaps if you are playing a version of the deck that maindecks Liliana, Mana Bloom can be discard fodder because it'll accelerate your deck a turn or two early in the game to hit that turn 3 Huntmaster or turn 4 Thragtusk... but then later in the game after you already have 6-7 lands in play it will probably be in your hand and it's a free card you can make your opponent discard with Liliana.
Mana Bloom? Scaling? What on earth? You can use the ability only once a turn. And since you don't gain any mana the turn you cast it, it's always, very, very strickly worse than Farseek. Mana Bloom is also a one-shot spell. Like, when you play Mana Bloom, you net one more mana for X turns, and X+1 was what you payed for. When you cast Farseek, you net one more mana to your mana pool FOR THE REST OF THE GAME, always paying only 1G. Drawing multiple Farseeks is also way better, since they thin your deck.
EDIT: Just to be clear here, what on earth are you talking about mana bloom being reusable? It's not reusable, you need to PAY to make it work like a Farseek for same effect.
Youtube Channel
You do realize that you can only remove one counter from Mana Bloom per turn?
It does the same thing as Farseek: each copy you draw provides one extra mana per turn on future turns. Farseek never runs out of charges, never needs to be recast, and provides an extra land for Underworld Connections. Farseek is strictly better.
Can you describe any specific scenario where Mana Bloom is better than Farseek? Be as unrealistic as you like.
3 Rakdos Keyrune
Creatures
4 Huntmaster of the Fells
4 Thragtusk
Enchantments
1 Underworld Connections
Instants
2 Abrupt Decay
Legendary Creatures
3 Olivia Voldaren
Sorceries
4 Dreadbore
4 Farseek
2 Mizzium Mortars
4 Pillar of Flame
2 Rakdos's Return
2 Sever the Bloodline
2 Forest
1 Mountain
1 Swamp
Lands
4 Blood Crypt
1 Dragonskull Summit
2 Evolving Wilds
2 Kessig Wolf Run
4 Overgrown Tomb
4 Rootbound Crag
4 Woodland Cemetery
4 Deathrite Shaman
1 Thundermaw Hellkite
1 Zealous Conscripts
1 Dead Weight
1 Underworld Connections
2 Liliana of the Veil
2 Duress
1 Rakdos's Return
1 Rolling Temblor
1 Sever the Bloodline
3 Rakdos Keyrune
Creatures
2 Borderland Ranger
4 Huntmaster of the Fells
4 Thragtusk
3 Thundermaw Hellkite
Legendary Creatures
2 Olivia Voldaren
Sorceries
3 Dreadbore
4 Farseek
3 Mizzium Mortars
4 Pillar of Flame
2 Rakdos's Return
2 Sever the Bloodline
3 Forest
2 Mountain
2 Swamp
Lands
4 Blood Crypt
3 Dragonskull Summit
1 Kessig Wolf Run
4 Overgrown Tomb
3 Rootbound Crag
2 Woodland Cemetery
3 Deathrite Shaman
3 Underworld Connections
2 Garruk Relentless
2 Liliana of the Veil
2 Appetite for Brains
2 Blasphemous Act
1 Dreadbore
4 Rakdos Keyrune
Creatures
4 Huntmaster of the Fells
4 Thragtusk
3 Wolfir Silverheart
Instants
3 Searing Spear
Legendary Creatures
3 Olivia Voldaren
Sorceries
4 Bonfire of the Damned
4 Farseek
4 Pillar of Flame
3 Sever the Bloodline
5 Forest
1 Mountain
Lands
4 Blood Crypt
2 Kessig Wolf Run
4 Overgrown Tomb
4 Rootbound Crag
4 Woodland Cemetery
3 Tormod's Crypt
3 Zealous Conscripts
4 Liliana of the Veil
4 Duress
1 Sever the Bloodline
Sooo....after this weekend here were our best results.
There was literally no zombies anywhere. The only aggro decks I saw were g/w. What we see is NO 3 drop outside of borderland ranger, and most decks only ran 2-3 of him. We see lots of keyrunes, lots of removal, and lots of value.
So....does our deck not need a 3 drop? It seems against control, the keyrune did enough on the games where we didn't farseek t2.
If aggro is done for....do we not need STRG t2 anymore? It seems everyone was UBER concerned about their mana...BLR, Keyrunes, Evolving Wilds, etc etc.
Thoughts...
(246-174-26)
Thanks for posting those lists. In my opinion you really can't make any definite conclusions... It's just one tourney. Lifegain and removal might be enough to win aggro at a reasonable rate, but it's a meta game call in my opinion. The deck can be good with Geist/Avenger/Nighthawk, but it can be good with those cards as well.
Youtube Channel
SRG is just not necessary IMO. People playing Aggro are quickly adapting the UWR Geist deck from Japan. And SRG isn't great against most of the control decks around. It gets exiled(or Terminus'ed too much). Against the UWR Geist deck, it just gets Pillared. In the mirror it does practically nothing. I can see some arguments for Avenger..it is a 3 drop(which we generally lack), it blocks Thragtusk and can survive, etc. I played with 3 MD Nighthawk last night and was pleased with it.
I've noticed a serious lack of aggro around my two areas as well, and the few that I have seen don't tend to get higher than mid rankings. I do think aggro could work, but it's much more dependent on consistent draws, whereas we can drop a thrag/nighthawk/huntmaster and be pretty much ok.
One question I still have is: Do we have a definitive ruling on Mizzium Mortars over Bonfire of the Damned? Myself and my groups have been testing both, and we can't come to a consensus as to which is superior.
Yeah, I agree that SRG is less impressive of those. I play 4 Avengers in my deck, but no Geists, so assuming that all decks have to play both or neither isn't actually true.
Youtube Channel
It's meta dependent, if it's more control go for the Mortars, if its more aggro go with Bonfire.
@The IT: Pretty sure that advice is exactly opposite of correct. Aggro is less likely to have guys with 5 toughness and guys with PWs, and the 'first mode' of MM will be relevant against them. So you want Mortars there. Control decks are more likely to have PWs, making the 'burn your face' aspect of Bonfire more relevant.
Ok. I'm on 2 Mortars and 1 Bonfire at the moment.
Youtube Channel
In theory it looked pretty weak in the format, but in practise its been performing phenomanally.
It was pretty one of my best cards in the san Antonio qualifier I won last weekend that I went 7-1.
Variance could be at play...
I think able to apply pressure early forces control to tap out constantly and use up their removal.
Means your bigger threats have less removal targets.
Also hasting then kessig wolfing it into a blocker, then having it recur is very relevant.
The biggest issue I have with it is it forces my mana base away from red, so my mana is occasionally an issue.
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
This, along with being a pretty weak topdeck late game (even with Kessig its not GREAT) Are why I cut mine. But mostly that...
Thanks Hero's of the Plane
Modern
-------------
xRxAffinityxRx
1st place GPT Seattle
1st place GPT Anaheim
In practice it must not be good, because 2 decks placed well with it in the first SCG Open of the format, and no one has done so since, while Jund is putting 2+ decks into T8 every week.
The question I have been considering with this deck is..should we re-focus the MD to beat Control/other Midrange, and use the SB to beat Aggro? Aggro decks just don't seem to be as major of a factor in the metagame as we had expected them to be. But at the same time, it is much easier to beat Control G2 and G3 than it is to beat Aggro G2 and G3, because of the variance factor in Aggro decks having 'just win' hands.
@spacedog: I think that there are other cards with broader general applications that we could MD, such as Appetite for Brains or Deathrite Shaman or something, before MDing something like Slaughter Games.
I think you're asking the right questions there. Since I don't live in the states, I personally have to mind only about my local meta, but I suppose it's different for those who take these decks to the biggest events.
Youtube Channel
I don't think she is a bad PW, I like her, but the time may not be just right for her. You rarely get to use her -2 efficiently, and against control they will just remove her with sphere or o-ring. You gain some tempo, but it's just a 1-1. Against Frites she is horrible, really. If the deck becomes popular I may have to remove even my 1-of RR from the MD.
She is good against Traft-decks, that is true. But I haven't seen too many of those about.
EDIT: You may find yourself in an awkward spot with -1 as well. When your deck plays Rakdos's Returns and Underworld Connections, it might be actually you who gets harmed the most from using her.
EDIT2: I might see her being good against GW-based decks as well. They have less answers for her and no fast and hasty ways of getting rid of her.
Youtube Channel