- Registered User
Member for 2 years, 4 months, and 17 days
Last active Thu, Dec, 14 2017 15:02:28
- 0 Followers
- 1,569 Total Posts
- 194 Thanks
Dec 14, 2017" I believe that a skilled pilot who knows how to mulligan and play the matchup, and who comes prepared with a decent sideboard, can win nearly half of their matches against Tron." --> Bold statement from Reid there. Can't confirm this out of my experiencePosted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
Dec 14, 2017Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)Quote from Hype_rion »@Flying Delver, you could add this article to the Primer:
Really nice, thx for letting me know, will add it!
Dec 14, 2017Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)Quote from Hype_rion »They are both equally bad vs big mana, but Souls wins you atleast the attrition-based matchups. Jund is at its best against small creature decks but they are very rare nowadays.
Its not like it mattered much, but I think Jund has noticable better game vs. Big Mana (Bolt, Rabblemaster, Hazoret). Small creature decks are at least present in Humans, Affinity, and probably Abzan CoCo. I personally like Bolt better than Path. Souls is the only argument for Abzan, and I think its about preference at that point.
Dec 14, 2017Here are a few additional interesting articles which are a good read. If you are interested:Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
Dec 11, 2017Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)Quote from immapwner »
You are probably right about swapping out a mountain for the 4th blackcleave. 23 land has been fine for me. The 24th land would be the 4th raging ravine anyway, so going to 23 with 3 ravines doesn't cut an untapped land.
I don't see why we need terminate. What does terminate hit that push doesn't? Reality smasher, primeval titan, endbringer, wurmcoil (which we probably aren't beating anyway), and some odd stuff like revilark. Aside from the odd stuff (which isn't really a thing) and wurmcoil, Liliana cleans up those other threats. Push is better right now because it lets you cast multiple spells earlier, and let's you answer a turn 1 dork more often.
4 Ravines is not the standard in a 24 landbase. It has been 3 Ravines for a while now. The tapped land issue is the reason why 3 Ravine is the maximum we want. So in that sense, you can put it your way if you want, but considering a standard 24 landbase you are actually cutting an untapped land, not a ravine.
Fatal Push is not here to replace Terminate. But more so to replace Bolt. Bolt only very recently became good enough again, most lists were running 2 Bolts at maximum prior to this. Right now 2-3 Pushes, 2-3 Bolts as well as 3 Terminates is the concensus. You can surely change numbers around, but I would not go below 2 Terminates maindeck at any point.
Yea, but my problem with this line of thinking is that we still think all of our spells and threats are "good enough." Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think that is true any more. The strongest card in the deck to me is Liliana of the Veil with Tarmogoyf being one of the weakest. Everything else in our deck is of varying degree of useful(-less). I don't see how being the reactive the deck with generally questionable spells is a recipe for success. The only way I see Jund being good now is via accurately predicting a positive metagame for Jund. That's a huge roll of the die considering how wide-open the format is now. I've been to a few PPTQs where I just played for craps 'n giggles where I rolled out with Jund and got really luck to beat a couple Tron players and an Eldrazi Tron player. If I had known that's what the metagame would've been (or if one them was a better player), there's no way I would have left the house. Another example is Storm now. Are we sure this is still a positive match now? With Gifts Ungiven, they're just as good at playing the long game as they are at trying to kill you on turn 3 or 4.
This is a fair point, and I agree with that. Our answers are indeed not good enough sometimes. But I don't think just cutting a land and put in another of those not good enough spells will change that a lot. The problem is that our spells are weak, yeah, but we have nothing to replace them with. I do also think Goyf is very weak in general. But I think that discard is stronger than LoTV basically. I think TS is the best spell currently in the format arguably. One way to do it, and I thought about that approach, is to increase discard count and reduce on board answers. Discard will always be able to hit what we want (at least TS), and things like Push/Bolt/Terminate/Pulse can be dead or too slow/situational.
I think Storm is still decent enough for us. They are certainly able to grind, but I think its still favourable to a certain extent. Might not be a bye or anything close, but it doesnt feel 50/50 for me at least.
Dec 11, 2017Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)Quote from Exatraz »One thing I will say about the Affinity postboard matchup, I objectively think taking out all the LotV is wrong. It's your only clean answer (outside damnation) to Etched champion. I do shave one usually but I like to leave in 2 and treat it as an edict effect. If your opponent then attacks into it, it bought you at least 1 life as well. There are plenty of worse cards to leave in during the matchup that I'd rather cut.
An experienced Affinity player won't let you edict the Champion away. At least not with LoTV alone. That would mean you need multiple removal spells in combination with LoTV to remove Champion. I personally rather have more IOK to just plain discard it from their hand. Yes there are topdecks. Yes sometimes you would be able to edict it away. But there are also times where the opponent doesn't draw the Champion and you have your worthless Lili in hand. Ultimatly I think its correct to shave all copies of her. Leaving in 1 copy or so is not what I would call completely wrong, but am not keen on it too much personally.
Dec 11, 2017@RationallyPrime: There is a lot of good stuff out there. I personally really like "Next Level Magic" by Patrick Chapin and "The Official Miser's Guide" by Michael Flores. Those are really theoretical and general aspects about playing Magic though.Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
About Technical play in general, by PV "Technical Play".
Specifically suited for Jund, I can recommend "Thoughtseize You" by Reid Duke.
The classical article everyone should read as a Magic player is "Who is the Beatdown" by Michael Flores and the following article: "Eight Core Principles of Who's The Beatdown". There is also "Who is the Beatdown II" by Zvi Mowshowitz.
Then I can think of a great article by Gerry Thompson, if you are interested in the topic archetypes in general: "The False Tempo Archetype".
Concerning deckbuilding (and specifically for the manabase, is relevant right now due to the 23/24 land debate): "How many coloured manasources do you need to consistantly cast your spells?".
A few of Reid Dukes basic articles concerning the game: "Level One: The Full Course". Its very basic, but amongs these, a really great one to mention is "The Metagame" where Reid talks about how to determine a given metagame and how to handle it.
I find this very appealing and useful: "Playing to win versus playing not to loose" by PV.
Again by Michael Flores: "The End of Virtual Card Advantage".
About tempo and card advantage: "Tempo and Card Advantage".
Since playing Jund gets more successful if you play tight: "Tight Plays" by Jeremy Neeman. And also by him, conerning taking risks: "Risky Move".
Dec 11, 2017Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)Quote from Rizso »Dont really want Damnation against Tron. We are fighting the 12 lands wich isnt gonna be happening with their insane consistancy. If we only could fight their wincons instead of their lands.
You can fight it with thoughtseize, which is our best option. I think its usually correct to target their wincons with TS rather than Eggs/Stirrings/Sylvans.
Dec 11, 2017Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
Thats one perfect argument for actually running 24 lands in my opinion. We have to naturally draw our lands to play them. Decks with loads of cantrips can cut lands. Patrick Chapin said that usually per 4 cantrip you play you can cut a land as a rule of thumb. And you are right. We are not running any (not counting Bob as a relyable cantrip) and thats why we need to hit landdrops to not loose against ourselves.
I guess that the thought of going down to 23 lands is to turn the Jund deck into a more proactive version than a reactive one. But I personally think that this basically hurts the deck. It turns the deck into one thats able to react, as well as proact, but both not executing very well compared to other decks in the format. I consider Jund to still be a reactive deck. If we now change the deck into an half aggro/ half control-ish style of deck, its basically a worse Grixis DS in my opinion. Grixis DS just does everything we want better at this point. So why mimicing the deck here? I don't see any advantage to run a Jund version of Grixis DS.
If you look at any deck with a lower land count I bet hardly you will find a deck that plays tapped lands like Ravine. I find it very weird to cut untapped lands to actually increase the chance of hitting either no land, or one tapped land. That being said, the only way I could see a 23 land version working smoothly, is to cut a Ravine. That doesnt lower the count of untapped lands at least.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.