All users will need to merge their MTGSalvation account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Sept 25th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
Dismiss
 
The Magic Market Index for Jan 12, 2018
 
Treasure Cruisin' Tempered Steel
 
The Magic Market Index for Jan 5, 2018
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    glad it worked out well for you samurai!

    i went 6-2 for 13th in the f2f vancouver open today. i played the matchups bingo expertly, except i missed the memo that infect is still a thing. the top 8 had 2 infect decks. weird field. I'll write a report later
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Death's Shadow Jund
    that's a fair point - it does make theoretical sense in that a mentor can win the game very quickly by himself with the deck's density of 1cmc spells and it's not unreasonable to be holding discard spells/kill spells when you topdeck a mentor in the late game grindfest to get immediate value. I do like the added benefit of attacking on a different axis than goyfs/traverse/half of souls vs. GY hate
    Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
  • posted a message on Death's Shadow Jund
    Quote from Spooly »
    Quote from whocansay »
    3-1 at 24-man FNM, beat GW, Coco, Abzan (!!!) and lost to nut draws from Revolt Zoo, felt helpless.

    Really uninterested in Staticaster and Ranger lately - LTLH has been pulling her weight more in grindy matchups. What are you guys running as far as unconventional sideboard tech goes?


    I've been off staticaster - my position is that if you have Lingering Souls in your 75, it's not needed, and the only major place you'd really miss it is as a traverse target for Storm. I'd prefer Ranger to be Hazoret, but I also want to be able to keep Stubs in vs. control decks, so it's a pickle. Having access to a different non-red Traversable haymaker would be nice. Tireless Tracker is an idea I haven't tried because I didn't think we'd trigger it enough. But maybe it's worth a shot. Thrun also has some upside, but you're basically never traversing for and casting him in the same turn.


    how about young pyro/mentor as standalone threats? as in the list below, for example for a 5c shell (although not having souls feels wrong)

    https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/896517#online
    Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    I would be pretty surprised if Sign in Blood is Viable. It has a few things going against it: 1) it's not a discard outlet to enable the strongest aspect of our deck (Vengeance), and 4 Lootings simply isn't enough, 2) BB can be a real cost when you are casting faithless looting a lot on turn 1, and 3) the extra life loss works further to negate one of the advantages we that we have with a clean BR manabase.

    That said, do let us know if it works out well.. This could be OK if you make certain changes to the 60, like including more Brutalities or Lightning Axes as additional discard outlets/combat the life loss.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    Quote from Morimacil »
    Hello everybody

    I was playing around, testing some stuff, and arrived at something like this:



    And I'm having quite a lot of fun tweaking it. But the exact shell isnt that important here.

    I see that most of you guys seem to be running 4 wurms, 4 shoals, and 2 borborygmos, instead of 4 emrakul and 6 other cards. I assume you guys have tested other versions? What is your reasoning for those cards?

    To me, it seems that emrakul is going to be better than wurm or grislebrand in most situations.
    When using through the breach, emrakul is usually game over, only burn can realistically rebuild.
    Worldspine wurm is good, but weak to path, and things like the opponent untapping and playing ugin or storming off or killing you.

    When using goryos, obviously emrakul has the advantage that it can actually be brought back.

    It seems like it is cute, but less efficient to go through reanimating a grislebrand into shoal into SSG, discard outlet, borborygmos, goryos win, instead of just reanimating emrakul and attacking.

    So what is it that I'm missing? are you playing very aggressive metas where you really value the 11 life?

    In the primer, it seems like the main reason to move away from emrakul is to be able to win without combat because of twin. But twin isnt really relevant anymore.
    Being able to splice onto arcane is not really a thing, if that slot is dedicated to desperate ritual, it is the same thing, if you use discard spells instead you can also fight through a counter, etc.


    THere is a few reasons as to why I dislike the traditional Emrakul/Griselbrand shell vs the Borborygmos/Shoal combo, not in particular order:

    1. It is soft to ensnaring bridges
    2. It is soft to control shells with its inability to win at instant speed. There's a ton of those decks now (UW, Jeskai Tempo, Jeskai Control, Blue Moon Madcap/Kiki/Breach). If they don't have to respect your ability to win at instant speed, they will freely flash in snapcasters/cliques/Quellers at first chance and you have little ways to fight back other than discards and maybe defense grids. That you can't run Pacts of Negation is also unappealing.
    3. When I ran Emrakul, I found that she doesn't finish the game on the spot in a surprising amount of games, including:

    Dredge (they generally don't take 5 damages from lands, can rebuild easily)
    Affinity (if you are breaching this in on turn 5 it's highly unlikely emrakul is enough)
    Humans (vials/other swarmy things, clean mana base and freebooters/mantis riders)
    Burn (likely to 1 shot in game 1, but you either need to pray they don't have deflecting palms post-board or wait until you can assemble discard+Emrakul)
    Mardu Pyromancer (little self damage and soul/elemental tokens)
    4. In that deck, Griselbrand is more of a delayed win condition and Emrakul, as discussed, isn't always guaranteed either. Griselbrand generally kills on the spot, and wurm and borby can be solo win conditions.
    5. It makes your burn matchup significantly better
    6. you get to run chalices

    However, I've said in the thread before and don't dislike your idea - you'll just need to adjust your philosophy a bit and treat it less like a combo deck and more like a control-combo deck. I've been working on something similar to your list and the below. I would definitely jam 3 maindeck Blood Moons in that shell. I also don't think Kolaghan's Command does much for that deck. I would consider running removal or Cathartic Reunion in that slot personally.

    https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/737254#online
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    Quote from Kathal »
    Quote from finalnub »
    I'll drop combo forever and play Jund for the rest of eternity if they ban SSG this go around. Ain't going to happen.

    Ähm, you are aware, that there were a couple of Jund bans in the past?

    Quote from Ruffys »
    So if you had to make the mana base without fetches how would you do it?

    Rly? The 4 Bloodstain Mires are not that expensive to skip them...

    However, due to how the deck work, there are no really good replacements, cause fast lands are garbage for TTB, Checklands don't go well with the Temples and more basics are not helpful either.
    Quote from HiImDustin »
    How do you board vs GDS? I know chalice is a must but do you add in the blood moons since they are greedy? I feel like I struggle with sidboarding in general

    OTP: Chalice + Moon
    OTD: Chalice + Axe

    This is at least how I board against this deck. Moon is to slow otd that it can really matter, so it only comes in otp.

    Greetings,
    Kathal
    that was more of a jab at fair decks and that i would never be caught dead playing fair :p
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    I'll drop combo forever and play Jund for the rest of eternity if they ban SSG this go around. Ain't going to happen.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    has anyone been maniacal enough to run 1-2 gurmag anglers or tomb stalkers on the side?

    feel like with the format slowing down a bit I was thinking we need to be more threat sense, but that doesn't necessarily have to be business spells and reanimation targets only. realize that it still gets hosed by hard GY hate, but a curious idea nonetheless
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    it may be better if your land produces black, you can draw into a SSG and speed is of importance. Otherwise, playing a land so you have the option to play a hug/looting/whispers/laxe/brutality that you draw into is superior
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    Quote from HiImDustin »
    Keepable hand question. GBrand Goryos WSW simian Temple of malice 2 lands on play. VS unknown. thoughts?

    Bogles and turn 0 leyline mainboard


    easy keep in the dark even OTP. You have both combo pieces and discarding to hand size is a real discard outlet and it'll be much harder if you mulligan on the play. I would play temple of malice t2 and hope to draw a looting/night's whisper/Cathartic Reunion/Breach/Brutality. If you don't, I would pass turns 2 and 3 to discard Griselbrand so you can Vengeance at instant speed.

    doesn't change my decision. Hope that their turn 3 bogles is smaller than 7/7 so you can SSG+Vengeance and block the bogle and set yourself up.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    Quote from damnjoni »
    Quote from finalnub »

    2. I'm not quite sure what you mean by the shoal comment. The maximum damage they could do is 2+4+3=9 (Queller+Colonnade+two of their 3 cards must be an untapped land+bolt). When we drain, we'll go up to 9, and we can shoal up to get out of the worst case scenario's range. You'll know what you are playing around once you brutality them and look at their hand anyway, but as good practice can't imagine not shoaling here since you are likely discarding those anyway and you are winning or losing next turn.


    Oh, my bad. Meant that should we Splice Breach onto Shoal on our upkeep? If they drew Snappy to flashback Knot to counter the Breach vs. if they drew Queller/Snare to counter Shoal in which the Breach is spiced. Brutality of course shows if they have one in hand but if they don't, which one you think we should play around?
    OK I see what you mean. You already see one Queller while you haven't seen a snapcaster, and I think Jeskai tempo shells play 4 snapcasters, so the technically correct move is to keep the 2 shoals, 3 lands, and breach and shoal splice breach on the next upkeep IF you see a hand that does not have the possibility of an untapped land+snapcaster (so they can logic knot for 3).

    You're right though I was ignoring snapcaster+untapped land as an out as I was automatically discounting Quellers as an out because Breach costs 5. Decreases scenario 2)'s win % by a bit, but probably not material enough to change the decision. More goes to show how it's impractical to do all of this during the game and how it's more important to know how to tackle these problems on the spot
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    Quote from Soltari18 »
    Hello Grshoalbrand mates!, this is my first communication at this forum.

    I have been playing this deck since I read the 1st Kathal post in 2014. Kathal, thanks so much for showing this deck up to the rest of combo players, I have had so fun momments with it :).

    After playing with this deck a little bit Kathal, how do you see the posibility of splashing green again to include time of need? I feel so comfortable with it in the deck, it has saved to me in a little of sittuation looking for the Grishelbrand or just pitching into shoal.

    I´m currently pilotting 2 copies of it :).

    I encourage all of you to try to test and include it in your deck.

    Regards,
    Soltari
    do you have a list we can have a look at? I'm curious to see what other green cards you'd use (decay?), but I'm skeptical about adding a third color and making the landbase more painful.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    1. good point about Cliques. Recent jeskai lists seem to be playing 1-2 cliques. This is somewhat countered by lists playing 0-2 spell snares, which actually does not count in our permission count since it doesn't work against Breach, so the actual conclusion should be roughly the same as what I outlined. Very good point though that Clique is an out.

    2. I'm not quite sure what you mean by the shoal comment. The maximum damage they could do is 2+4+3=9 (Queller+Colonnade+two of their 3 cards must be an untapped land+bolt). When we drain, we'll go up to 9, and we can shoal up to get out of the worst case scenario's range. You'll know what you are playing around once you brutality them and look at their hand anyway, but as good practice can't imagine not shoaling here since you are likely discarding those anyway and you are winning or losing next turn.

    3. An added benefit to the brutality line is that you do not let Helix bet you. As I noted, we only have 3 lands, so if the opponent is at 8, we cannot beat a helix and a Pact of Negation trigger
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] G/W Auras (Bogle)
    Hey guys, wandering into this thread here as I am getting interested in sleeving up the ol' bogles, as the format seems to be moving towards a more dorky shadows/midrange/control meta, with big mana being the foil. I've jammed 20~ games with it and have been pretty impressed. I couldn't find a matchup section on page 1 - what are some good and bad matchups for Bogles? From my impression, any mid range and control shells without LotV seems to be very good including humans. linear combo like Storm and Ad Nauseam seems like a nightmare but I'm assuming that's why people pack RIPs/Rule of Laws for a variety of unfair GY decks/spell based combos. Shadows seems to be even-ish if you are maindecking leylines. I was curious about people disliking Gryff's Boons - can someone please elaborate? Seems like Flying is key in a field full of humans, GBx midrange, affinity, infect etc.
    Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
  • posted a message on Grishoalbrand / Griselbrand Reanimator
    Interesting, damnjoni. That was a line that did not cross my mind during play . Goes to show how complciated this deck can be if you want to squeeze the last few percentage points

    Here's my solution:


    We'll need some math, format knowledge and intuition to come to a good solution. The first thing to observe is because the opponent let Vengeance #2 resolve, we can infer that s/he has no spell snare, dispel or negate in hand. The only pieces of permission he could plausibly still have in hand is Cryptic Command or Logic Knot.

    Second, typical Jeskai lists seem to be playing 3-4 Cryptic Commands, 2-3 Logic Knots, 0-2 Spell Snares and 0-2 Mana Leaks. They have roughly ~9 counterspells in the mainboard, and around 3 in the sideboard (dispels, negates). So we can say we should be expecting 12 permissions to be in the opponent's 60 post-board. Note that we have seen 2 Logic Knots and 1 Negate in this game and no other piece of permission.

    I considered a few lines:

    1) Let the Logic Knot resolve, Looting twice to dig for pacts of negations to fight permission off the top of their deck. If we are absolutely sure they have no permission in hand, this could be the best line. However, Cryptic Command and Logic Knot could plausibly be in their hand.

    2) Let the Logic Knot resolve, Escalate Brutality to spot check for permission, with the plan to win on my next upkeep with the Pact trigger on the stack. This plays around 1 piece of permission in their hand, but not 2 nor does it protect against their top deck.

    3) Shoal pitching Shoal to go up to 9 and draw 7 cards. from there, several things can happen, including a) finding a pact for their logic knot to let the first shoal resolve, and try to combo off, finding a piece of fast mana so we pay for the Knot and gain 8 to draw more cards towards comboing this turn or Pacts, c) Combination of a) and b), and d) missing on pact and fast mana and being dead on board to their Queller and Colonnade

    (damnjoni's line) 4) Let the Logic Knot resolve, Escalate Brutality to go up to 9 and spot check for permission and try to combo.

    Relevant Math via hypergeometric calculator, given 31 cards left in our deck and 42 in theirs:
    Probability(Opp topdecks permission, assuming 12 total counterspells post-board and 3 already used)=21%
    Pr(Opp's 2 last cards in hand are 2 OF Cryptic Commands/Logic Knot given 44 unknown cards)=1%
    Pr(at least 1 Wurm in the next 7 cards drawn)=66%
    Pr(at least 1 of the 5 fast mana in the next 7 cards)=75%
    Pr(at least 1 of the 2 Pacts in the next 7 cards)=
    Pr(all 5 fast mana within the last 28 cards)=59%
    Pr(4 out of 5 fast mana within the last 28 cards)=94%
    Pr(at least 1 of 2 remaining Pacts in 2 Lootings)=25%
    Pr(at least 3 fast mana in the next 14 cards)=40%

    I think 4) is a bit too risky, given that if we brick on the next 7 cards on Wurm (34%) we just simply die. Also, given that we are operating on no lands and 5 mana sources left mana is a non-zero risk as well. From above, we only have a 59% chance that all 5 pieces of fast mana is within 4 Griselbrand draws. 59% isn't exactly the fail rate, as ritual and shoal shenanigans can reduce the fast mana requirement to 4 pieces (in which case we'll find 4 fast mana within the next 28 cards at a 94% rate), but it's not a given that we'll have gained enough life to dig 28 cards deep, as that will require 3 Shoal+Wurm cast. Given this, I believe 4) is too risky

    1) I believe is the best if we have a soul read that he has no pieces of permission in his hand, and want to be as safe proof as possible for the topdecked permission. GIven that he can plausibly have the last Logic Knot or 1 of the 4 Cryptic Commands still in hand given the play pattern, I believe this is a pretty reckless line

    The thesis for 3) is that you are unlikely to brick on the spot and are likely to draw at least 1 piece of fast mana to pay for the Knot so the first Shoal for 8 resolves while freerolling towards Pacts to protect your attempt to Breach in a Borborygmos on your next upkeep. In this spot, to not immediately die on the spot you need to hit 1 of 5 fast mana to pay for the Knot or 1 of 2 Pact in the deck (87% to hit one of your "7 outs" to not die on the spot i.e. 13% chance to die on the spot).

    I think Shoal pitching Shoal and hoping to combo is pretty ambitious. You'll need to draw your second pact for the Knot, a Wurm and the last Shoal to draw 14 cards. Those 14 cards will need 3 pieces of fast mana FTW, and this is assuming you can draw into a Pact in the next 7. Otherwise, you need to deal with the Knot to gain life from the first Shoal. Without doing too much math, I think this is too much risk

    Which leads to my preferred solution, which is 2). If we were to accept teh assumption that he has no snare/negate/dispel in hand (likely given play pattern), then this would only backfire on us big time if both of the opponent's remaining 2 cards are 2 of the remaining 4 Cryptics+1 Logic Knot (~1%). Otherwise, the only risk to us is that we get got by his topdecked permission for our Breach on the next upkeep, which, assuming 12 total counterspells post board and 3 of them having been used alraedy, is around 21%.

    Therefore, we can conclude that 2) has a ~78% success rate

    Given the assumed 78% success rate, and the conditional nature of all of the other solutions (having to draw into x which leads to having to draw into y etc.), I think 78% is as good as it gets of us.

    Obviously, you cannot run all of these numbers in-game, but I think this highlights that it's more important to know how to approach these problems with imperfect information (just like how these silly finance/consulting interview questions like "how many windows are in the City of New York" isn't about the answer, but the approach).

    In this particular case, I think the takeaway is that if you can guarantee yourself a predictible high expected value spot with the draws to the outs being one (i.e. opponent's one remaining draw step), it's likely better than increasing your draws (Griselbrand activations) at the cost of increasing the number of required outs (such as a combination of fast mana, shoal+wurm, pact etc. in these other scenarios), you should not take the solution that requires multiple outs.

    In the actual game, I let the Logic Knot resolve, Brutality with escalation to play around Queller+2 burn spells, saw no pieces of permission, and won on my Upkeep.

    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.