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.
The Magic Market Index for Oct 20, 2017
The Magic Market Index for Oct 13, 2017
The World of Kamigawa
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from shadowsaotome »
    Quote from Aegraen »
    The format would be a lot better if we had Counterspell and Fact or Fiction. The former we're never going to get because "standard" and "unfun", and the latter I don't see as well because of all the "fixed" versions of the card they've tried over the years. They just seem reluctant to ever bring it back, and it's probably a no-go so long as Gearhulk is in the format. It's a sad day when Glimmer of Genius is one of the better draw spells in the format. Having an actual good control deck would do a lot to decrease the amount of shenanigans. Daze would be interesting, but I think GDS beats up on the unfair decks enough as is. Also, **** Cavern of Souls - that card should not exist.

    LOL to anyone who thought WoTC would unban anything.

    Well now...your post reminds me of one of the ETron players I encounter at my LGS, except his stance is the complete opposite of yours. However, you both present your arguments in a rather hostile format which makes it difficult to take seriously. So let's go over your points, because I'm trying to understand where you're coming from.

    1) Counterspell and FoF in modern seems like overkill. I love blue as a color, but there is no way in hell we'd get both of those cards. The power level of standard would have to be through the roof to allow either one of those in, let alone both. Some players, myself included, love to play draw-go magic, but that's not what standard has been about for a long time.

    2) Glimmer of Genius is good in standard, but to call that a good draw spell in modern is laughable.

    3) Not certain how you define a good control deck. What's your ideal version, and how would that reduce shenanigans in Modern?

    4) Cavern of Souls is pretty much a pillar in any tribal deck, and no tribe save Eldrazi is remotely close to needing the axe that badly. Why does that card grind your gears?

    5) No unbans yet, but the fact that they said publicly they're discussing unbans for February is good news. We'll have to see how the Pro Tour goes.

    1) I'm not saying we have to get them at the same time, but one or the other would be nice - preferably Counterspell because that is the weakest part of the deck which does need to be addressed. I mean, it doesn't even have to be Counterspell, but something close (1U - Counter target spell with CMC 4 or less) would be acceptable. Also, if we can't get good strong control cards through standard, then what's the point? If counterspells and card draw - two very important parts of a control deck - are off limits for modern power-level, then I guess the game has left me by. I came for the chess-like gameplay, and if WoTC rams down linear dog*****, I'm just going to go elsewhere (I heard GWENT was pretty good in that department).

    2) Of course it's laughable - that's the power-level of card draw in Modern outside of Esper Charm. It's garbage.

    3) A good control deck can police the degenerate decks. It's been that way traditionally. Apparently, now-a-days, all WoTC knows how to do is print a decent removal spell every 2-3 years. Which means the only good control cards tend to be them and not counters, hence, Modern control decks being much better against aggro decks than the degenerate decks - a fact mind you, that only holds true in Modern. In every other format including Standard, Control is weak to aggro, but strong against degenerate decks. This needs to change imho. Control should be weak to aggro, as it's meant to police the format, and keep things on the straight and narrow.

    4) Because a card that has such low opportunity cost as that should not invalidate an entire spectra of interaction. Would you be bitching and moaning if there was a 5 color tribal land that gave creatures hexproof? It also contributes to the lack of control decks doing well in large tournaments. Over 15-rounds you're bound to lose at least 1 round to Cavern (perhaps more). It was a stupid card specifically made to deal with Delver decks - it's a pox on format health imho.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    The format would be a lot better if we had Counterspell and Fact or Fiction. The former we're never going to get because "standard" and "unfun", and the latter I don't see as well because of all the "fixed" versions of the card they've tried over the years. They just seem reluctant to ever bring it back, and it's probably a no-go so long as Gearhulk is in the format. It's a sad day when Glimmer of Genius is one of the better draw spells in the format. Having an actual good control deck would do a lot to decrease the amount of shenanigans. Daze would be interesting, but I think GDS beats up on the unfair decks enough as is. Also, **** Cavern of Souls - that card should not exist.

    LOL to anyone who thought WoTC would unban anything.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from h0lydiva »
    Honestly, I didn't play Pod, so my opinion is kind of worthless. People say it was busted, I believe them. But yeah it doesn't look like it's too powerful for Modern or anything.

    Pod is simply too good. Since it was banned, some damn good Pod cards have been printed as well (e.g. Rallier) that would make it even worse. Granted, we have Kcommand now, but more often than not it'll beat the Kcommand decks just through out-attritioning them.

    People remember Delver-TC being the best deck during its time, but Pod was actually the best deck at something like 22-25% during that time. Plus if you go back and look at Day 2 rates, conversion %, etc. Pod was absurd.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on UB Azcanta Laboratory Draw-Go
    This is what I think I'll be playing tomorrow:

    I might end up changing Negate for Countersquall as the 2 life may matter against Combo/Tron decks, and UB isn't too difficult mana-wise. I also may end up cutting 1 Opt for another removal spell or something like TT. Another removal spell may be better in conjunction with Azcanta and PW'ers...not sure. Warrants more testing. If more combo shows up I may want Clique in the SB or the 1 Surgical I took out for Kalitas.

    I'm still torn on what I want to cut for the Dismember - there are more PW'ers showing up in Modern and it's nice to have the option of Downfall with Snap/Gearhulk. It may just be that I need to cut one VoN for the Dismember as a hedge for Angler. My mana is relatively painless so I can afford the 2 life loss from Dismember pretty easy. We'll see how it goes.

    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on Modern Esper Draw-Go
    I've never really had a problem beating Storm. As long as you don't let Gifts resolve and you have cards like Spellbomb in your 75 to nullify PIF, it's hard to lose, especially if you know to play the MU a bit like you do vs. Tron flashing in Snap on T2. Then again, I play an abnormally high amount of interaction against combo decks (~10 counters in the 75, thoughtseizes, collective brutalities, spellbombs, etc.). Plus, Night of Souls' Betrayal blanks their Empty plan and you can usually stick it with good information from all the discard. If you go Thoughtseize, kill their guy, Esper Charm them, snap-seize, that's a hard game for you to lose especially if you have Dispel back up for a top-decked Gifts. Then again, a lot of lists don't play 4x Snapcaster, which also makes the MU harder. So, really, it comes down to how you've built your 75. Not playing Collective Brutality anywhere in the 75 is just insane to me, but I see so many lists that don't then you see posts about not beating burn, or storm, or having trouble in CoCo matches, etc. /shrug
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the October 17, 2017 announcement?
    Quote from 13055 »
    Quote from Venom_man4 »
    Cavern I'm not 100% on this but I would like to see how it plays out in regards to balancing out control vs those super aggro creature decks.

    Is this really an issue? Are Humans/Slivers/Merfolk really so strong that we want to remove Cavern? Constrol should have sweepers to deal with go-wide strategies; if you feel the uncounterability of the weenie squad is what your control deck is losing to, maybe you should find some other deck to combat them with. It's super important for Humans/Slivers to have a 5 color land, and even with the new Unclaimed Territory, I don't think Cavern is even close to on Wizard's radar. The only thing I can say against Cavern is that it allows Eldrazi (which already dodge the format-standard removal spells of Lightning Bolt and Fatal Push) to dodge counters, as well, but I think most people would agree that Eldrazi, if it needs any bans, needs something stiffer, like Temple or Tron ban(s).

    I think as time goes on Cavern just gets better and better. It's also highly punishing to 1 specific type of answer. Control should be a good favorite against mid-range decks like Eldrazi, but Cavern just *****s all over it. You can't afford to have dead interactive cards in your hand and that's what Cavern does for decks like Fish/Humans/Slivers/etc., so saying you should have sweepers, isn't really a valid argument given the breadth of the format. It just doesn't promote format health imho. At least cards like GSZ/Pod/BBE have some inter-play to them. Cavern really was a mistake and should go. I'm sure more people would be upset if there was a tribal land that gave the creature hexproof which is equivalent to uncounterability with counters, but for some reason it gets a pass because ... counters are "unfun"?

    Plus as you brought up they just printed a 5 color tribal land.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on UB Azcanta Laboratory Draw-Go
    Well, you say it's marginally better than Ingenuity, but agree that the leap from 4 to 5 mana is pretty significant. There are a decent number of 4 cost spells that see play in Modern, but far fewer 5CMC cards see play (plus it plays well with Cryptic in the sense that you put your opponent in a bad spot holding up 4 mana). Also, I'm only warping it by playing 3-4 copies of a card that at worst cycles for U or B (the Spellbomb is in the main because I needed a SB slot for Hostage Taker), so it has a far lower opportunity cost than the cards you're including to build around Azcanta.

    As for Spreading Seas...yes I know what it does - I'm talking about the cost. Targeting OP LD costs you the card (98% of the time the land is going to be untapped and will tag a land of yours), and it is much much worse if it is Tec Edge you have to target. That's 1-2 cards you're down, which costs you 8 mana to recoup and 2 turns. That's just not a winning play. If you want to play SS for other reasons, then, that can be argued, but the use of it to pre-emptively make opp. use their LD is -CA. I also agree that you wouldn't play Architects without a pay off (see: LE or Scour the Lab), but I'm not just throwing Will into a random deck so I'm not sure how that argument holds. You're not going to play Thought Scour in non-GY centric decks, but that doesn't make Thought Scour a bad card. It makes it niche. I have enjoyed the card as being very flexible and important in the deck. We'll probably agree to disagree on this forever, until you play the deck (for better or worse).

    I also do not like Mana Leak at all even in non-path decks. We're aiming to prolong the game. I'm willing to take the minor hit on Azcanta to have 3 very good counters that are relevant early and late. Plus you don't always have to delve with Logic Knot, and many times early it's essentially censor. It doesn't really strain your GY a lot til later in the game.

    I'm hoping that Ob Nix will work out. I think I can afford 1 5 mana play and he seems to be quite flexible, and the deck is already pretty good against Combo decks so I think I can afford this to boost my other MU's. Gifts is interesting, and could be quite good. Next time I play I'll make a note if one or the other instant speed 4 mana CA spells would have been better. I tried Thopter/Sword when it was unbanned. It's not good. I don't see that changing here. It's possible Trinket Mage is good, but then the only targets are EE or Spellbomb. It's just too low impact imho. The space in the SB is pretty taxed as is.

    As for the only has 4 removal spells (well 5 if you count the edict from LoTV). I don't see how this can be successful in Modern. I think if I were you, I'd stick to one list and play some games and tweak from there instead of relying on thought experiments. I know you're in a lot of other threads and playing many other control decks so maybe time is limited for you, but I think that's where I'd start if you wanted to improve the list. Lmk how it goes.

    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on UB Azcanta Laboratory Draw-Go
    Quote from jayjayhooks »
    Quote from D90Dennis14 »
    I can't imagine that 4x Ancestral Vision + 4x Serum Visions (over the delirium artifacts) isn't better for card draw and selection in a control deck.

    For a big draw spell maybe Pull from Tomorrow can be used as a weaker version of Sphinx's Revelation in a non-white deck.

    For me at least, the appeal of Azcanta is that control decks no longer need cards like Ancestral Vision and Sphinx's Rev, both of which are unplayable (competitively) in modern in my estimation. I think UW control has been doing well despite running 1-of Rev, not because of it, and Ancestral Vision has no competitive home.

    The more I think about Scour the Lab, the more I think the juice isn't worth the squeeze. We are working way too hard to get a 1 mana discount on Jace's Ingenuity. There's just no way I'm ever sleeving up Architects of Will.

    On the other hand, after reading Sam Blacks article on what he calls his "Search for Azcanta deck featuring UB control cards" (paraphrasing), i'm starting to think that I have been undervaluing the ramp aspect of Azcanta. Sam basically said they switched out Glimmer of Genius for Heiroglyphic Illumination simply so they would have more cyclers to flip Azcanta earlier. We can do something similar in modern by including Thought Scour, which plays well with UB control strategies generally in any case. My only concern is that by moving off of Scour the Lab, Spreading Seas becomes less potent because it isn't pulling double duty as both Delirium and Azcanta protection. Without Seas, Azcanta becomes more vulnerable and we are in the same predicament again where we need a certain critical number of win conditions, and card advantage sources. UW control can get away with only relying on Colonnade and Snap because they also have access to planeswalkers that can attack. We might have to rely on Torrential Gearhulks and Tasigurs, which puts us on all of our win conditions and card advantage as relying on the graveyard, which is not a great place to be, and I'm not too sure that is something that we can overcome since we don't have access to Enchantment/Artifact hate in UB. We may have to splash into Sultai for Abrupt Decay. What do you think?

    I think you're under-estimating 1 mana, especially the difference between 5 and 4 is much greater than 1 to 2 or 3 to 4, etc. If Jace's Ingenuity cost 4 mana it would be seeing a lot of play.

    As for Will - I mean, you even mention Sam running a bunch of cyclers to turbo-ramp out Azcanta. Then you say you'd never play Architects because it's terrible, yet it does exactly what the deck wants imho. You can't rely solely on Azcanta as your CA-suite; it is slow, vulnerable to LD/GY hate and vulnerable to Abrupt Decay/Pulse, etc. It's a tool to be used in addition to your other sources of CA - a way to fight on another axis. The reason Thought Scour is played is because it fuels delve cards, which are nearly a non-bo (outside of Logic Knot because of its flexibility and necessity) with early Azcanta flips. Also, how is Seas protecting Azcanta? You're throwing away a card and a land (if in the case of Tec edge) to protect it, but you need to sink a couple turns into the card just to get to card parity at that point. Imho, Azcanta isn't meant to be the aim of the deck - it's meant as an important adjunct to what the deck all ready wants to do. I think you're focusing a little too much on having your 75 built around Azcanta instead of building a 75 that works well together.

    I agree being so GY-centric is a hindrance not a benefit G2/G3, but we don't have FoF/etc. available to us. As for Enchantment hate, you can play EE and Hostage Taker also hits artifacts. Blacks suite of planeswalkers can also win the game (Lili, LH / Ob Nix ults), but also do things the deck all ready wants, where Gideon's are more one-dimensional, so it isn't like there aren't pro's and cons to each. By the way, once again you under-estimate the flexibility of Architects being an enabler/card draw, disruption, and win-con depending on the state of the game. It's not uncommon later in the game to lock my opp. for 2 turns and win with the 3/3. I think you should give it a try before totally dismissing its merits, but that's up to you in the end.

    If you don't want to be so GY-centric I could see going -1 Scour, -1 Architects, +1 Opt, +1 Glimmer of Genius to hedge a bit. It's probably not the worst idea in the world.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on UB Azcanta Laboratory Draw-Go
    Quote from D90Dennis14 »
    Any reason you prefer Scour (which requires setup and running some bad filler cards) over Ancestral Vision ?
    Sure it is slow (Scour isn't fast either) and isn't an instant but it is much cheaper to play.

    I'd also prefer 2x Go For the Throat + 1x Murderous Cut and either SB the Victim of Night or remove it completely.
    Dissolve is probably worse than Disallow if you want a 3-mana counter.

    Scour is more consistent than AV, and works much better in conjunction with Snapcaster and Gearhulk. Incidentally, the Architects perform quite a few duties in the deck - cycling for 1 mana is always low cost; it helps fill GY for Knot if needed, for Azcanta, and later in the game, acts as disruption+win-con or pseudo-selection with yourself (ala something like Halimar Depths) if you need to find something. On the surface, it looks bad, but it is one of the better cards imho.

    As for the removal - GftT is quite good, but if you look at the top 50 creatures that are played Victim only misses Gurmag Angler and Tidehollow Sculler. It's pretty much Terminate, though missing Angler can be somewhat of a problem against DS. That's a little less of a problem with less DS around, but it's still something to consider. The deck probably wants a Dismember as well. As for Murderous Cut, you simply can't play it - you're all ready playing 3 Logic Knots, Azcanta that wants your GY filled, Scour that wants delirium, and 3 Snaps + 1 Gearhulk.

    For the 3 mana counter, I think the selection of Dissolve is better than the niche scenarios for Disallow (I tend to value consistency a bit more than most), but I ended up cutting it since I wanted a 4th "CA" spell. I ended up going -1 Dissolve +1 TT, but next week I'm going to try -1 TT +1 Ob Nix. It's been working for Ozguney on MTGO, so I'll see it how it goes.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on UB Azcanta Laboratory Draw-Go
    Ended up going -1 Opt +1 Architects and -1 Dissolve for +1 Think Twice. Our Modern Monday's are 40 min rounds. I ended up going 1-0-2 lol.

    2-0 Boros Burn
    1-1 Bant Knightfall splash for Kessig
    1-1-1 E. Tron

    I didn't have Hostage Taker yet, but it would have been very good against Knightfall and E. Tron. I also didn't have the Field of Ruin (LGS sold out and my JP ones not here yet), so I played an Island instead. It kind of hurt against E. Tron. In the limited amount of games Azcanta wasn't terrible, but it did whiff once with 3 lands + Snap, but I think the deck wants 1 more removal spell. I know Osman Ozguney has been playing a 1-of Ob Nixilis online and he's been doing well and UW tends to play 1 Gideon Jura. I'm thinking of going -1 TT +1 Ob Nix as it is a draw engine and removal spell. There are certainly MU's it's really bad like Combo + Burn, but that's also mostly true for Jura as well, but it is still good.

    The Downfall wasn't the worst, but I think you want cheaper removal that you can grab off Azcanta so a 1 of Dismember is probably better. I also think -1 Flooded Strand +1 Drowned Catacombs is better too (81% in opening 7 to be untapped and 90% by the 9th card). I want another UB dual, but don't want it to be tapped (so no Tar pit / Fetid Pools) and those %'s are good enough imho. The other option is River of Tears, and honestly, that might be better. Ok, I sorta convinced myself just now on the River of Tears. I'll give that a try. Tears is better in SB games with Brutality / Thoughtseizes.

    The 1-of Spellbomb actually wasn't bad, providing revolt/delirium and shutting down Knight. It's pretty low-cost to play. Need more games to get in, but that's the preliminary outlook. Scour was good. Need to play more with Azcanta to get a better picture.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on UB Azcanta Laboratory Draw-Go
    Quote from jayjayhooks »
    So I was thinking that it might be possible to go heavier on enchantments rather than architects of will, the fact that architects works great with Scour is nice and all, but I think the card is pretty poor otherwise. My thought was perhaps going heavier on Azcanta and adding Spreading Seas. Spreading Seas obviously protects Azcanta very well, and works well in conjunction with LD lands. The LD lands could in some corner cases be used to blow up lands that have Spreading seas already on them to put an enchantment in the graveyard if need be to help with Scour. In any case, Spreading Seas and LD lands have a proven track record, so I don't think you could go too wrong to try to use them!

    My other thought was running Serum Vision over Opt mostly because of it being a Sorcery to help with the card type count. I also briefly considered Chart A Course because it could discard excess Azcantas, or Spreading Seas and being a Sorcery again helps with the card type count. For the same reason, I also like the addition of Liliana of the veil. It's a fine card on it's own, extra walkers help with type count, being able to discard an enchantment from hand seems good.

    I think the biggest difference between our lists, besides Spreading Seas over Architects of Will, is Leak over Logic Knot. I don't want to get bogged down on arguing over that choice difference, because I think ultimately it's a preference thing there; I will cede that Logic Knot looks better in a list like this due to Search, and Liliana Veil if you take that route, over other control decks. Not sure if that makes up for further relying on the GY but for the sake of moving on to productive conversation about the rest of the deck, Lets just call those slots 2cmc counters and discuss elswhere.

    The 2 Chart a Course a just placeholders for now, I'm not sold on them.

    I have no experience playing with Scour, so how do you think my list differs fundamentally from yours? What do you like, what do you hate?

    I think your list is trying to do 2 things that play awkwardly together - you're playing 6 counters, but then also a ton of sorcery speed cards. Many times you're going to end up wasting mana because you have to hold up interaction and can't play your sorcery speed cards. UW can do this because they're mostly tap-out deck. UB plays much better with a Draw-Go shell than UW because UB has better removal which allows you to do this. In UW you're heavily reliant on Supreme Verdict and Path plays poorly with counters as well. I don't think the deck needs to imitate UW to do well.

    As for Architects vs. the enchantments. Architects is a very flexible card. It is the best enabler for Scour, and since it cycles it has minimal downside (and plays better with your instant-interaction). When you get your opponent close to hell-bent/hell-bent which is the goal of any Azcanta deck as you want to 1:1 them with the Impulse effect, playing an Architects essentially seals the game buying you on average 1.5-2 turns. It also gives relevant information and can index yourself which is underrated imho. I've had others play with a Scour/Will list before and they've always been impressed by the card. It's innocuous, but what it does is very important for the deck imho.

    The LoTV is interesting. I've never played with her in a control-shell, but I can see how she synergizes with some of what the deck is doing, plus she is just powerful on her own. I could go either way here. I'm also not sold on Chart a Course. If you're going to play a card like that, that poor mans Accumulated Knowledge (Take Inventory) plays MUCH better in the deck and with Azcanta. With Chart, you're almost never going to just draw 2. Granted, Take Inventory wants you to play with 4, but you could also replace with something like Think Twice that also has some synergy with LoTV and Azcanta instead.

    Serum Visions in your list is just much better than Opt because your list is mostly tap-out. Opt plays better when you're holding up Snaps, Counter, card draw, impulse land, etc. I'm not saying that draw-go in a vacuum is better than tap-out, it's just that I think that the card pool for UB is more suited to draw-go than tap-out imho. White has powerful cards like D. Sphere, Gideons, and Wall of Omens that UB doesn't. LoTV really wants you to have a board advantage since that is when she is at her best.

    I would be interested to hear how your list plays out, but I think you vastly underestimate how good Architects is.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on Modern Esper Draw-Go
    Quote from Cipher »
    Quote from jayjayhooks »
    I agree that the deck needs to be reconfigured a bit for Azcanta, but not to the point of changing the fundamental strategy of the deck. I don't think it's necessary to become a prison style deck, as you mentioned. Not really too sure why you think that actually, seems like you stated it without expanding on the reason you arrived at that conclusion. I don't think planes walkers and enchantments like counterbalance/halo are anymore necessary than ever.

    Adding a single card engine to the deck doesn't play out any differently than, in my experience, than playing with a card like Rev. As I've said, it seems to me that the only real difference in deck design is that rev can be replaced and that it's possible we may need assurances for the inevitable situations where GQ style lands take out our azcanta. This can be accomplished by playing more copies or maybe through other means (spreading seas for example, though I don't think that particular route is optimal for this deck, but there are certainly options out there).

    My main point is azcanta seems to be a fine engine for draw go strategies, look at the world championship for example. Obviously standard is a different beast but azcanta is nearly singlehandedly carrying multiple drawgo style control archetypes through the tournament.
    I thought I spelled it out pretty well, but I suppose it wouldn't hurt to repeat.

    Azcanta rewards positional advantage permanents. Casting Impulse each turn opens up the possibility of soft-locks, similar to what we saw with Dragonloard Ojutai in Standard. Once you untap with a planeswalkers on turn 5 and this thing flips, it becomes less likely with every passing turn that your opponent will draw out of it before the planeswalker ultimates. Same could apply to Crucible of Worlds locks. The search helps setup and protect these board states, which will shift any (successful) list over time towards this end of the spectrum. People do things like cut sweepers for Tasigur in their Draw-Go decks, so there's no saying you have to build your decks a certain way, but when there's an obvious path of least resistance a successful archetype will tend to evolve in that direction. That's assuming the deck has exposure and there are articles and tournament results available.

    Azcanta disincentivises low-impact, one-for-one disruption and/or Divination effects. This isn't as intuitive, but Azcanta is highly mana-inefficient in terms of material (card) advantage. Phyrexian Arena effect exists that will give you a card for less mana each turn, and they're hardly playable cards. Similar to the way that Mystical Tutor gives you the option of a 5-mana Path to Exile, a 6-mana counterspell, or a 7-mana Divination, when you're burning 3 mana each turn on a dig effect you need the answers you're finding to have huge impacts on the board. You'll feel it when you're staring down lethal in 2 turns and you begin wondering exactly you could get off an activation that would justify sinking half your available mana each turn into.

    Quote from Adrithria »
    UW doesn't technically only run 4 removal spells right? They're typically on some number of Detention Sphere as well if I remember correctly.
    I said spot removal, by which I meant cards which only kill creatures and are dead in most all of the spell-based matchups.

    On the contrary, I think Azcanta incentivizes cheap interaction. If you can impulse + interact each turn the chances of your opponent winning the game is dramatically lowered. Cards like Path, Push, Logic Knot, etc. go up in value, not down. High-impact spells tend to be expensive. Sweepers can recoup tempo, but a lock piece like Chalice cannot. I don't think Azcanta is going to push the decks it is in towards prison (they'll never be as good as Lantern or Chalice decks and as such, they'll be little reason to do this), but it is going to push the control decks it is in to play more cheap interaction. You're also still going to need some other CA spell whether that is Esper Charm, Glimmer, Scour the Lab, etc. as Azcanta gets worse in multiples and is vulnerable to LD where the instant-speed CA isn't (plus you just need a critical number of cards that +CA). In other words, it's going to replace cards like Sphinx's Rev, and more decks will be playing more 1 and 2 mana interaction. I wouldn't ever play 4 wraths MB in an Azcanta deck, but I could definitely see these decks cut one for another path or push or blessed alliance, etc. Even a card like Deprive goes up in value because Azcanta is essentially rampant growth so it's actually tempo-neutral in conjunction and does the thing for 2 mana.

    There's also the flipside that GY-hate is going to be better against your decks that are packing Snaps, Azcanta, Think Twice, etc., but I think it's worth it.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on UW Control
    Quote from jayjayhooks »
    Yep, Field is great!

    Better than GQ at everything other than being able to cut basics if you run crucible.

    It's a little worse than Tec Edge in conjunction with Mana Leak, but much better in every other regard including how well it plays with Cryptic Command, Supreme Verdict and Sphinx's Rev. As well as being able to strip Tron lands earlier.

    A I've said, I think the only time you should be playing either GQ or Tec now is if you're running crucible main or relying on it as a sideboard strategy.

    Tec Edge is nice to color screw people in conjunction with Spreading Seas. It's much harder to do that with Field. I wouldn't cut all the edges, imho.
    Posted in: Tier 1 (Modern)
  • posted a message on UB Azcanta Laboratory Draw-Go

    Preliminary list without too much testing. I could see going -1 Opt +1 Architect, -1 Dissolve +1 Think Twice, -1 Victim of Night +1 Dismember (for DS decks - Angler can be an issue), and try and fit a Kalitas somewhere in the SB.

    The deck is a bit GY-centric which is an issue, but Scour the Lab. is just by far the best CA draw spell in the colors. The idea is similar to Esper Draw-Go with Azcanta as your engine. Being able to have better mana and some utility in the mana is a huge bonus. Azcanta also works well with Scour the Laboratory.

    Hostage Taker is in the board for creature-centric matches and artifacts. It's in theory quite good against E-Tron, Lantern, CoCo decks, Affinity, etc. It might turn out to be a dud, in which Kalitas is the better card. UB historically has done poorly interacting with artifacts, so I wanted 2 in the 75 (EE + Hostage Taker), but I could be mistaken.

    Deck mostly beats up on Combo decks and creature-centric decks.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on Modern Esper Draw-Go
    Quote from jayjayhooks »
    Obstructionist only costs 1 more than Squelch, can't be countered, can be cycled empty (I assume that to mean without a target) and is infinitely more flexible than squelch.

    Damnation is a fine card against everything except Shadow decks, and push only hits half their creatures. I guess that's only one match though. I didn't consider the other removal options in black for the Drazi match fairly I suppose, but Path is so good there, they run like 2 basics and it also deals with Reshaper cleanly. I guess Hero's downfall makes up for some of the slack though since it can also hit a random Karn. Hmm, UB could be interesting. Still not too sure about trying to get fancy with Scour the Laboratory mainly because I don't want to run Architects of Will. I suppose running 3-4 Azcanta makes it much more likely to have card type Enchantment in the graveyard. I think this is getting a little off topic, Aegraen if you want to start a thread for UB Scour/Azcanta i'd love to have more discussion about this. I have some ideas, and I think we could develop the deck a bit, at least to the point where I think I'd be willing to give it a spin on MTGO.

    Sure. I've been playing Will/Scour Esper build for months now and it's performed very well. It's an easy transition to UB. The deck might need 1 more source of CA so possibly -1 Dissolve +1 TT or something. I definitely need to find time to playtest.

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