I think the @shoktroopa style works because what this deck really is, is a toolbox full of silver bullets and ways to find then, and that is our biggest strength and weakness. The control package is nice as a way to delay our enemy while we solve the "puzzle" and then win out of the blue. Therefore this is not a traditional control deck as many suggest before me, and this is not an aggro deck like the "all in Gx tron lists" this is a beast of its own kind, and for me the "tutoring" part is what makes the deck tick.
I'm working on a "new" silver bullet heavy list and Ill post it here after doing several tests.
I'm a relative newcomer to U-Tron, but not to Modern. I settled on this as my "change of pace" deck from Merfolk, and have really been enjoying it so far (especially now that it's bagged me a 5-0!). Details below:
Matchups Faced:
RB Hollow One (2-0)
Game 1 (play): I open with Tron land into Map, but quickly realize I have to play some defense when my opponent opens with Flameblade Adept. I decide to play an Island to hold up Condescend, which fortuitously catches a Gurmag Angler after my opponent discards a ton of cards. The scry finds me a second Tron land, which lets me work my way into Ugin followed by Platinum Angel and prompts a quick concession.
Game 2 (draw): My opener is slow but has Repeal and 2 Tron lands, so I keep. My opponent does little until Turn 3, when they slam a Blood Moon (and keep me from T3 Wurmcoiling them, as I had drawn the 3rd Tron land). I bide my time for a bit until I can Repeal the Blood Moon, slam a Wurmcoil, and cast Treasure Mage to get my 2nd Wurmcoil. My opponent puts up some resistance in the way of Ancient Grudge, recasting Blood Moon, and Hazoret, but ultimately the Wurm tokens overwhelm them.
Sideboarding: +4 Spatial Contortion, +4 Spreading Seas, +1 Wurmcoil Engine; -4 Condescend, -4 Remand, -1 Sundering Titan. My opponent is on a pretty fast deck, and my thoughts were that I had to disrupt them early, and that I wouldn't necessarily be able to line up my counterspells in time to do it. Titan is also low-impact because they run on such few lands.
Jund Ponza (2-1)
Game 1 (play): The only real stinker this deck produced all league. I had a Sundering Titan and an Ugin in hand, but thanks to a timely Stone Rain, I could never quite put 8 mana together. To make matters worse, I also never drew a blue source, and died with lots of bombs in hand.
Game 2 (play): This time around, my opponent is the one on mana issues (1-lander, though they did find lots of Utopia Sprawls/Arbor Elves), and I slam a T3 Wurmcoil one turn ahead of their Blood Moon. Next, I cripple their ability to cast spells by slapping a Seas on the Utopia Sprawl land, and the game is frankly pretty academic from there.
Game 3 (draw, mull 6): My opponent has a series of Stone Rain effects to try and keep me off Tron, but applies no pressure. Because of this, I eventually find my way to Tron, counter their incoming threats, and prompt a concession with Wurmcoil into Mindslaver.
Sideboarding: +4 Spreading Seas, +1 Wurmcoil Engine; -1 Platinum Angel, -4 Repeal. Plat is not at her best against decks in the artifact hate colors, and Repeal generally lines up poorly against ramp decks and their expensive permanents. Seas (as we saw in Game 2) is potentially crippling for their manabase.
Jund (2-0)
Game 1 (play):U-Tron kind of just did its thing. I wiped my opponent's board with an Oblivion Stone, slapped down Wurmcoil into Sundering Titan, and my opponent couldn't really do anything about it.
Game 2 (draw): My hand is slow, but it is highly disruptive; I slap Seas effect after Seas effect on my opponent's lands, which prevents them from doing much of anything while I hardcast my Wurmcoil Engine and take over the game. The final board state for this game is perhaps my favorite moment in my U-Tron experience thus far.
Game 1 (play): A quick Chalice on 1 keeps them from getting too crazy, and I am able to put down an O-Stone with enough time to put a fate counter on my Chalice. My opponent casts a desperation Bloodbraid Elf, but hits a 1-drop and concedes.
Game 2 (draw): Elves was just a bit too quick, and I didn't quite find enough spot removal to fend them off. This was a game that would have been quite different if I had been on the play.
Game 3 (play, mull 6): Chalice and Dismember buy me the time I need to wipe their board with O-Stone, and Wurmcoil following by digging my way into Mindslaver quickly put the game away.
Game 1 (play): Pretty straightforward stuff. I have natural Tron in hand, so I use my Map to fetch an Island and Condescend their T3 Fulminator Mage, then slam an Ugin and quickly close them out with counterspell backup.
Game 2 (draw): My opponent jams a quick Living End to get 9 power on the table and attempts to disrupt me with Beast Within on my land, but I fight my way to Tron and wipe their board with Ugin. My planeswalker succumbs to a Kolaghan's Command, but I then find a Chalice and Mindslaver them to end the game.
I was pretty obviously running hot, and I managed to win all 5 of my die rolls, so there's no denying at least part of this result is due to good fortune. That said, the list feels strong, and there's little I would change. My only quibble is with Gemstone Caverns, which would have been good to have in my Game 2 opener against Elves but would otherwise be highly superfluous. I will keep testing it, but that's my least favorite card in the deck right now.
Or, does it seem like the deck is inconsistent because we have anecdotal evidence coming from an overly verbal and inexperienced base of players?
Take this with a pinch of sugar, but this statement sums up the last 20 pages or so perfectly. The platinum angel argument is good proof of ancedotal evidence. The deck is incredibly consistent, bad hands and draws happen to every deck. Burn dies brutally when it floods or gets mana screwed, but it's still one of the most consistent decks.
Sometimes you must take a step back in order to take two forward, but some of the advice popping up are detrimental to the deck and the big grinders either aren't here anymore or are tires of repeating themselves over and over.
Or, does it seem like the deck is inconsistent because we have anecdotal evidence coming from an overly verbal and inexperienced base of players?
Take this with a pinch of sugar, but this statement sums up the last 20 pages or so perfectly. The platinum angel argument is good proof of ancedotal evidence. The deck is incredibly consistent, bad hands and draws happen to every deck. Burn dies brutally when it floods or gets mana screwed, but it's still one of the most consistent decks.
Sometimes you must take a step back in order to take two forward, but some of the advice popping up are detrimental to the deck and the big grinders either aren't here anymore or are tires of repeating themselves over and over.
That may be true, but if the deck were really as consistent as you imply, why has it yet to have a single GP or higher top 8 finish? If it was so consistent, then by now someone should have made it through the swiss rounds lottery to make it to the top 8.
To be honest... because the player base is super small. No one plays U-Tron, and a lot of us who do are limited in how many events we can go to. The deck works really well, but if your n isn't where it needs to be, you won't break through very often.
That's a possible hypothesis, but other decks also had very small player bases and still got GP or higher top 8's. Lantern, Merfolk, Mardu Pyromancer, Hollow One, Ponza. While I can't say for sure that there aren't alternative reasons the deck hasn't performed at that level at major events, we equally cannot rule out the possibility that the deck just isn't there yet.
EDIT: Some of these decks only started to get larger playerbases because they made top 8 at a major event.
Based on my experience with MTGO as well as the large events I've been to, a lot more people play those decks than U-Tron. This deck, while good, is hard to play and thus highly fringe. I'd compare the playerbase size to Lantern before it hit the big time with Zac Elsik and Sam Black. And I agree, we can't rule out the possibility that the deck isn't quite there yet. But based on how it performs in my hands, it feels like it's there.
“Stylistically” speaking, I love the looks. Always been a fan of the x-mile cantrips spells (Repeal, Remand, Seas) and multiple sweepers. I don’t think this is the right direction for the deck - indeed, you faced archetypes against whom early interaction is much less required - but a win is a win! Glad it worked for you, because it’s always a good feeling drawing cards into cards drawing. Seems like our deck is getting better and better in this meta game. I just came back from a little tournament, and closed 3-0 without dropping a single game (against Affinity, URg Unstorm and UB Tezzeret). I’m sure we can reach the Tier 2 status with a little more players.
About the sb in/out: I would definitely not cut Condescend and Ballista against Jund. Ballista kills Confidant and, later in the game, immediately gets rid of Lily. Remand is the correct side out instead of our hard counter.
You did see I played against Elves, Hollow One, and Ponza, yes? If you don't need early interaction there, I don't know where you need it. The toolkit I have in the deck is good enough to do the job. I'll have to experiment with Condescend vs. Remand against Jund, though; Jund taps out a lot, so Remand is often a virtual Time Walk, and at the end of the day, you just want to buy time until you can Tron them off the table. And Ballista may catch Bob, but it ONLY catches Bob, and to be honest, I'm not afraid of Bob.
They're not really equipped to take us off Tron and pressure us at the same time, especially considering I have Relics to contain the Goyfs and Oozes and Seas to make casting their spells harder. And they absolutely, positively cannot deal with us once Tron is up. The Jund matchup is all about buying a modicum of time until our power cards make them unable to play Magic, just like it is for GX Tron, and we all know that matchup is atrociously bad for them. Play like a Tron deck, and you will win.
Or, does it seem like the deck is inconsistent because we have anecdotal evidence coming from an overly verbal and inexperienced base of players?
Take this with a pinch of sugar, but this statement sums up the last 20 pages or so perfectly. The platinum angel argument is good proof of ancedotal evidence. The deck is incredibly consistent, bad hands and draws happen to every deck. Burn dies brutally when it floods or gets mana screwed, but it's still one of the most consistent decks.
Sometimes you must take a step back in order to take two forward, but some of the advice popping up are detrimental to the deck and the big grinders either aren't here anymore or are tires of repeating themselves over and over.
That may be true, but if the deck were really as consistent as you imply, why has it yet to have a single GP or higher top 8 finish? If it was so consistent, then by now someone should have made it through the swiss rounds lottery to make it to the top 8.
Maybe?
Statistically speaking, given the number of options there are, for decks to play, in modern, it's possible that either the "right" person has not yet picked up the deck, has not spent the requisite time playing it, and has not appeared at any or enough GPs to hit a top 8 with it. Alternatively, maybe the entire field of players has just gotten that "unlucky" in the matchup "lottery" of the swiss rounds...
I agree wholeheartedly with your burn example, having seen it happen. That's why I raised the question regarding it being a deckbuilding problem v. a piloting problem v. a game mechanics/"luck" problem.
It's tough to pin it down because we don't have anyone at the "pro level" playing the deck regularly. Shoktroopa and Pie were playing it online consistently and Shok certainly had many 5-0 MTGO finishes noted on Goldfish, but we all know MTGO is a different animal than live events, for tracking performance.
Nonetheless, if they are many 5-0 online records and the deck is "consistent enough to compete", why has nobody taken it into a Top 8? Bringing us full circle...
How many people want to experiment with a different deck in tournament? Most people will just play decks that are known to win and stick with that so they have a better shot at getting into the top 8.
Funny thing to say about piloting. We won't ever have any evidence of piloting efficiency unitl someone pilots it better then everyone else.. know where this is going? We can talk about these kind of faith and believes, but they will not get us anywhere. The proof of the unbelievable is the proof that will unveil the unbelievable and make us believe.. please, let's not bring god and such metaphore into MTG.
So we can either tech and tinker or we simply stop talking about it. I mean it doesn't give anyone anything to say: maybe we need to "git gud". This kind of rhetoric is pretty counterproductive; it either shows our desperate needs for a hero to come and save the deck (meaning we can't work, think and try things) or it shows that some of us are conservative about the classic 75.
Also, I watched Shok and Pierakor alot back in 2015 or so. Shock often mulled to 0 and instant conceded; Pierakor grinded his teeth once in a while feeling powerless. I don't even know at this point if winning a ournament with the "classic 75" is an aberration or not.
On another note: I destroyed the whole LGS tonight with that Japanese list (http://www.hareruyamtg.com/en/k/kD10910W/). 4 Wurmcoil and 4 thought-knoot is really a huge thing. The akward tutorin taking our blue mana only giving us next turn our "right" threat isnt anymore. The turn 8 tron TKS + counter up or TFK is really nice and strong. I'll keep on trying this version and see how it goes.
I have been grinding some games with the japanese lists as well but swapped the 2x ulamog for a 1x Ugin and 1xEE. Deck feels much better with the 4x wurm/TKS. It has a very clear "plan"
ALSO, 3 FIELD OF RUIN IS NUTS! Wasnt sure what they were there for but after testing them in vs control as well as eldrazi they are well worth it and a real interesting sideboard option.
Funny thing to say about piloting. We won't ever have any evidence of piloting efficiency unitl someone pilots it better then everyone else.. know where this is going? We can talk about these kind of faith and believes, but they will not get us anywhere. The proof of the unbelievable is the proof that will unveil the unbelievable and make us believe.. please, let's not bring god and such metaphore into MTG.
So we can either tech and tinker or we simply stop talking about it. I mean it doesn't give anyone anything to say: maybe we need to "git gud". This kind of rhetoric is pretty counterproductive; it either shows our desperate needs for a hero to come and save the deck (meaning we can't work, think and try things) or it shows that some of us are conservative about the classic 75.
Also, I watched Shok and Pierakor alot back in 2015 or so. Shock often mulled to 0 and instant conceded; Pierakor grinded his teeth once in a while feeling powerless. I don't even know at this point if winning a ournament with the "classic 75" is an aberration or not.
On another note: I destroyed the whole LGS tonight with that Japanese list (http://www.hareruyamtg.com/en/k/kD10910W/). 4 Wurmcoil and 4 thought-knoot is really a huge thing. The akward tutorin taking our blue mana only giving us next turn our "right" threat isnt anymore. The turn 8 tron TKS + counter up or TFK is really nice and strong. I'll keep on trying this version and see how it goes.
I don't quite know what the hell you're talking about in the first paragraph...But, as far as I can see from everything, the argument isn't "git gud", it's there are XYZ factors that affect deck performance. Of those factors, we can control X & Y. Z, we don't have control over, but if we have enough information we can account for it, to some extent in our analysis of the deck's performance.
In this instance, we can control: decklist. We cannot control: the meta or the people playing the deck.
We have the data on the meta, from MTGTop8 and other sources. We can tinker with the decklist based on that information. What we don't have data on is, the caliber of player using the deck. To account for this, we need to ask questions and try to get answers to: Is non-top 8 appearance driven by lower quality players using the deck and/or a non-pro level player using the deck? Are complaints of inconsistency in the deck driven by lack of experience or because the deck is truly inconsistent or something else? Etc.
So, this has nothing to do with, "OMG everyone sux and they need to git gud and stop whining!" This is trying account for as many factors as we can in order to make objective choices to improve the deck, so we can all enjoy better results, more consistent play, etc.
I believe that this deck takes a great amount of time to get comfortable with (specially shok-style lists) and it is probably the last deck I will recommend to a new comer, and that may be one of the factors.
A couple of years ago i was truly invested on the lantern deck, before it was any popular and the average list of cards compare to the first winning list of cards was not that different, and the discussion was just like it is on this forum right now. It just took a lot of time and effort to a couple of people and it was a success, but i think that what we really need is not just tweak the deck but also go to more tournaments and the top 8's will come.
Pros don't play decks that are inconsistent so they don't play U-Tron.
Yes, Shok's put up so many 5-0's and Top 8 on MTGO Challenges, but if you watch his streams, he also goes 1-4's 2-3's quite a bit because the deck doesn't perform (or he has those bad nights with floods and starves). I also don't believe the MTGO 5-0 lists are quite representative of what the paper Magic (i.e. Majors) represent, especially after the unbans. I think the meta needs to settle a bit and we can go from there.
A good example of a Tier 3 deck becoming a Tier 1/2 deck is Eldrazi Tron. The deck has existed for awhile (more like survived after the Eye of Ugin bannings). The deck back then still played Mimics, SSG's, and Endless Ones. But people realized that this style of play wasn't consistent so they started playing more mid-rangey style, utilizing more on Tron. Of course cards like Walking Ballista really improved the deck, but the bottom line was that people started adjusting the decklist to perform more consistently. So they added Karn, Chalices, Warping Wails, All is Dust, etc. Then came Spring 2016 where Todd Stevens and a few others started stomping on people with the deck and it became Tier 1. This kind of story goes the same way for Lantern Control and the recent powerhouse, RG Eldrazi.
Mono-U used to be Tier 2 sometime before and during the Twin meta. And this was when the modern format was A LOT slower. Mono-U always struggled in a faster meta, but people have been so stubborn to change the decklist. Because we have Shok and the beautiful list of 75 where every card has a purpose. Modern is now more popular than ever and there are so many different decklists and the meta's constantly shifting. Yet, we still use the same decklist from 4 years ago, scared to innovate. It's extremely hard to play a toolbox style of deck with Mono-U now. There are way more decks that are almost non-interactive with what Blue can do like 5C Humans and other Cavern/Vial decks. I believe Jeskai Control is the true "Toolbox" deck right at this moment and it does it way better than Mono-U.
So back to where I started: why would anyone play Mono-U over Jeskai if they wanted a "Toolbox" with lots of silver-bullets?
Please don't get me wrong because I LOVE Shok's list and it's seriously everything I wanted out of a Magic deck. It's so much fun to play and it's the most rewarding deck I've ever played. But, I just don't think the deck is designed to win a GP or constantly put up results at majors, especially with so many archetypes out there. It's so hard to find answers for everything with just 1 colour.
So where do we go now? I think the winner of Hareruya Modern cup's list (aka "the Japanese List") has some insight. We play Tron so it's an "unfair deck", but we don't always get Tron and ways to get there fast. So we play counterspells and Thirst to dig, manage, and disrupt our opponents early-mid game. Remember that we don't always get Tron OR Blue sources sometimes. How do we solve this? Play lower CMC cards that are easy to cast and are hard to deal with like Wurmcoil Engines, Thought-Knot Seers, SINGLE-blue mana spells, etc. I think we start from the basic again because U-Tron is a Tron deck after all and I think it can really come out on top, ESPECIALLY after the unbans because our control matchup is ridiculously strong.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks
Modern
Mono U-Tron U
Jeskai Control UWR
EDH
Ezuri, Renegade Leader UG
Tasigur, the Golden Fang UGB
Having some 20% winrate matchups like gx tron, merfolk, and dredge that aren't exactly fringe decks really hurts u tron's GP performances
We also don't have that many "free win" hands. The best we have is a fast chalice and maybe a t3 wurmcoil, which arent that great compared to the godhands of other decks like burn, affinity, gx tron, eldrazi tron etc
No way gr tron is close to 40:60. Maybe before ulamog and world breaker. There are like 5 GR tron players at my local, and so i prettu much play against it every week. Shok, Pie and a whole bunch of other mtgo grinders report a 25-30% winrate against the deck.
Its true that Merfolk arent as bad as it used to be, but its still unfavorable. I haven't played against it in a long time, but dismembers, and spatials did improve the matchup by a lot.
Dredge is the same as affinity, and burn. Very coinflippy and there so many variables that are out of your control.
My point is that the deck gets gatekept by a lot of decks that aren't that uncommon.
p.s
The deck can also have outside the game issues that don't make it GP friendly such as going to time, opponent slow rolling, not scooping to slaverlock, fatigue due to long games with not much time between rounds, etc
I'm working on a "new" silver bullet heavy list and Ill post it here after doing several tests.
360 Pauper Cube The Trinket Box
PDH Decks
Classic Pauper Decks
Just wanted to pop in and share a report on my first 5-0 with U-Tron! Details below:
List here.
I'm a relative newcomer to U-Tron, but not to Modern. I settled on this as my "change of pace" deck from Merfolk, and have really been enjoying it so far (especially now that it's bagged me a 5-0!). Details below:
Matchups Faced:
RB Hollow One (2-0)
Game 1 (play): I open with Tron land into Map, but quickly realize I have to play some defense when my opponent opens with Flameblade Adept. I decide to play an Island to hold up Condescend, which fortuitously catches a Gurmag Angler after my opponent discards a ton of cards. The scry finds me a second Tron land, which lets me work my way into Ugin followed by Platinum Angel and prompts a quick concession.
Game 2 (draw): My opener is slow but has Repeal and 2 Tron lands, so I keep. My opponent does little until Turn 3, when they slam a Blood Moon (and keep me from T3 Wurmcoiling them, as I had drawn the 3rd Tron land). I bide my time for a bit until I can Repeal the Blood Moon, slam a Wurmcoil, and cast Treasure Mage to get my 2nd Wurmcoil. My opponent puts up some resistance in the way of Ancient Grudge, recasting Blood Moon, and Hazoret, but ultimately the Wurm tokens overwhelm them.
Sideboarding: +4 Spatial Contortion, +4 Spreading Seas, +1 Wurmcoil Engine; -4 Condescend, -4 Remand, -1 Sundering Titan. My opponent is on a pretty fast deck, and my thoughts were that I had to disrupt them early, and that I wouldn't necessarily be able to line up my counterspells in time to do it. Titan is also low-impact because they run on such few lands.
Jund Ponza (2-1)
Game 1 (play): The only real stinker this deck produced all league. I had a Sundering Titan and an Ugin in hand, but thanks to a timely Stone Rain, I could never quite put 8 mana together. To make matters worse, I also never drew a blue source, and died with lots of bombs in hand.
Game 2 (play): This time around, my opponent is the one on mana issues (1-lander, though they did find lots of Utopia Sprawls/Arbor Elves), and I slam a T3 Wurmcoil one turn ahead of their Blood Moon. Next, I cripple their ability to cast spells by slapping a Seas on the Utopia Sprawl land, and the game is frankly pretty academic from there.
Game 3 (draw, mull 6): My opponent has a series of Stone Rain effects to try and keep me off Tron, but applies no pressure. Because of this, I eventually find my way to Tron, counter their incoming threats, and prompt a concession with Wurmcoil into Mindslaver.
Sideboarding: +4 Spreading Seas, +1 Wurmcoil Engine; -1 Platinum Angel, -4 Repeal. Plat is not at her best against decks in the artifact hate colors, and Repeal generally lines up poorly against ramp decks and their expensive permanents. Seas (as we saw in Game 2) is potentially crippling for their manabase.
Jund (2-0)
Game 1 (play): U-Tron kind of just did its thing. I wiped my opponent's board with an Oblivion Stone, slapped down Wurmcoil into Sundering Titan, and my opponent couldn't really do anything about it.
Game 2 (draw): My hand is slow, but it is highly disruptive; I slap Seas effect after Seas effect on my opponent's lands, which prevents them from doing much of anything while I hardcast my Wurmcoil Engine and take over the game. The final board state for this game is perhaps my favorite moment in my U-Tron experience thus far.
Sideboarding: +2 Relic of Progenitus, +4 Spreading Seas, +1 Wurmcoil Engine; -1 Chalice of the Void, -4 Condescend, -1 Platinum Angel, -1 Walking Ballista. Drawing cards = good in this matchup, especially when you can also disrupt their mana. Plat is once again not at her best here, and Ballista rarely catches anything of note unless you have Tron (in which case you have won).
Jund Elves (2-1)
Game 1 (play): A quick Chalice on 1 keeps them from getting too crazy, and I am able to put down an O-Stone with enough time to put a fate counter on my Chalice. My opponent casts a desperation Bloodbraid Elf, but hits a 1-drop and concedes.
Game 2 (draw): Elves was just a bit too quick, and I didn't quite find enough spot removal to fend them off. This was a game that would have been quite different if I had been on the play.
Game 3 (play, mull 6): Chalice and Dismember buy me the time I need to wipe their board with O-Stone, and Wurmcoil following by digging my way into Mindslaver quickly put the game away.
Sideboarding: +1 Chalice of the Void, +2 Dismember, +4 Spatial Contortion, +1 Walking Ballista, +1 Wurmcoil Engine; -4 Condescend, -4 Remand, -1 Sundering Titan. Needless to say, removal = good in this matchup, and Chalice also plays a big role. Sundering Titan could be nice if you live long enough to cast him, but he is a step slow.
Living End (2-0)
Game 1 (play): Pretty straightforward stuff. I have natural Tron in hand, so I use my Map to fetch an Island and Condescend their T3 Fulminator Mage, then slam an Ugin and quickly close them out with counterspell backup.
Game 2 (draw): My opponent jams a quick Living End to get 9 power on the table and attempts to disrupt me with Beast Within on my land, but I fight my way to Tron and wipe their board with Ugin. My planeswalker succumbs to a Kolaghan's Command, but I then find a Chalice and Mindslaver them to end the game.
Sideboarding: +1 Chalice of the Void, +2 Relic of Progenitus, +4 Spreading Seas; -1 Platinum Angel, -4 Repeal, -1 Walking Ballista, -1 Wurmcoil Engine. Chalice counters the namesake spell, so it's obviously good here. Spreading Seas is also nice to dirsupt their color-intensive manabase. You want to try and present noncreature threats if possible in this matchup, to deny them the ability to cast Demonic Dread.
Notes and Observations:
I was pretty obviously running hot, and I managed to win all 5 of my die rolls, so there's no denying at least part of this result is due to good fortune. That said, the list feels strong, and there's little I would change. My only quibble is with Gemstone Caverns, which would have been good to have in my Game 2 opener against Elves but would otherwise be highly superfluous. I will keep testing it, but that's my least favorite card in the deck right now.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Care to share your 5-0 List?
Also, is there a website for the Japanese tournament which U-Tron has won? The one mentioned in post #13826. I am kinda curious about the meta there.
Cheers.
Take this with a pinch of sugar, but this statement sums up the last 20 pages or so perfectly. The platinum angel argument is good proof of ancedotal evidence. The deck is incredibly consistent, bad hands and draws happen to every deck. Burn dies brutally when it floods or gets mana screwed, but it's still one of the most consistent decks.
Sometimes you must take a step back in order to take two forward, but some of the advice popping up are detrimental to the deck and the big grinders either aren't here anymore or are tires of repeating themselves over and over.
I linked to it in the writeup, but here it is in case you can't access the link:
1 Chalice of the Void
4 Expedition Map
1 Mindslaver
2 Oblivion Stone
Creatures (8)
1 Platinum Angel
1 Sundering Titan
2 Treasure Mage
2 Trinket Mage
1 Walking Ballista
1 Wurmcoil Engine
Instants (18)
4 Condescend
2 Cyclonic Rift
4 Remand
4 Repeal
2 Ugin, the Spirit Dragon
Lands (24)
1 Academy Ruins
2 Field of Ruin
1 Gemstone Caverns
6 Island
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
1 Tolaria West
4 Urza's Mine
4 Urza's Power Plant
4 Urza's Tower
1 Chalice of the Void
2 Dismember
2 Relic of Progenitus
4 Spatial Contortion
4 Spreading Seas
1 Walking Ballista
1 Wurmcoil Engine
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
That may be true, but if the deck were really as consistent as you imply, why has it yet to have a single GP or higher top 8 finish? If it was so consistent, then by now someone should have made it through the swiss rounds lottery to make it to the top 8.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
EDIT: Some of these decks only started to get larger playerbases because they made top 8 at a major event.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
You did see I played against Elves, Hollow One, and Ponza, yes? If you don't need early interaction there, I don't know where you need it. The toolkit I have in the deck is good enough to do the job. I'll have to experiment with Condescend vs. Remand against Jund, though; Jund taps out a lot, so Remand is often a virtual Time Walk, and at the end of the day, you just want to buy time until you can Tron them off the table. And Ballista may catch Bob, but it ONLY catches Bob, and to be honest, I'm not afraid of Bob.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Maybe?
Statistically speaking, given the number of options there are, for decks to play, in modern, it's possible that either the "right" person has not yet picked up the deck, has not spent the requisite time playing it, and has not appeared at any or enough GPs to hit a top 8 with it. Alternatively, maybe the entire field of players has just gotten that "unlucky" in the matchup "lottery" of the swiss rounds...
I agree wholeheartedly with your burn example, having seen it happen. That's why I raised the question regarding it being a deckbuilding problem v. a piloting problem v. a game mechanics/"luck" problem.
It's tough to pin it down because we don't have anyone at the "pro level" playing the deck regularly. Shoktroopa and Pie were playing it online consistently and Shok certainly had many 5-0 MTGO finishes noted on Goldfish, but we all know MTGO is a different animal than live events, for tracking performance.
Nonetheless, if they are many 5-0 online records and the deck is "consistent enough to compete", why has nobody taken it into a Top 8? Bringing us full circle...
So we can either tech and tinker or we simply stop talking about it. I mean it doesn't give anyone anything to say: maybe we need to "git gud". This kind of rhetoric is pretty counterproductive; it either shows our desperate needs for a hero to come and save the deck (meaning we can't work, think and try things) or it shows that some of us are conservative about the classic 75.
Also, I watched Shok and Pierakor alot back in 2015 or so. Shock often mulled to 0 and instant conceded; Pierakor grinded his teeth once in a while feeling powerless. I don't even know at this point if winning a ournament with the "classic 75" is an aberration or not.
On another note: I destroyed the whole LGS tonight with that Japanese list (http://www.hareruyamtg.com/en/k/kD10910W/). 4 Wurmcoil and 4 thought-knoot is really a huge thing. The akward tutorin taking our blue mana only giving us next turn our "right" threat isnt anymore. The turn 8 tron TKS + counter up or TFK is really nice and strong. I'll keep on trying this version and see how it goes.
ALSO, 3 FIELD OF RUIN IS NUTS! Wasnt sure what they were there for but after testing them in vs control as well as eldrazi they are well worth it and a real interesting sideboard option.
I don't quite know what the hell you're talking about in the first paragraph...But, as far as I can see from everything, the argument isn't "git gud", it's there are XYZ factors that affect deck performance. Of those factors, we can control X & Y. Z, we don't have control over, but if we have enough information we can account for it, to some extent in our analysis of the deck's performance.
In this instance, we can control: decklist. We cannot control: the meta or the people playing the deck.
We have the data on the meta, from MTGTop8 and other sources. We can tinker with the decklist based on that information. What we don't have data on is, the caliber of player using the deck. To account for this, we need to ask questions and try to get answers to: Is non-top 8 appearance driven by lower quality players using the deck and/or a non-pro level player using the deck? Are complaints of inconsistency in the deck driven by lack of experience or because the deck is truly inconsistent or something else? Etc.
So, this has nothing to do with, "OMG everyone sux and they need to git gud and stop whining!" This is trying account for as many factors as we can in order to make objective choices to improve the deck, so we can all enjoy better results, more consistent play, etc.
A couple of years ago i was truly invested on the lantern deck, before it was any popular and the average list of cards compare to the first winning list of cards was not that different, and the discussion was just like it is on this forum right now. It just took a lot of time and effort to a couple of people and it was a success, but i think that what we really need is not just tweak the deck but also go to more tournaments and the top 8's will come.
360 Pauper Cube The Trinket Box
PDH Decks
Classic Pauper Decks
Yes, Shok's put up so many 5-0's and Top 8 on MTGO Challenges, but if you watch his streams, he also goes 1-4's 2-3's quite a bit because the deck doesn't perform (or he has those bad nights with floods and starves). I also don't believe the MTGO 5-0 lists are quite representative of what the paper Magic (i.e. Majors) represent, especially after the unbans. I think the meta needs to settle a bit and we can go from there.
A good example of a Tier 3 deck becoming a Tier 1/2 deck is Eldrazi Tron. The deck has existed for awhile (more like survived after the Eye of Ugin bannings). The deck back then still played Mimics, SSG's, and Endless Ones. But people realized that this style of play wasn't consistent so they started playing more mid-rangey style, utilizing more on Tron. Of course cards like Walking Ballista really improved the deck, but the bottom line was that people started adjusting the decklist to perform more consistently. So they added Karn, Chalices, Warping Wails, All is Dust, etc. Then came Spring 2016 where Todd Stevens and a few others started stomping on people with the deck and it became Tier 1. This kind of story goes the same way for Lantern Control and the recent powerhouse, RG Eldrazi.
Mono-U used to be Tier 2 sometime before and during the Twin meta. And this was when the modern format was A LOT slower. Mono-U always struggled in a faster meta, but people have been so stubborn to change the decklist. Because we have Shok and the beautiful list of 75 where every card has a purpose. Modern is now more popular than ever and there are so many different decklists and the meta's constantly shifting. Yet, we still use the same decklist from 4 years ago, scared to innovate. It's extremely hard to play a toolbox style of deck with Mono-U now. There are way more decks that are almost non-interactive with what Blue can do like 5C Humans and other Cavern/Vial decks. I believe Jeskai Control is the true "Toolbox" deck right at this moment and it does it way better than Mono-U.
So back to where I started: why would anyone play Mono-U over Jeskai if they wanted a "Toolbox" with lots of silver-bullets?
Please don't get me wrong because I LOVE Shok's list and it's seriously everything I wanted out of a Magic deck. It's so much fun to play and it's the most rewarding deck I've ever played. But, I just don't think the deck is designed to win a GP or constantly put up results at majors, especially with so many archetypes out there. It's so hard to find answers for everything with just 1 colour.
So where do we go now? I think the winner of Hareruya Modern cup's list (aka "the Japanese List") has some insight. We play Tron so it's an "unfair deck", but we don't always get Tron and ways to get there fast. So we play counterspells and Thirst to dig, manage, and disrupt our opponents early-mid game. Remember that we don't always get Tron OR Blue sources sometimes. How do we solve this? Play lower CMC cards that are easy to cast and are hard to deal with like Wurmcoil Engines, Thought-Knot Seers, SINGLE-blue mana spells, etc. I think we start from the basic again because U-Tron is a Tron deck after all and I think it can really come out on top, ESPECIALLY after the unbans because our control matchup is ridiculously strong.
Modern
Mono U-Tron U
Jeskai Control UWR
EDH
Ezuri, Renegade Leader UG
Tasigur, the Golden Fang UGB
We also don't have that many "free win" hands. The best we have is a fast chalice and maybe a t3 wurmcoil, which arent that great compared to the godhands of other decks like burn, affinity, gx tron, eldrazi tron etc
Its true that Merfolk arent as bad as it used to be, but its still unfavorable. I haven't played against it in a long time, but dismembers, and spatials did improve the matchup by a lot.
Dredge is the same as affinity, and burn. Very coinflippy and there so many variables that are out of your control.
My point is that the deck gets gatekept by a lot of decks that aren't that uncommon.
p.s
The deck can also have outside the game issues that don't make it GP friendly such as going to time, opponent slow rolling, not scooping to slaverlock, fatigue due to long games with not much time between rounds, etc