I know all the cards serve their functions and all, but Tyler Hill's smorgasboard of 1-ofs is driving me nuts. :))
At least it was only running 1 Become Immense
I find it interesting that the Infect deck that did the best in the modern portion of the Pro Tour was only running 1 Become Immense and 4 Groundswell.
same here as well :)) What made me curious was why the 2 Rancor over Distortion Strike? It's one of the reasons for tapping into blue :/
What made me curious was why the 2 Rancor over Distortion Strike? It's one of the reasons for tapping into blue :/
I am still a big fan of Rancor, it regularly hangs around for the rest of the game once you draw it, tends to accumulate in multiples over longer games, is a form of card advantage that the deck lacks, and gives +2 rather than +1. On the flip side Distortion Strike does play a similar role, but with genuine unblockability for 2 turns, and can trigger Wild Defiance. They are both definitely good choices. It is good to see Rancor back in a UG list again!
Should this really be Tier 1 after the Pro Tour? These type of events tend to be very inbreed. You had a team of very powerful players all play this deck. just about any deck they played would have put a few people in the Top 32, the players are that good. Not a single Infect player made the Top 8. I feel like this will not be a Top Tier deck and we should hold off on what is "Tier one" until we have more results than one inbred event.
Its Tier 1 based on the formula MTGS has been using for a long, long time. Cant complain about it once you see a deck you don't agree with. If you want to be consistent and non-hypocritical. Go complain about the other tier 1 decks who didnt make it to top 8.
Is this meant to be a troll post? I'll assume it isn't. I have no preference of whether this deck or any other is on the list. In fact I think this deck is interesting and dangerous. My problem is based on Pro Tour results which are hedged more and more by large teams metagaming for the event. The field becomes increasingly inbreed and the results are often non-indicative of what's actually strong.
A moderator gave his response and reasons and I accept that. I'm just generally wary of inbreed statistics. I hope to see Infect put up some strong GP results in the future!
Clearly wasn’t trolling. Stern disagreement does not equate to trolling.
As for PT results skewing tiers: it only means that infect will be tier 1 for a short period of time. Thats all. Once GP results come in to prove your points; Infect will be demoted as any other deck would. So lets all Keep Calm and Keep Playing.
I will be also glad if somebody could take Finkel's list and told me how to side with this deck... I feel horrible,but I just don't know when somebody gives me some random deck to play,how to side with it... But I hope that it will come with time... Thank you for your replies!
Finkel played a very similar list to Tom Ross'. They both played for CFB Pantheon during the Pro Tour. Tom just released an article named "The Pro Tour Infect Primer" that he sent to his team to study before the Pro Tour. It's on SCG Premium, but I'm not sure the legality of me copying and pasting it on a public thread since it's a subscribe thing. It's actually really helpful in deciding how to play and sideboard. I really like his use of Piracy Charm to get rid of pesky cards like Dark Confidant and Grim Lavamancer. It also can be used to give your infect dude unblockable or as a pump. Personally, I'm playing the Infect Master's list minus two Become Immense and one Gitaxian Probe and plus two Groundswell and one Viridian Corrupter.
Should this really be Tier 1 after the Pro Tour? These type of events tend to be very inbreed. You had a team of very powerful players all play this deck. just about any deck they played would have put a few people in the Top 32, the players are that good. Not a single Infect player made the Top 8. I feel like this will not be a Top Tier deck and we should hold off on what is "Tier one" until we have more results than one inbred event.
Its Tier 1 based on the formula MTGS has been using for a long, long time. Cant complain about it once you see a deck you don't agree with. If you want to be consistent and non-hypocritical. Go complain about the other tier 1 decks who didnt make it to top 8.
Is this meant to be a troll post? I'll assume it isn't. I have no preference of whether this deck or any other is on the list. In fact I think this deck is interesting and dangerous. My problem is based on Pro Tour results which are hedged more and more by large teams metagaming for the event. The field becomes increasingly inbreed and the results are often non-indicative of what's actually strong.
A moderator gave his response and reasons and I accept that. I'm just generally wary of inbreed statistics. I hope to see Infect put up some strong GP results in the future!
I too am exceedingly wary of inbred statistics. We had this issue last year in a big way when our formula had Bogles as a tier 1 deck for months, despite never repeating its PT success. Monthly updates instead of quarterly updates should help that, and will give us a way to determine if Infect is the real deal or if it is the Bogles of 2015. The challenge here was that we had a huge banning on 1/19 and needed some kind of update in the immediate future to reflect that new metagame. With another update coming on 3/2, after the upcoming Modern GP, we should have enough data to know with certainty how Infect stands.
My suspicion is that this deck is actually a lot better positioned than people think it is. It had a very interesting pre-trend even before the PT, putting up noticeable results on MTGO and at local paper events against a diverse, non-Pro/inbred metagame. I'm not sure if it can keep this up, but I would not bet against it.
most people that play on it are testing decks they want to buy themselves or are playing net decks they're trying to learn
it's like practicing for a nascar race at a DMV test facility / learner's permit lot.
spend the $9.99 AND THE $5 to get an infect list on MODO and run the gauntlet if yu feel the need to test online
you'll be a much better player and you'll see why most people make the choices they do. like rancor becomes obvious if you run agaisnt good players
and you find out why burn is a bad matchup, because so far you never played a skilled player on xmage yet if burn isn't an issue for your mono-green list
Should this really be Tier 1 after the Pro Tour? These type of events tend to be very inbreed. You had a team of very powerful players all play this deck. just about any deck they played would have put a few people in the Top 32, the players are that good. Not a single Infect player made the Top 8. I feel like this will not be a Top Tier deck and we should hold off on what is "Tier one" until we have more results than one inbred event.
Its Tier 1 based on the formula MTGS has been using for a long, long time. Cant complain about it once you see a deck you don't agree with. If you want to be consistent and non-hypocritical. Go complain about the other tier 1 decks who didnt make it to top 8.
Is this meant to be a troll post? I'll assume it isn't. I have no preference of whether this deck or any other is on the list. In fact I think this deck is interesting and dangerous. My problem is based on Pro Tour results which are hedged more and more by large teams metagaming for the event. The field becomes increasingly inbreed and the results are often non-indicative of what's actually strong.
A moderator gave his response and reasons and I accept that. I'm just generally wary of inbreed statistics. I hope to see Infect put up some strong GP results in the future!
I too am exceedingly wary of inbred statistics. We had this issue last year in a big way when our formula had Bogles as a tier 1 deck for months, despite never repeating its PT success. Monthly updates instead of quarterly updates should help that, and will give us a way to determine if Infect is the real deal or if it is the Bogles of 2015. The challenge here was that we had a huge banning on 1/19 and needed some kind of update in the immediate future to reflect that new metagame. With another update coming on 3/2, after the upcoming Modern GP, we should have enough data to know with certainty how Infect stands.
My suspicion is that this deck is actually a lot better positioned than people think it is. It had a very interesting pre-trend even before the PT, putting up noticeable results on MTGO and at local paper events against a diverse, non-Pro/inbred metagame. I'm not sure if it can keep this up, but I would not bet against it.
it's a cheap deck that people run all day everyday 365 days from a bunch of no-names that can't afford to build real decks on mtgo. but you take the 3-4 that actually put up a record better than 1-3 or 2-2 and ignore all evidence to the contrary.
a broke clock is right 2 times a day.
i think you're just hyped.
also this thread has been really inbred over time previous fad have been:
everyone going on the mono-geen hype train; viridian corrupters main when tom did it; run 2 of apsotle's blessing instead of 4; run 4 of ancient stirrings; run 4 of cathedral of war; run 4 of distortion strike; run 4 of guttral response; run 4 of rancor; remove all rancor; run 4 of wild defiance
just none of that ***** made for a reliable deck and every time i spoke out agaisnt it people accused me of trolling.
you can't ust yank consistency out of this aggressive low combo deck just to try some bull***** $0.10 bulk rare that you find and post in this thread
most of the bad ideas came from magnus and friends.....and they tend to stick around forever!
how many of you are in blue and green running 4 pendlehaven and 4 cathedral.....nobody?
well you all would have argued for that idea 7 months ago!
Public Mod Note
(ktkenshinx):
Infraction for trolling -ktkenshinx-
Thanks Chudd, I will try to write one my friend who own SCG premium account to share Ross's article to me... I want to ask you what do you think about Viridian Corrupter in main? Or how it works? Image situation that you have on your board spellskite... You have to sac it or not? I don't think that Corrupter is maindeck card,or am I wrong? I am plying one Myr (like Finkel) but never played him in maybe 20-30 games I played because of discard or it didn't come... I personally love Groundswell that card is so good in deck like this I think... I would like totally to play it
Yes, Viridian Corrupter has to target something. So if the only artifact is your own Spellskite or activated Inkmoth Nexus then your artifact dies. A one of should be fine and it's really there to have assistance game one against Affinity or Tron. Also, I like to have at least one out if someone plays a Chalice of the Void on one.
Golgari charm seems to be a card that we could get some mileage out of. Thoughts???
I think I'd much rather play Nature's Claim, assuming you want to kill enchantments. As for the regeneration part, I'd rather just have one-mana counterspells (Stubborn Denial could be interesting to try). I don't know that -1/-1 would be too useful for us, especially since it kills our guys too.
@MrPhysics Could you share us the reasons for your sideboard choices and 1-ofs in the maindeck in your Pro Tour list? Thank you so much!
Since you asked nicely ;).
There were generally two reasons - I had tested so much that I knew I wanted certain exact ratios of cards with certain functions in my deck, and secondly, I really wanted as many sideboard slots as possible, so I decided to mainboard some sideboard cards.
I believe I had 4 1-ofs in the maindeck - probe, dismember, spell pierce, and become immense.
For a very long time, I actually had 2 dismember main and 2 side, since I really liked dismember against pod (full 4 copies post side).I still liked it vs twin and abzan and affinity, but it is obviously terrible vs burn,amulet, and scapeshift. Even vs slower versions of zoo I liked it. I also learned before the event that pantheon was on infect. Given my expected meta, I knew I wanted 2 dismember in my 75, but felt it was good enough vs the expected field that it was fine to maindeck one copy to save a sideboard slot.
Become immense I tested a lot as both a 1-of and as a 2-of. I felt the PT meta was going to be slightly more combo heavy than it was, were might of old krosa is usually better. Obviously BI is worse in multiples, so I went with the 'safe' option of a single copy.
The miser's spell pierce has always been good to me. Its definitely not something you want to draw multiple of, but it is devastating if it works. Also, casting spell pierce g1 is great since if you get them with it, they will play around it all match not knowing your a madman with exactly 1 spell pierce. Also, I knew I wanted at least 2 pierce (and possibly a dispel if I could fit it), so maindecking a copy saves me another sideboard slot. Also note that the above 3 cards are typically bad in multiples, Id almost always rather have 1 dismember and 1 spell pierce than 2 of either.
The 1-of probe is because I feel this deck works best with 20.3 lands, but I cant play 20.3 lands, so I play 20 lands and a probe. Probe is actually a really great card, but becomes less important once you have a ton of experience with the deck. Your lifetotal really matters, and Im already maindecking bad cards vs burn (dismember), so I really cant afford to play many probes. Finally, its also a card thats bad in multiples, just like all my other 1-ofs
Also, at the risk of sounding arrogant, I planned on top 8ing (I plan on winning every tournament I enter, thats just the competitive mindset I have) - I really felt like my modern prep was outstanding, and I got some very good draft advice the day or two before the PT. Imagine your my opponent and have my list - its much harder to play around all these random 1-ofs than if I just used 3 spell pierce for example.
On the sideboard:
3 nature's claim/1 hurkyl's recall: The recall was my 15th sideboard card, going into the PT, Id planned on having a 3rd relic, but changed my mind to wanting a dispel, then I tried to find fog, but the vendors didnt have it, so I settled on recall. Now, the only matchup where Id want all 4 claims is affinity, and if thats true, then I feel like hurkyl's recall is better than claim vs affinity (at least the first copy, Id probably rather have 2 claim than 2 recall, but id rather have 1 of each than 2 claim). 3 claims is needed vs burn, so I didnt seriously consider fewer copies. Its also nice vs affinity, and in general is very solid vs an open field, nature's claim is simply a very versatile card
1 dismember - as before, I already have 1 main, and id like a second vs the mirror, abzan, twin, etc. Dismember is another card thats good to have as an option - for example, I like a couple copies vs storm, as I find its very difficult for them to race me without electromancer.
1 spell pierce - pierce stops things like blood moon and living end and wrath (not verdict, but people often respect thrun). You really want at least 2 pieces of countermagic in infect, if not more
1 dryad arbor - amazing vs abzan, 'ok' vs non-combo. This card is just all around reasonable, although drawing it sucks. I probably shoudlve just maindecked it - then id get another sb slot!
2x relic - as mentioned previously, Id considered a third relic. You never know when you will face dredge or living end (it was key in both my wins vs living end!) or gifts -> rites. Also, Against abzan I liked it, and I also like it vs things like temur twin. Liking relic so much is another reason I didnt overload on become immense
1x spellskite - great vs boggles and burn - ok in the mirror, either great of mediocre vs twin (bad vs grudge)
1x wall of roots - I really wanted a card specifically for burn, and this was the best I could come up with. Spellskite, while great, can be hard to use since you have to shock for blue mana, and they usually have smash to smithereens post side. Generally speaking, Id rather turn 2 wall than spellskite vs burn, whereas spellskite it much better later, and for ths reason I went with a 3/1 split in the 75
2x twisted image : Once again, amazing in the mirror, and I knew pantheon was on infect (and I was legitimately afraid of their 3x twisted image). I also bring it in in a ton of matches since the upside is so high and the downside is so low, especially once you factor in wild defiance
2x viridian corrupter: Since I skimped on become immense, my list is a bit weaker vs chalice. I like having at least 4 answers to chalice in my deck, and once again - I like this card in the mirror, since it will often trade with a guy and a pump spell, and furthermore, can eat opposing skites. I also like corrupter in matches where I dont like skite, but have artifacts that arent critical to kill, but that I incidentally want to kill, for example, vs a deck like merfolk (aether vial) or hatebears (vial, splicer tokens). When corrupter is good - its often really good, and I like having this type of high impact card in my side.
@MrPhysics13 WHOA :))) Totally comprehensive, thanks so much sir. :)) The deck makes better sense to me now haha I understood the 2 Sylvan Scryings 'cuz this deck draws into lesser Infect dorks compared to MonoGreen Infect, and it helps push Inkmoths against Control and BG/x Midrange. The FOUR Wild Defiance is interesting
:)) After a lot of goldfishing, I think I'll practise a tweaked list revolving around your build >.< (I couldn't grasp or be comfortable with the CFB Pantheon build Also Huey Jensen said in his latest article that their team's list was built on an element of surprise basis, whereas yours was derived from traditional lists of UG Infect)
@MrPhysics13 WHOA :))) Totally comprehensive, thanks so much sir. :)) The deck makes better sense to me now haha I understood the 2 Sylvan Scryings 'cuz this deck draws into lesser Infect dorks compared to MonoGreen Infect, and it helps push Inkmoths against Control and BG/x Midrange. The FOUR Wild Defiance is interesting
:)) After a lot of goldfishing, I think I'll practise a tweaked list revolving around your build >.< (I couldn't grasp or be comfortable with the CFB Pantheon build Also Huey Jensen said in his latest article that their team's list was built on an element of surprise basis, whereas yours was derived from traditional lists of UG Infect)
Thank you again so much!
I didnt have 4 wild defiance, I had 2 - my list has been widely misreported.
I totally agree with Spell Pierce in the main, I was on Dispel for a while (mostly because my games often go to a point where Pierce is dead) but now that I think about it you're absolutely correct.
Regarding Gitaxian Probe, I have to say I disagree. The whole "worthless if you're experienced enough" idea is pretty misguided in my mind, because even if you're the best player in the world you won't have perfect information and your opponents can always be playing all sorts of weird stuff. I feel alright conceding the burn matchup game 1, especially since my builds have access to Dispel postboard.
Finally, about your sideboard: I'm interested in your choice to include no Dispel. I like having 4 counterspells in the 75, especially given the likely rise of Twin following the PT. I'd also say your Dryad Arbor should have been in the main, but you knew that already.
@MrPhysics13 WHOA :))) Totally comprehensive, thanks so much sir. :)) The deck makes better sense to me now haha I understood the 2 Sylvan Scryings 'cuz this deck draws into lesser Infect dorks compared to MonoGreen Infect, and it helps push Inkmoths against Control and BG/x Midrange. The FOUR Wild Defiance is interesting
:)) After a lot of goldfishing, I think I'll practise a tweaked list revolving around your build >.< (I couldn't grasp or be comfortable with the CFB Pantheon build Also Huey Jensen said in his latest article that their team's list was built on an element of surprise basis, whereas yours was derived from traditional lists of UG Infect)
Thank you again so much!
I didnt have 4 wild defiance, I had 2 - my list has been widely misreported.
Please MrPhysics13 what do you have instead of these 2 Wild Defiances? Thanks
Ultra_Magnus posted the correct list earlier in the thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
same here as well :)) What made me curious was why the 2 Rancor over Distortion Strike? It's one of the reasons for tapping into blue :/
Quote from his Reddit thread, sums it up nicely for me
I am still a big fan of Rancor, it regularly hangs around for the rest of the game once you draw it, tends to accumulate in multiples over longer games, is a form of card advantage that the deck lacks, and gives +2 rather than +1. On the flip side Distortion Strike does play a similar role, but with genuine unblockability for 2 turns, and can trigger Wild Defiance. They are both definitely good choices. It is good to see Rancor back in a UG list again!
Is this meant to be a troll post? I'll assume it isn't. I have no preference of whether this deck or any other is on the list. In fact I think this deck is interesting and dangerous. My problem is based on Pro Tour results which are hedged more and more by large teams metagaming for the event. The field becomes increasingly inbreed and the results are often non-indicative of what's actually strong.
A moderator gave his response and reasons and I accept that. I'm just generally wary of inbreed statistics. I hope to see Infect put up some strong GP results in the future!
As for PT results skewing tiers: it only means that infect will be tier 1 for a short period of time. Thats all. Once GP results come in to prove your points; Infect will be demoted as any other deck would. So lets all Keep Calm and Keep Playing.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
Finkel played a very similar list to Tom Ross'. They both played for CFB Pantheon during the Pro Tour. Tom just released an article named "The Pro Tour Infect Primer" that he sent to his team to study before the Pro Tour. It's on SCG Premium, but I'm not sure the legality of me copying and pasting it on a public thread since it's a subscribe thing. It's actually really helpful in deciding how to play and sideboard. I really like his use of Piracy Charm to get rid of pesky cards like Dark Confidant and Grim Lavamancer. It also can be used to give your infect dude unblockable or as a pump. Personally, I'm playing the Infect Master's list minus two Become Immense and one Gitaxian Probe and plus two Groundswell and one Viridian Corrupter.
UG Infect
Modern
UG Infect
GW Infect
EDH
WB Teysa, Orzhov Scion
B Skithiryx, the Blight Dragon
I too am exceedingly wary of inbred statistics. We had this issue last year in a big way when our formula had Bogles as a tier 1 deck for months, despite never repeating its PT success. Monthly updates instead of quarterly updates should help that, and will give us a way to determine if Infect is the real deal or if it is the Bogles of 2015. The challenge here was that we had a huge banning on 1/19 and needed some kind of update in the immediate future to reflect that new metagame. With another update coming on 3/2, after the upcoming Modern GP, we should have enough data to know with certainty how Infect stands.
My suspicion is that this deck is actually a lot better positioned than people think it is. It had a very interesting pre-trend even before the PT, putting up noticeable results on MTGO and at local paper events against a diverse, non-Pro/inbred metagame. I'm not sure if it can keep this up, but I would not bet against it.
most people that play on it are testing decks they want to buy themselves or are playing net decks they're trying to learn
it's like practicing for a nascar race at a DMV test facility / learner's permit lot.
spend the $9.99 AND THE $5 to get an infect list on MODO and run the gauntlet if yu feel the need to test online
you'll be a much better player and you'll see why most people make the choices they do. like rancor becomes obvious if you run agaisnt good players
and you find out why burn is a bad matchup, because so far you never played a skilled player on xmage yet if burn isn't an issue for your mono-green list
it's a cheap deck that people run all day everyday 365 days from a bunch of no-names that can't afford to build real decks on mtgo. but you take the 3-4 that actually put up a record better than 1-3 or 2-2 and ignore all evidence to the contrary.
a broke clock is right 2 times a day.
i think you're just hyped.
also this thread has been really inbred over time previous fad have been:
everyone going on the mono-geen hype train; viridian corrupters main when tom did it; run 2 of apsotle's blessing instead of 4; run 4 of ancient stirrings; run 4 of cathedral of war; run 4 of distortion strike; run 4 of guttral response; run 4 of rancor; remove all rancor; run 4 of wild defiance
just none of that ***** made for a reliable deck and every time i spoke out agaisnt it people accused me of trolling.
you can't ust yank consistency out of this aggressive low combo deck just to try some bull***** $0.10 bulk rare that you find and post in this thread
most of the bad ideas came from magnus and friends.....and they tend to stick around forever!
how many of you are in blue and green running 4 pendlehaven and 4 cathedral.....nobody?
well you all would have argued for that idea 7 months ago!
Yes, Viridian Corrupter has to target something. So if the only artifact is your own Spellskite or activated Inkmoth Nexus then your artifact dies. A one of should be fine and it's really there to have assistance game one against Affinity or Tron. Also, I like to have at least one out if someone plays a Chalice of the Void on one.
UG Infect
Modern
UG Infect
GW Infect
EDH
WB Teysa, Orzhov Scion
B Skithiryx, the Blight Dragon
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
I think I'd much rather play Nature's Claim, assuming you want to kill enchantments. As for the regeneration part, I'd rather just have one-mana counterspells (Stubborn Denial could be interesting to try). I don't know that -1/-1 would be too useful for us, especially since it kills our guys too.
RUGTemur ScapeshiftGUR
UWRJeskai ControlRWU
UGUG InfectGU
Since you asked nicely ;).
There were generally two reasons - I had tested so much that I knew I wanted certain exact ratios of cards with certain functions in my deck, and secondly, I really wanted as many sideboard slots as possible, so I decided to mainboard some sideboard cards.
I believe I had 4 1-ofs in the maindeck - probe, dismember, spell pierce, and become immense.
For a very long time, I actually had 2 dismember main and 2 side, since I really liked dismember against pod (full 4 copies post side).I still liked it vs twin and abzan and affinity, but it is obviously terrible vs burn,amulet, and scapeshift. Even vs slower versions of zoo I liked it. I also learned before the event that pantheon was on infect. Given my expected meta, I knew I wanted 2 dismember in my 75, but felt it was good enough vs the expected field that it was fine to maindeck one copy to save a sideboard slot.
Become immense I tested a lot as both a 1-of and as a 2-of. I felt the PT meta was going to be slightly more combo heavy than it was, were might of old krosa is usually better. Obviously BI is worse in multiples, so I went with the 'safe' option of a single copy.
The miser's spell pierce has always been good to me. Its definitely not something you want to draw multiple of, but it is devastating if it works. Also, casting spell pierce g1 is great since if you get them with it, they will play around it all match not knowing your a madman with exactly 1 spell pierce. Also, I knew I wanted at least 2 pierce (and possibly a dispel if I could fit it), so maindecking a copy saves me another sideboard slot. Also note that the above 3 cards are typically bad in multiples, Id almost always rather have 1 dismember and 1 spell pierce than 2 of either.
The 1-of probe is because I feel this deck works best with 20.3 lands, but I cant play 20.3 lands, so I play 20 lands and a probe. Probe is actually a really great card, but becomes less important once you have a ton of experience with the deck. Your lifetotal really matters, and Im already maindecking bad cards vs burn (dismember), so I really cant afford to play many probes. Finally, its also a card thats bad in multiples, just like all my other 1-ofs
Also, at the risk of sounding arrogant, I planned on top 8ing (I plan on winning every tournament I enter, thats just the competitive mindset I have) - I really felt like my modern prep was outstanding, and I got some very good draft advice the day or two before the PT. Imagine your my opponent and have my list - its much harder to play around all these random 1-ofs than if I just used 3 spell pierce for example.
On the sideboard:
3 nature's claim/1 hurkyl's recall: The recall was my 15th sideboard card, going into the PT, Id planned on having a 3rd relic, but changed my mind to wanting a dispel, then I tried to find fog, but the vendors didnt have it, so I settled on recall. Now, the only matchup where Id want all 4 claims is affinity, and if thats true, then I feel like hurkyl's recall is better than claim vs affinity (at least the first copy, Id probably rather have 2 claim than 2 recall, but id rather have 1 of each than 2 claim). 3 claims is needed vs burn, so I didnt seriously consider fewer copies. Its also nice vs affinity, and in general is very solid vs an open field, nature's claim is simply a very versatile card
1 dismember - as before, I already have 1 main, and id like a second vs the mirror, abzan, twin, etc. Dismember is another card thats good to have as an option - for example, I like a couple copies vs storm, as I find its very difficult for them to race me without electromancer.
1 spell pierce - pierce stops things like blood moon and living end and wrath (not verdict, but people often respect thrun). You really want at least 2 pieces of countermagic in infect, if not more
1 dryad arbor - amazing vs abzan, 'ok' vs non-combo. This card is just all around reasonable, although drawing it sucks. I probably shoudlve just maindecked it - then id get another sb slot!
2x relic - as mentioned previously, Id considered a third relic. You never know when you will face dredge or living end (it was key in both my wins vs living end!) or gifts -> rites. Also, Against abzan I liked it, and I also like it vs things like temur twin. Liking relic so much is another reason I didnt overload on become immense
1x spellskite - great vs boggles and burn - ok in the mirror, either great of mediocre vs twin (bad vs grudge)
1x wall of roots - I really wanted a card specifically for burn, and this was the best I could come up with. Spellskite, while great, can be hard to use since you have to shock for blue mana, and they usually have smash to smithereens post side. Generally speaking, Id rather turn 2 wall than spellskite vs burn, whereas spellskite it much better later, and for ths reason I went with a 3/1 split in the 75
2x twisted image : Once again, amazing in the mirror, and I knew pantheon was on infect (and I was legitimately afraid of their 3x twisted image). I also bring it in in a ton of matches since the upside is so high and the downside is so low, especially once you factor in wild defiance
2x viridian corrupter: Since I skimped on become immense, my list is a bit weaker vs chalice. I like having at least 4 answers to chalice in my deck, and once again - I like this card in the mirror, since it will often trade with a guy and a pump spell, and furthermore, can eat opposing skites. I also like corrupter in matches where I dont like skite, but have artifacts that arent critical to kill, but that I incidentally want to kill, for example, vs a deck like merfolk (aether vial) or hatebears (vial, splicer tokens). When corrupter is good - its often really good, and I like having this type of high impact card in my side.
Hope that helps
:)) After a lot of goldfishing, I think I'll practise a tweaked list revolving around your build >.< (I couldn't grasp or be comfortable with the CFB Pantheon build
Thank you again so much!
I didnt have 4 wild defiance, I had 2 - my list has been widely misreported.
Regarding Gitaxian Probe, I have to say I disagree. The whole "worthless if you're experienced enough" idea is pretty misguided in my mind, because even if you're the best player in the world you won't have perfect information and your opponents can always be playing all sorts of weird stuff. I feel alright conceding the burn matchup game 1, especially since my builds have access to Dispel postboard.
Finally, about your sideboard: I'm interested in your choice to include no Dispel. I like having 4 counterspells in the 75, especially given the likely rise of Twin following the PT. I'd also say your Dryad Arbor should have been in the main, but you knew that already.
Sweet deck, congratulations on the finish!
RUGTemur ScapeshiftGUR
UWRJeskai ControlRWU
UGUG InfectGU
Ultra_Magnus posted the correct list earlier in the thread.