MTG Salvation

Looks like 4/8 of the lists that have placed in larger (major/professional) events since we got our new cyclers have run 3-4 Archfiends.

So based on that timeline it’s only been half. You’re right though, the three most recent lists all ran 3-4.

I will say that Archfiend is our best hardcast. I feel like 1-2 is the sweet spot, and I’d never go below one.

Edit: I don’t like the two-mana/land cyclers in a fast meta. If these unbannings slow the meta down a lot and make it more grindy we may want to add the staying power that land cyclers and better hardcasts (Archfiend) provide. I don’t really know. I do know that I still like MB Macabre, and I do know that 4x Fulminator seems like a solid include.

I'd be very careful using the results to back up the conclusion because I feel the numbers are shaky to begin with. If there ever was data that i'd place more faith in, it would be the day 1 to 2 conversation rates for Living End in large non-PT event and the percentage breakdown of decks running a certain number of archfiends over the other percentage running more.

And even then i'd still be uncomfortable with the data overall because not a lot of players run LE to begin with, and that the variance is incredibly high as a result of that compounded by our deck's matchup with the overall meta that unlike Jund or GDS, is not just a blanket 40/60 - 60/40.

Obviously we're never going to get that info because Wizards would never publish it and even SCG wouldn't (too time consuming), and we're most certainly not going to get round to round reports plus notes from every LE player. That if anything would help immensely.

The big problem of Living END is Humans! In addition, we can say that Jund platforms are not as easy as they used to be, although they are still quite easy!

Jund should still be a really easy one.

Humans are tough. Thalia, Meddling Mage, and Freebooter, as well as Images to copy them all is just hard to wade through. Fortunately Jund has a pretty solid MU against them, so maybe the percentages will drop a little bit.

Quote from Piney_Tinecones »

Jund should still be a really easy one.

Humans are tough. Thalia, Meddling Mage, and Freebooter, as well as Images to copy them all is just hard to wade through. Fortunately Jund has a pretty solid MU against them, so maybe the percentages will drop a little bit.

I agree but. Burn is not easy! Affinity (if ravager is online) is very hard, and Humans is so bad!

The real question is: Is Living End playable yet?!

Extra: Jace TMS'decks with Remand and cya is so hard too!

Affinity is hard if they have ravager, otherwise a breeze. And it gets way easier with more archfiend of Ifnir.

Burn is hard

Humans are hard if they have the disruption draw. They also get hurt badly by Shriekmaw.

New thought after the call with Trav and some guys tonight: why not Bloodbraid Elf? Move the interactive spells to the board, trim a couple Demonic Dread, then we have more cascade spells in addition to more threats.

Quote from kodieyost »

New thought after the call with Trav and some guys tonight: why not Bloodbraid Elf? Move the interactive spells to the board, trim a couple Demonic Dread, then we have more cascade spells in addition to more threats.

I would point you to my post a few days back when they originally unbanned it. No. No for any number of reasons. If you want to play BBE play it in a shell where it makes sense like Jund, not in LE.

• You have other 3 CMC spells you will hit (Beast within, Ravager, Fulminator) that will prevent you from playing LE when you need to. Cascading into fulminator in a deck with Goyfs and Liliana may actually be great, but us not hitting a LE when we need it or just getting a vanilla 2/2 or a beast within we cant use are game losing plays.
• You do not have enough sideboard space to create a sandbag list that pulls out the engine and suddenly plays fair creatures and a normal land base.
• You do it worse than every other deck that uses BBE
• If you actually hit LE or a cascade with a BBE, the BBE is basically win more. If you want more chances to hit LE, run the 8th cascade slot Demonic Dread.
• If 4 mana cascade was worth it people would have been running Captured sunlight since we also spend so much life and that could help against burn, but no one runs that.

In addition to everything that protoaddict just said, if you are proposing that we cut demonic dreads as part of playing bloodbraid elves, we actually just succeeded in making all our cascades cost one more without increasing our number of cascades.

Just to further this. The core principal of this deck is that when we cascade we hit one of 2 things every, single, time:

• Living end, the card the entire deck is engineered around and the core win con of our list
• A card out of the sideboard that is literally so devastating to your opponents build that it's more game ending than living end is. These are few and far between, but Rest in Peace has been one of them occasionally since you can still hard cast creatures, and typically if you bring that in you are playing a transformative list and siding out LE.

If you are adding ANYTHING to this list that prevents the above 2 points from happening, either by adding something with less than 3 CMC or adding cascades that can miss, you are very much not actually playing the deck correctly. I feel like every 3 months or so someone raises this point as if we have not thought about it or dabbled with it in the past. We have. It does not work and adds a level of risk to the list that is totally unneeded.

What part of “remove the utility spells” did you miss from my post? No mages, no Beast within. Just more cyclers, more cascade spells. All-in Living End. 20 lands, 4 SSG even an option. SB for protection and disruption (like most combo decks).

Like, the guy who literally innovated this deck at a Pro level, thinks the meta is weak to this idea. I 3-2’ed the league with it last night, really sweet ambushing a t3 karn + cascading anyway. 4 BBE 4 Outburst 2 Dread 3 LE 20 Land 23 Cycler (3 archfiend 4 deadshot). SB 4 fulm 3 ingot 4 Leyline of the void 2 avalanche riders 2 Beast within. SB out elf vs decks I need the interaction, vs decks like storm/Dredge/robots I have more cascade spells and can keep them in. Lost to RG Eldrazi with chalice=0 t1 g2 and g3, and RW Burn in a close g3 that ended to topdeck runner-runner-runner 3-DMG spells to outrace my BBE and Minotaur (t2 RiP).

Vs UW Control I also tried siding out the 8-card package, everything but 1 Living End, I was lucky to cascade into Fulminator twice but the only other options were Beast within and a LE. Seemed strong to go the hardcast route, I’ll be testing that more in the future.

Not having fulminators or beasts or SSG in the deck is anathema in my eyes.

• You cannot remove leyline / rest in peace
• You cannot punish a slow start player
• You cannot deal with man lands outside of instant speed cascades
• You cannot rush cards and cycles out with SSG while at the same time making your list cost more
• The utility of the cycling creatures you are now adding to the list suffer from diminishing returns
• The decks threat density actually becomes lighter as you are using more lands and cycling higher cycle cost cards (so cycling more infrequently)

The only real benefit I see is that the deck may be a bit more resilient to blood moon with the higher focus on mana, but also hard pressed to remove one if needed.

So leaving aside the massive problems that playing this deck with 0 interaction causes (seriously, how many decks with zero interaction are successful in the current meta? Bogles? That's literally it), why on earth are you playing bloodbraid elf in that deck model? Ardent Plea exists, and if you want so much mana and so many landcyclers, you probably won't find playing it that difficult. If you're going all in on this just living end and cyclers plan, go all in.

As for turn 3 cascade in response to Karn, we do that too. It's just we can also destroy the tron lands before and after.

Again, TWoo is a good player who has come up with some great innovations in the past. Nothing we say here should be considered an insult of him as a player, much less as a person. But the reality is that his suggested innovations to Living End have been very strange and often wildly off-base for some time now. The last major change I remember him arguing for is that we should play 90 cards and five colors in this deck. Before that, he was making a case for Restoration Angel in the deck, on the grounds that instants made your other instants better, while ignoring the basic anti-synergy that a vanilla 3/4 flyer has with this deck. I don't see this bloodbraid elf idea as anything other than another chapter in that story.

Hi! Im new here but I have been lurking on this thread a while and I love playing Living End.
I've played almost 30 games now with this deck (yes, thats not alot) and I'm having the most struggle vs control decks such as UW Control or Grixis Control.

Can someone help me with the sideboard against control? I board in Slaughter Games (targeting Cryptic Command), 2 Ricochet Trap, Lost Legacy (targeting Cryptic Command). Not sure what to board out. I feel like when they got 4 lands and more the game is really one-sided with all counter spells.


I've faced couple death taxes and 3 SSG have saved me many games when I was able to cast Beast Within targeting their lands or Aether Vial on their turn 2 upkeep.
Also I like to have 4 fulminator against midrange decks such as jund and abzan. Really locks them out early game.

EDIT: Cryptic Command instead of C Company.

Do you need help against control (UW or Grixis) or decks with collected company?

Control decks I board in 3 ricochet traps and try to either 1) violent on their turn (gets countered) untap resolve a cascade spell or 2) Wait until I can back up a cascade spell with trap, they rarely expect trap off a SSG. You can put the pressure on Grixis by going after their mana base with fulminators and beast withins. Keeping control decks off UUU (cryptic mana) also helps. The hardest part about Grixis is avoiding getting beat by a T1 thoughtsieze and then never seeing another cascader. I'm 50-50 against control.

Company decks don't be afraid to use living end as a wrath and then faerie out their combo. I don't even board in Lost Legacy or Slaughter games effects. I feel it's a pretty good match-up.

Thanks for reply ottosmagic13! Of course I meant Cryptic Command instead of Collected Company, my bad.
Maybe I could sideout one Living End also because I dont see that last one resolve lategame versus control decks. I rather hardcast then and use Violent Outburst and Demonic Dread without cascade.

Thanks for advice I need to play more to get a grip how to play vs control.

I keep my Living End vs control because it’s a required counter

I shave dreads vs them usually

Siding in the slaughter games and lost legacy against control doesn't seem right to me. I'd really rather have the fourth beast within and faerie macabre even if you're taking out four cards. Which four cards, for that matter, are you taking out?

For the matchup in general, I find it pretty favorable to us. But it does require significant experience. You're really fighting over their mana in this matchup: trying to resolve living end while they don't have it, reducing it to the point they can't really win, etc. Keep in mind what they're using it for, and play at instant speed as much as possible. With time, you'll probably improve at this matchup a lot.

Welcome to the deck.

Depending on the flavor of control. I don’t much care for Faerie Macabre vs straight UW unless I have them on Logic Knot. Even then, maybe not. Our Game is just so strong vs them anyway

Those aren't the cards I'd necessarily want in a vacuum, agreed, but they're in Dimian's deck and they're better than slaughter games and legacy

Quote from protoaddict »

Quote from Pistallion »

How come I never see this deck anymore?

Most people never saw this deck in the first place. For as well positioned and good as I think it is and always has been, it never makes up more than a fraction of the field. Modern has a huge spread of viable decks to begin with, but the deck has a lot of things going against it as far as representation:

• It is complex to play
• Some people just never play combo
• The cards are really esoteric and will not see play in other lists, making them a "bad" investment
• It is not a list you can convert into or convert from another format like legacy, it exists only in modern unlike something like affinity which is very similar in both formats.
• Format decktype confirmation bias

Is living end really that uncommon and complex to play? The only thing i had to look up was what happens when i cascade with no available target in my library.

Quote from kodieyost »

What part of “remove the utility spells” did you miss from my post? No mages, no Beast within. Just more cyclers, more cascade spells. All-in Living End. 20 lands, 4 SSG even an option. SB for protection and disruption (like most combo decks).

Like, the guy who literally innovated this deck at a Pro level, thinks the meta is weak to this idea. I 3-2’ed the league with it last night, really sweet ambushing a t3 karn + cascading anyway. 4 BBE 4 Outburst 2 Dread 3 LE 20 Land 23 Cycler (3 archfiend 4 deadshot). SB 4 fulm 3 ingot 4 Leyline of the void 2 avalanche riders 2 Beast within. SB out elf vs decks I need the interaction, vs decks like storm/Dredge/robots I have more cascade spells and can keep them in. Lost to RG Eldrazi with chalice=0 t1 g2 and g3, and RW Burn in a close g3 that ended to topdeck runner-runner-runner 3-DMG spells to outrace my BBE and Minotaur (t2 RiP).

Vs UW Control I also tried siding out the 8-card package, everything but 1 Living End, I was lucky to cascade into Fulminator twice but the only other options were Beast within and a LE. Seemed strong to go the hardcast route, I’ll be testing that more in the future.

Couple days left, but oh well. I dislike the idea as it gets rid of your plan B if something goes wrong during G1 or just need some interaction to put your opponent behind. Other then that it obviously makes less room in the SB for different options to play which narrows the deck further. I would rather have the ability to be versatile over straight hard combo that if we falter we blew our chance.