Let me see if I get this right, overall there are 3 ways to build grixis control:
-with ancestral vision and 8 cantrips
-corey's way, 4 field of ruin and 8 commands
-and, let's call it, chapin's away, with only the 8 cantrips and delve creatures
and we all can agree that all the builds have similar results and power, none of then top the other in terms of power. So first question, in what MU one tops the other?
the reason is that I really want to find the best way too build grixis right now and personally I think corey's list is far from being good for the average player. 4 field of ruin seems sketchy(probably a meta call), 1 young pyromancer in a deck that wants to switch roles faster is not perfect, I don't like the one inquisition of kozilek seems to narrow of a choice for a one of, and the nombo between azcanta and 4 delve spells, specialy logic knot, bothers me a bit, but then is has awesome 1 ofs in the main board that brings the deck to a good level, EE, countersquall and dismember and is sideboard was well positioned for the meta.
Second question, what is your opinion on the deck? too slow, too grindy?
I've been playing corey's list in the practice room on mtgo. It's surprisingly not garbage. Not playing Jace or serum visions seems bad in theory. But in actually playing the deck, I don't really miss those cards. However the way he constructed the deck, the deck has a hard time beating burn, combo and tron. But it's nuts vs creature decks, mid range and control.
I've been playing corey's list in the practice room on mtgo. It's surprisingly not garbage. Not playing Jace or serum visions seems bad in theory. But in actually playing the deck, I don't really miss those cards. However the way he constructed the deck, the deck has a hard time beating burn, combo and tron. But it's nuts vs creature decks, mid range and control.
Actually I think corey did well because he was prepared to tron, 4 field and 1 countersquall main plus is sideboard was super good against it.
I only tested his previous build with PNK, but 2 red was too much for me. now the pyromancer my only question why not 2? is too soft too removal for an addicional threat. if it was only for the bodies I would try whirler rogue, but without PNK ability or one similar is not good enough.
You have to know when Young Pyro is going to shine before criticizing it. Its not there to shine against Jeskai or Jund or people running 7-8 removals main. Its there because when you're facing down hollow ones and bloodghasts, the tokens that Pyro produce are going to turn what is normally a straight loss into a possible victory. Take some damage perhaps, but at least you chump Hollow ones and trade for Bloodghasts without losing real value. Its also going to make Humans a bearable match up, with Pyro producing something to tank that Champion of the Parish as you Push that mantis rider or Kitesail out of the sky.
Pyromancer is shining now in the meta because he's a means to your survival in the early game against hyper aggressive decks. Not because he's going to form a army of tokens and overwhelm your midrange opponent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
I've been playing corey's list in the practice room on mtgo. It's surprisingly not garbage. Not playing Jace or serum visions seems bad in theory. But in actually playing the deck, I don't really miss those cards. However the way he constructed the deck, the deck has a hard time beating burn, combo and tron. But it's nuts vs creature decks, mid range and control.
The 3-4 Field of Ruins, along with strong sideboard, provide a 50-50 match against tron, I guess.
Collective brutalities are awesome against hyperagressive decks such as burn, and their disruptive element is important against combo decks as well.
The surgical extractions can give you the opportunity to remove a Urza Tower, Ad Nauseam, etc. and win you the game on the spot.
I find the Jeskai and Jund matchs rather favorable, my main nightmare right now are the Hollow One and Blood Moons, which will always be unfavorable, I guess there's no way around it..
Related to this topic, why is it often considered "bad" to play targeted discard AND countermagic in the same deck? A lot of lists seem to either lean one way or another in that regard with no in between. Gods_Shadow's deck is the only one I've seen recently that blends the two.
If we're trying to ensure we survive until getting to play cryptic command, then wouldn't targeted discard be far more advantageous than mana leak, logic knot et all? And in this vein if we ARE trying to get to the cryptic/k command end game couldn't remand help bridge us there as it cantrips into more answers?
PS @Gods_Shadow love your work man, especially the youtube vids, do you ever feel like you're stumbling on mana while playing the deck? Do the three cryptic and three Pia and Kira ever sit dead in your hand? Have you considered pyromancer main board before?
The 3-4 Field of Ruins, along with strong sideboard, provide a 50-50 match against tron, I guess.
Collective brutalities are awesome against hyperagressive decks such as burn, and their disruptive element is important against combo decks as well.
The surgical extractions can give you the opportunity to remove a Urza Tower, Ad Nauseam, etc. and win you the game on the spot.
I find the Jeskai and Jund matchs rather favorable, my main nightmare right now are the Hollow One and Blood Moons, which will always be unfavorable, I guess there's no way around it..
field let's you steal the first game, after sideboard ceremonious rejection plus disdainful stroke I think grixis becames favorable. I also think if we build the deck more UB and less red dependent (more fatal push instead of bolt and probably cast down?) the deck will feel more consistent and less color screw, I'm still stressing this point because I have draw to many creeping tar pit and field of ruin hands.
Blood moon will always kill grixis but I have been losing more to it with field of ruin instead of the 4 cantrips.
Now I'm trying to find core cards between the various builds, my conclusion is:
22 lands
4 thought scour or cantrips
6 small creature removal(between bolt and push)
2 big creature removal (terminate as the most common option)
3 cryptic command
2 kolaghan's command
4 snapcaster mage
2 tasigur, the golden fang
4 counterspells
that's 49 cards, then we have 11 flex slots? does anyone agree with me?
I think this can help us build the deck more meta dependent
Related to this topic, why is it often considered "bad" to play targeted discard AND countermagic in the same deck? A lot of lists seem to either lean one way or another in that regard with no in between. Gods_Shadow's deck is the only one I've seen recently that blends the two.
If we're trying to ensure we survive until getting to play cryptic command, then wouldn't targeted discard be far more advantageous than mana leak, logic knot et all? And in this vein if we ARE trying to get to the cryptic/k command end game couldn't remand help bridge us there as it cantrips into more answers?
PS @Gods_Shadow love your work man, especially the youtube vids, do you ever feel like you're stumbling on mana while playing the deck? Do the three cryptic and three Pia and Kira ever sit dead in your hand? Have you considered pyromancer main board before?
Discard vs counterspell topic, is because normally your discard gets the cards that you can counter for exemple inquisition + spell snare normally gives you options for the same thing problems, but catch all counter are fine (cryptic for example)
Red should be burn, Goblins, Dragons, draw/discard, and Standard-unplayable 5CMC cards with insane, lengthy effects that take 10 minutes to figure out what they do and another 20 to actually make their effects work on the field.
Round 1 was versus rat tribal. 2-0. I was able to stop him from locking me out with chittering rats eldrazi displacer. Targeted discard was real bad, I took those out and put in more creatures. He did have rest in piece and path to exile, but I was able to out value him. Pyromancer was very good both games. Liliana also closed the door first game where I would have struggled otherwise I think.
Round 2, mono black devotion. 2-0 he was a new player but was able to keep pace really well.
Round 3, humans. 1-2. I literally drew all lands the first game. Second game I got him locked out with liliana. Third game he had a fast start and I sided in too many 4 drops. I drew them all and he had mage on liliana with thalia out to stop 4 drops. Also, I had a good opener but got stuck on 3 lands for a turn or two. Very close had I drawn anger of the gods at any point I think I would have been able to play kalitas and win.
Round 4, black/white eldrazi taxes. 2-1. Pyromancer was good here to generate value. He wasn't able to Gq me ever since I always had removal for his first couple plays. I had some good moments where I bounced his threats and inquisitioned them as well. He had quick thought knots game 2 and I stumbled. Game 3 I milled a thundermaw early with thought scour and was able to get it back with kommand later to kill his flickerwisp and stall him. Would have liked to have the third anger of the gods this game but having double red is tough with all of the other card requirements.
Some thoughts are that I absolutely loved having four field of ruin, I think it was great each game except one but I lost that game mostly because of not enough mana, not because of the color. I still love having 4 liliana. Even though it can be challenging going double black into triple blue for cryptic, you can discard anything and recur it or flash it back so it still provides value. I haven't gotten a fourth snapcaster but I think three is fine. I need to tweak the sideboard quite a bit still, and I'd like to try to get a third pyromancer in the main.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every successful deck has a 1-drop, and a way to gain life.
Yes it's cool to see the different lists between players, the game night I went to had me in second place and the first place player was also playing grixis control. I asked him about his list, he was only playing tasigur as a win con. I saw that he was also playing Jace, the Mind Sculptor. It looked like he had a lot of copies of fatal push as well.
A couple pages ago people were talking about the new Nicol Bolas, I don't think that we need him but it's a cool card and eventually they are going to print a card that makes cards transform similiar to moonmist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every successful deck has a 1-drop, and a way to gain life.
How does everyone build their sideboard these days? 0-15 removal spells, hate cards, additional threats? Curious how everyone thinks about it with this deck, are people planning on sideboarding to be more proactive or controlling?
Are there some matchups that we really want to shore up, and if so how? I think there's a consensus that lots of people think tron is a bad matchup for example. If that's the case, why aren't people allowing for more sideboard cards? Typically I haven't seen more than 3 cards against tron. Usually people are playing 3 fulminators, or they're playing a couple ceremonious rejection.
I personally like playing the proactive version of control with lots of discard and few counters. So in my sideboard I've put in lots of counters because they work against control and give a better chance against combo. But this always gets me thinking that dispel is a good card, and most decks that you bring in dispel against they are going to bring it in against you.
I always like having a few extra creatures in the board because usually they take out their removal, but lately I've seen cards like young pyromancer and anger of the gods in the side. That can't be right can it? How can we build a control side without any nonbos?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every successful deck has a 1-drop, and a way to gain life.
Are there some matchups that we really want to shore up, and if so how? I think there's a consensus that lots of people think tron is a bad matchup for example. If that's the case, why aren't people allowing for more sideboard cards? Typically I haven't seen more than 3 cards against tron. Usually people are playing 3 fulminators, or they're playing a couple ceremonious rejection.
Tron's MU against us (and other control decks) has become a kind of a meme. +2 years ago you could have said that tron is the Achilles Heel of control since there simply weren't as many degenerate decks around. Tron's label as *the* bad MU has passed on to this day, but it's a lot less warranted. Decks like E-tron and before that Bant Eldrazi are bigger obstacles to begin with, but luckily those decks have dropped in popularity. There are also many challenging MU's that are extremely close, like Dredge, KCI and Hollow One. Today's premier aggro deck Humans is also very difficult to beat, even though we are strategically advantaged. My point is, Tron isn't the only hard deck to beat, and we need to squeeze advantages against most archetypes, even the ones where we should be traditionally advantaged.
I was having difficulties against Tron, so I increased sideboard count against bigmana and now it's strangely even (I'm 3-1 since then with this new sideboard but it certainly doesn't feel like a 3-1 matchup). I almost 5-0'd a friendly league yesterday, my opponent was tapped out and I had lethal, but I rushed to combat, missed the tarpit activation and now I have nightmares thinking about it hahahaha! (I used 6 commands, the deck ran smoother. As there weren't grindy matchups, that wasn't a problem)
Todd Stevens just theorized a Grixis Control at starcitygames.com.
It's a list using the new Nicol Bolas, thought I should share:
Ya I think a lot of players get trapped by building with cards and ignoring synergy. In control, we want to pull ahead with 2 for 1's. We want to guarantee that our opponent will draw lands, which will be dead cards because their deck might only need 4 lands. When we get to the late game, and they have 5 plus lands in play we are gaining an advantage over what they are drawing each turn.
I specifically think there are lots of pros or I guess people writing articles that don't really think about what they are writing. They don't think or proofread after they write it sometimes like on Tcgplayer. I've seen before, especially before upcoming tournaments that they will write about decks specifically to deceive people or promote strategies that are bad. After all that is what makes tournament or competitive settings lots of fun, metagaming can be quite a mental exercise and game theory is part of what has made this game last for so long; the vast number of cards allows for so much creative design. But with defined archetypes I think we should include more unified thinking and educate our peers on the best practices in deck building.
1. If you have a card that is the best or most important card in your deck, play 4. Play tutors to find that card. Play other cards that synergize with it. We should be playing 4 cryptic 100 percent. We should be playing 4 Kommand 100 percent.
2. Play 2 for 1's in control, or creatures that are resilient. If we could be playing cards like voice of resurgence or tireless tracker we would. But pyromancer and snapcaster are the creatures we choose because they interact with our other cards best. They generate advantage. This is why Nicol Bolas does not work.
3. In my opinion, I have always struggled with variance when I play a deck with any less than 25 lands. I know all about turbo xerox, but I still find that variance affects us negatively when trying to get to the late game. In addition, turbo xerox does not take into account lands with utility abilities. Lands like field of ruin are basically worth a card in the main deck and smooth out our games by making our starting hands have enough lands.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every successful deck has a 1-drop, and a way to gain life.
In my opinion the most important thing for modern control list is the versatility of the cards and that's is the main reason jeskai has been the most successful control deck in the last years. the removal of jeskai is efficient and can deal with creatures as well as planeswalker. Grixis prays on the efficiency but is completely meta dependent.
Am I the only that thinks Gods_shadow list is more a midrange deck than a control deck? I'm not saying that isn't a viable list, just feels like a different archetype.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-with ancestral vision and 8 cantrips
-corey's way, 4 field of ruin and 8 commands
-and, let's call it, chapin's away, with only the 8 cantrips and delve creatures
and we all can agree that all the builds have similar results and power, none of then top the other in terms of power. So first question, in what MU one tops the other?
the reason is that I really want to find the best way too build grixis right now and personally I think corey's list is far from being good for the average player. 4 field of ruin seems sketchy(probably a meta call), 1 young pyromancer in a deck that wants to switch roles faster is not perfect, I don't like the one inquisition of kozilek seems to narrow of a choice for a one of, and the nombo between azcanta and 4 delve spells, specialy logic knot, bothers me a bit, but then is has awesome 1 ofs in the main board that brings the deck to a good level, EE, countersquall and dismember and is sideboard was well positioned for the meta.
Second question, what is your opinion on the deck? too slow, too grindy?
List below(I know it was already published):
https://www.channelfireball.com/articles/grixis-at-grand-prix-toronto-and-for-grand-prix-las-vegas/
I've been playing corey's list in the practice room on mtgo. It's surprisingly not garbage. Not playing Jace or serum visions seems bad in theory. But in actually playing the deck, I don't really miss those cards. However the way he constructed the deck, the deck has a hard time beating burn, combo and tron. But it's nuts vs creature decks, mid range and control.
Chapin's list:
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/31030_9th-At-GP-Charlotte-With-Grixis-Home-At-Last.html
I call it because it was a way to identify the configuration
Actually I think corey did well because he was prepared to tron, 4 field and 1 countersquall main plus is sideboard was super good against it.
I only tested his previous build with PNK, but 2 red was too much for me. now the pyromancer my only question why not 2? is too soft too removal for an addicional threat. if it was only for the bodies I would try whirler rogue, but without PNK ability or one similar is not good enough.
Pyromancer is shining now in the meta because he's a means to your survival in the early game against hyper aggressive decks. Not because he's going to form a army of tokens and overwhelm your midrange opponent.
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
The 3-4 Field of Ruins, along with strong sideboard, provide a 50-50 match against tron, I guess.
Collective brutalities are awesome against hyperagressive decks such as burn, and their disruptive element is important against combo decks as well.
The surgical extractions can give you the opportunity to remove a Urza Tower, Ad Nauseam, etc. and win you the game on the spot.
I find the Jeskai and Jund matchs rather favorable, my main nightmare right now are the Hollow One and Blood Moons, which will always be unfavorable, I guess there's no way around it..
If we're trying to ensure we survive until getting to play cryptic command, then wouldn't targeted discard be far more advantageous than mana leak, logic knot et all? And in this vein if we ARE trying to get to the cryptic/k command end game couldn't remand help bridge us there as it cantrips into more answers?
PS @Gods_Shadow love your work man, especially the youtube vids, do you ever feel like you're stumbling on mana while playing the deck? Do the three cryptic and three Pia and Kira ever sit dead in your hand? Have you considered pyromancer main board before?
field let's you steal the first game, after sideboard ceremonious rejection plus disdainful stroke I think grixis becames favorable. I also think if we build the deck more UB and less red dependent (more fatal push instead of bolt and probably cast down?) the deck will feel more consistent and less color screw, I'm still stressing this point because I have draw to many creeping tar pit and field of ruin hands.
Blood moon will always kill grixis but I have been losing more to it with field of ruin instead of the 4 cantrips.
Now I'm trying to find core cards between the various builds, my conclusion is:
22 lands
4 thought scour or cantrips
6 small creature removal(between bolt and push)
2 big creature removal (terminate as the most common option)
3 cryptic command
2 kolaghan's command
4 snapcaster mage
2 tasigur, the golden fang
4 counterspells
that's 49 cards, then we have 11 flex slots? does anyone agree with me?
I think this can help us build the deck more meta dependent
Discard vs counterspell topic, is because normally your discard gets the cards that you can counter for exemple inquisition + spell snare normally gives you options for the same thing problems, but catch all counter are fine (cryptic for example)
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mtgo-standings/competitive-modern-constructed-league-2018-06-22
How do you feel this is positioned in the meta right now? Congrats on the 5-0
4 Thing in the Ice
3 Snapcaster Mage
Land
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Creeping Tar Pit
2 Blood Crypt
2 Steam Vents
2 Watery Grave
3 Polluted Delta
4 Field of Ruin
3 Island
1 Swamp
1 Mountain
4 Cryptic Command
4 Manamorphose
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Thought Scour
4 Kolaghan's Command
1 Opt
1 Terminate
Sorcery
1 Dreadbore
2 Anger of the Gods
3 Inquisition of Kozilek
Planeswalker
1 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
2 Izzet Staticaster
1 Grim Lavamancer
2 Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet
1 Thundermaw Hellkite
2 Engineered Explosives
1 Counterflux
2 Ceremonious Rejection
1 Anger of the Gods
1 Stone Rain
1 Vandalblast
1 Duress
Went 4 rounds:
Round 1 was versus rat tribal. 2-0. I was able to stop him from locking me out with chittering rats eldrazi displacer. Targeted discard was real bad, I took those out and put in more creatures. He did have rest in piece and path to exile, but I was able to out value him. Pyromancer was very good both games. Liliana also closed the door first game where I would have struggled otherwise I think.
Round 2, mono black devotion. 2-0 he was a new player but was able to keep pace really well.
Round 3, humans. 1-2. I literally drew all lands the first game. Second game I got him locked out with liliana. Third game he had a fast start and I sided in too many 4 drops. I drew them all and he had mage on liliana with thalia out to stop 4 drops. Also, I had a good opener but got stuck on 3 lands for a turn or two. Very close had I drawn anger of the gods at any point I think I would have been able to play kalitas and win.
Round 4, black/white eldrazi taxes. 2-1. Pyromancer was good here to generate value. He wasn't able to Gq me ever since I always had removal for his first couple plays. I had some good moments where I bounced his threats and inquisitioned them as well. He had quick thought knots game 2 and I stumbled. Game 3 I milled a thundermaw early with thought scour and was able to get it back with kommand later to kill his flickerwisp and stall him. Would have liked to have the third anger of the gods this game but having double red is tough with all of the other card requirements.
Some thoughts are that I absolutely loved having four field of ruin, I think it was great each game except one but I lost that game mostly because of not enough mana, not because of the color. I still love having 4 liliana. Even though it can be challenging going double black into triple blue for cryptic, you can discard anything and recur it or flash it back so it still provides value. I haven't gotten a fourth snapcaster but I think three is fine. I need to tweak the sideboard quite a bit still, and I'd like to try to get a third pyromancer in the main.
A couple pages ago people were talking about the new Nicol Bolas, I don't think that we need him but it's a cool card and eventually they are going to print a card that makes cards transform similiar to moonmist.
Are there some matchups that we really want to shore up, and if so how? I think there's a consensus that lots of people think tron is a bad matchup for example. If that's the case, why aren't people allowing for more sideboard cards? Typically I haven't seen more than 3 cards against tron. Usually people are playing 3 fulminators, or they're playing a couple ceremonious rejection.
I personally like playing the proactive version of control with lots of discard and few counters. So in my sideboard I've put in lots of counters because they work against control and give a better chance against combo. But this always gets me thinking that dispel is a good card, and most decks that you bring in dispel against they are going to bring it in against you.
I always like having a few extra creatures in the board because usually they take out their removal, but lately I've seen cards like young pyromancer and anger of the gods in the side. That can't be right can it? How can we build a control side without any nonbos?
Tron's MU against us (and other control decks) has become a kind of a meme. +2 years ago you could have said that tron is the Achilles Heel of control since there simply weren't as many degenerate decks around. Tron's label as *the* bad MU has passed on to this day, but it's a lot less warranted. Decks like E-tron and before that Bant Eldrazi are bigger obstacles to begin with, but luckily those decks have dropped in popularity. There are also many challenging MU's that are extremely close, like Dredge, KCI and Hollow One. Today's premier aggro deck Humans is also very difficult to beat, even though we are strategically advantaged. My point is, Tron isn't the only hard deck to beat, and we need to squeeze advantages against most archetypes, even the ones where we should be traditionally advantaged.
Youtube Channel
Todd Stevens just theorized a Grixis Control at starcitygames.com.
It's a list using the new Nicol Bolas, thought I should share:
4 Snapcaster Mage
1 Nicol Bolas, the Ravager
Planeswalkers (2)
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Lands (24)
3 Island
1 Mountain
1 Swamp
1 Blood Crypt
3 Creeping Tar Pit
2 Field of Ruin
4 Polluted Delta
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Steam Vents
1 Sulfur Falls
2 Watery Grave
3 Cryptic Command
3 Fatal Push
3 Kolaghan's Command
4 Lightning Bolt
2 Logic Knot
1 Mana Leak
1 Spell Snare
2 Terminate
2 Search for Azcanta
2 Damnation
4 Serum Visions
2 Thoughtseize
2 Engineered Explosives
1 Izzet Staticaster
1 Alpine Moon
1 Countersquall
1 Disdainful Stroke
2 Dispel
2 Surgical Extraction
1 Vendilion Clique
1 Ancestral Vision
1 Anger of the Gods
2 Collective Brutality
He kinda just mirrored the Jeskai approach, but... well, he is a phenomenal deckbuilder, and the list definitely seems playable. Thoughts?
I specifically think there are lots of pros or I guess people writing articles that don't really think about what they are writing. They don't think or proofread after they write it sometimes like on Tcgplayer. I've seen before, especially before upcoming tournaments that they will write about decks specifically to deceive people or promote strategies that are bad. After all that is what makes tournament or competitive settings lots of fun, metagaming can be quite a mental exercise and game theory is part of what has made this game last for so long; the vast number of cards allows for so much creative design. But with defined archetypes I think we should include more unified thinking and educate our peers on the best practices in deck building.
1. If you have a card that is the best or most important card in your deck, play 4. Play tutors to find that card. Play other cards that synergize with it. We should be playing 4 cryptic 100 percent. We should be playing 4 Kommand 100 percent.
2. Play 2 for 1's in control, or creatures that are resilient. If we could be playing cards like voice of resurgence or tireless tracker we would. But pyromancer and snapcaster are the creatures we choose because they interact with our other cards best. They generate advantage. This is why Nicol Bolas does not work.
3. In my opinion, I have always struggled with variance when I play a deck with any less than 25 lands. I know all about turbo xerox, but I still find that variance affects us negatively when trying to get to the late game. In addition, turbo xerox does not take into account lands with utility abilities. Lands like field of ruin are basically worth a card in the main deck and smooth out our games by making our starting hands have enough lands.
Am I the only that thinks Gods_shadow list is more a midrange deck than a control deck? I'm not saying that isn't a viable list, just feels like a different archetype.