The criticism of Myth Realized offered in the past couple posts here have been kind of mind boggling. While it has shortcomings, "win-more" and "you can only play 4" are just strange to see given as strikes against it.
Myth Realized is most certainly not a "win-more" card. It forces similar over-extension to wall/finks since it sticks around after a verdict. The main factor that makes the card good is that it is a 1 mana finisher that rewards you for playing draw-go. Casting supreme verdict on turn 4 is only a win if you can turn the corner fast. If it wasn't clear, I was advocating the card as an alternative to the finks/omens/clique/resto package we see to make a draw-go style deck. This allow you to run more early interaction, and more of our best card advantage/selection spells like cryptic, snapcaster and serum visions. Being able to play serum visions has been a huge boon for the build as it helps find the correct answer - and turn 3 snap + visions gives you a chump while digging for your verdict or cryptic.
Being limited to 4 is a strange criticism. All cards suffer from that feature, but it is a particularly curious criticism of a card that rewards you for running Serum Visions and max Snapcaster Mage - two cards that greatly increase the consistency of the deck. In fact, Myth Realized is a card that helps consistency through its synergies, not hinders it.
The list I'm offering as a proper context to play the card can be found just under the OP. This is a card for a reactive build of UW control, not the tap-out (aka Midrange-Control) version that is commonly seen.
You justified it well and believe it can be fine in a reactive Control deck without building your deck around Myth. It just feeds off your gameplan.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm the founder and community manager of the following pages on Facebook:
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control
Facebook.com/ModernUWxControl
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control Community
Facebook.com/Groups/MTGModernUWx
I'm also an Admin for one of the premier Modern communities on Facebook:
myth is a "win more" card, if you manage to stay alive until turn 4 and cast supreme verdict the chances are you going to win the game anyway.
i like the card, but i dont like in the current decklist and the example above.
When you get to Verdict, you must close the game out afterwards. I dislike Myth myself, but it's a fine answer to that problem. A lot of UW decks win via Colonnade, Resto and/or planeswalkers post Verdict. Myth is good here. It does require a little build around, but all with good cards
myth is a "win more" card, if you manage to stay alive until turn 4 and cast supreme verdict the chances are you going to win the game anyway.
i like the card, but i dont like in the current decklist and the example above.
When you get to Verdict, you must close the game out afterwards. I dislike Myth myself, but it's a fine answer to that problem. A lot of UW decks win via Colonnade, Resto and/or planeswalkers post Verdict. Myth is good here. It does require a little build around, but all with good cards
then is a wincon? is fightning a spot with gideon/elspeth, and i take over a planeswalker over myth any day.
wpgstevo say that is like "wall of omens/finks", so its taking a "stall" card spot, since you need to pay for the card and pay for activation, is pretty expensive (and weak, since you must leave mana open) in the early game for stalling, it is a win-more card following this logic.
i insist, not saying is a bad card, i may even see a UWx deck with myth (with probe and other things) but in current decklist in the premier i dont like it, any mtgo result (or gp, etc but not "my local fnm") that can back up myth?
and playing a "control" or more "midrange" decklist is more a meta call than a playstyle preference, at least in my opinion (i have played "both" versions, but to me they are the same deck)
Ok... well obviously I failed to communicate. I never said it was better against aggro than finks/omens/resto, merely that it offered a similar benefit as far as incentivizing over-extensions into verdicts since, like finks/omens, you don't lose cards when casting verdict with it in play and it can threaten to trade/block.
I also made no claim with respect to comparing draw-go UW control to UW Midrange-control - I simply responded to a poster who was asserting draw-go ("purely reactive") to be not viable. I did assert that Myth Realized was the "hero draw-go UW control needed" - not as a univeral card in all UW decks.
Kinda annoying to see so much misrepresentation of my assertions.
No, I don't play on MTGO. Personally, GPs are too far away for me to travel to frequently - I'm not even sure I'd play any form of UW control when I get the chance. It's fine if people prefer the Midrange-Control versions - I have all the cards for it as well and play it sometimes. I like the midrange-control builds.
All I was trying to say was that if you want to play a "purely reactive" build, we have a sleeper card waiting to be explored that fits the gameplan perfectly, and at least for myself, it has been doing the job the "purely reactive" build wants (edit) at a bare minimum of expense both in terms of mana cost and slots on the top end of your curve.
I feel the need to chime in on the recent discussion, as I’ve been an advocate for Myth Realized pretty much since it was spoiled. My goal have been to make an optimal UW build for the card - this is where I’m at currently ”Mythic Command”.
I'm currently sitting at a 64% playtesting win rate over 54 Bo3 games - link, so that's all the credibility I currently can serve the table.
---
I'm not going to touch the points in the discussion that has happened, as I don't have time to actively participate. Instead I'm going to share my thoughts on the card based on my own experience and observations;
1. The context:
I think it's important to realize that Myth shouldn't be slotted into the default UW build. Due to the nature of the card you're required to have a higher spell density than the typical midrange approach. When you look at these restrictions, you shouldn't think about what the card has replaced in the traditional list, but rather see it as an unique build with its own set of pros & cons. I believe Myth facilitates an unique deck in similar fashion as Emiria Control - UW is a vast color combination, builds can coexist.
2. The facilitator:
By including Myth in your build you're committing yourself to a spell heavy deck. The fact that you aren't forced to run any 'bad or specific' cards is important. For example "Thing in the Ice" requires Sorceries & Instants, but highly favors the latter from a gameplay perspective. Myth pretty much work with any non-creature spell, thus we can play our trumps without worrying too much about synergy.
I like to say that Myth gives 'face' to your gameplan - meaning each spell advance your gameplan. This means that a normally "useless" card for UW, like Spreading Seas, can serve a purpose with a Myth on the field. Finally, the spell heavy deck design makes you vulnerable to early creature aggression, and this is why I'm a fan of Lingering Souls and/or Timely Reinforcements in the build.
3. The mana cost:
This is, in my opinion, maybe the most overlooked aspect of Myth Realized that people fail to mention in discussions - it cost one single mana! I feel that most ignore this fact when they compare it to cards like “Thing in the Ice”, three drops or other high cost win conditions like Planeswalkers. There are no other threats in the UWBR color spectrum that can be deployed turn one. That being said Myth normally goes down t2 when we lead with Colonnade.
Now, this is all good theory, but there are merits in the criticism mentioning Myth’s activation cost and the fact that it needs build-up. This is why the card can’t be your only win condition, nor should you design your deck to solely protect it. You need to be smart, know when to attack, and have enough game knowledge to anticipate what your opponent might have that can interact with it.
4. Its role:
The card is without a doubt a win condition, but it’s also a mana sink as the game progress. While the ability isn’t particularly interesting or cheap, the possibility to put a lore counter on a Myth at instant speed let us do something with our mana if the opponent doesn’t do anything worth interacting with. Other obvious traits like immunity to sorcery speed removal and sweepers are also a plus. One interesting aspect is that the card can give accidental information about the opponents hand – if they’re sandbagging cards or leaving mana open you should expect an answer to your Myth, and can act accordingly.
---
Apart from this, the card is nothing more than a cheap beat stick. It has no evasion, however the UW ‘all-stars’ Supreme Verdict & Cryptic Command does a nice job “splitting oceans”. I can’t say that the myth-build is better than the traditional lists – ironically I think UW control might be one of my worse matchups. To end my post; I honestly believe that the card is worth exploring and I know that it’s a working threat in the modern format – how strong is yet to be seen.
When I was playing UW Control, I played 3 condescends and it was really good. The only place it didn't shine was in the Twin matchup where I needed to win counter wars in the late game. Now that almost no decks play counterspells, I strongly feel we should be revisiting Condescend - especially in a post-Eldrazi world (where decks can't just cast all their spells for free).
To be clear, I have nothing against your love for Myth guys, and I like the way you are experimenting, it's one of the best things to do in Magic. That being said, I believe you're overestimating Myth's potential and I explained why. I don't have much to add, except I need to ask you Spotred to explain me exactly what this means:
While yes, there aren’t any high level placements to prove the card’s potential (I check regularly), there isn’t any placements to show that it has failed either.
'Cause to me the second part of this sentence is really obscure. No sarcasm intended.
Yeah, that sentence became a bit vague, apologies. Also, when I wrote that I failed to realize that low placing results normally aren't shared at mtgtop8 & goldfish.
What I tried to say is that the card seems untested. This definitely do say more against the card's relevance than for it. So I guess the only thing I can do is to keep at it and place well with it myself.
Ok... well obviously I failed to communicate. I never said it was better against aggro than finks/omens/resto, merely that it offered a similar benefit as far as incentivizing over-extensions into verdicts since, like finks/omens, you don't lose cards when casting verdict with it in play and it can threaten to trade/block.
I also made no claim with respect to comparing draw-go UW control to UW Midrange-control - I simply responded to a poster who was asserting draw-go ("purely reactive") to be not viable. I did assert that Myth Realized was the "hero draw-go UW control needed" - not as a univeral card in all UW decks.
Kinda annoying to see so much misrepresentation of my assertions.
No, I don't play on MTGO. Personally, GPs are too far away for me to travel to frequently - I'm not even sure I'd play any form of UW control when I get the chance. It's fine if people prefer the Midrange-Control versions - I have all the cards for it as well and play it sometimes. I like the midrange-control builds.
All I was trying to say was that if you want to play a "purely reactive" build, we have a sleeper card waiting to be explored that fits the gameplan perfectly, and at least for myself, it has been doing the job the "purely reactive" build wants (edit) at a bare minimum of expense both in terms of mana cost and slots on the top end of your curve.
That first bit includes something I'd like to address. Myth does not "incentivize" overextending the way Finks/Omens does. Omens is a body that they must swing into, not one that you might decide to trade with if you have mana open. Finks actively makes them want to add power to the board to combat both the life gain and the recursion. I see Myth the way I would see a mutavault or blinkmoth. It can and I'm sure does become a win con, but like many others say - why not run an actual win con?
Versatility is a valuable commodity as most any UW mage would tell you - so perhaps there is something to Myth. However, I refuse to accept that it forces players to overextend into it. If you trade with their dude, you lose Myth and they cast dude #2. If you don't trade, they don't cast dude #2. And this is with the downside of not being able to both activate Myth and counter a spell on the same turn which means you are losing too much tempo in the early game.
Myth doesn't cause overextension, it cause consideration - wether or not your opponent decides to represent interaction for your myth. This is why, in my opinion, cards like Lingering Souls & Timely are essential for the Myth strategy.
I don't understand what you mean with "why not run an actual win con". Myth is definitely an actual win con, you can't compare it to five-six mana walkers and three-four mana creatures. It cost one mana!
Here's an optimal goldfish example from my deck;
T1 colonnade
T2 Myth + Visions
T3 Souls
T4 Swing with souls, verdict
T5 Flashback Souls, Visions, Path - attack with a 6/6 Myth
It's not uncommon for me to have a 12/12 myth, and I still have access to threats like Gideon, Archangel Avacyn, Souls etc. I don't get why people think you have to give up those cards when you run Myth Realized. You can't replace the card with anything in UW midrange and call it a day, you have to construct a specific type of deck in order to utilize it properly.
That first bit includes something I'd like to address. Myth does not "incentivize" overextending the way Finks/Omens does. Omens is a body that they must swing into, not one that you might decide to trade with if you have mana open. Finks actively makes them want to add power to the board to combat both the life gain and the recursion. I see Myth the way I would see a mutavault or blinkmoth. It can and I'm sure does become a win con, but like many others say - why not run an actual win con?
Versatility is a valuable commodity as most any UW mage would tell you - so perhaps there is something to Myth. However, I refuse to accept that it forces players to overextend into it. If you trade with their dude, you lose Myth and they cast dude #2. If you don't trade, they don't cast dude #2. And this is with the downside of not being able to both activate Myth and counter a spell on the same turn which means you are losing too much tempo in the early game.
I'm not sure why you are assuming that the myth will be smaller than the opposing creatures it is threatening to block. The reason it causes over-extensions is because it is often the biggest creature on the battlefield and doesn't die to wrath. So it can just sit there, and unless they play 2 creatures to the board (excluding evasion same as wall/finks), they'll never be able to get through on the ground. goblin guides, glistener elf, wild nacatl... all cards that can be traded or even profitably blocked within the first few turns. Tarmogoyf and Thought-knot Seer also don't stay larger than myth for long.
Myth + spellsnare is a tempo gain, mitigating the early tempo loss. By turn 3, you can activate and mana leak as well. The most compelling reason to play myth is that it has the features covered, and is much cheaper to cast than any other finisher while retaining a higher power ceiling.
My point is that if you do "trade profitability" as you say, then you must cast another Myth and begin growing it again. It then becomes a glorified removal spell. I'm not arguing that it is directly bad, and acknowledge that it may have merit. I simply disagreed with the statement about it causing overextension. Having the ability in UW to grow a threat larger than most in Modern is pretty sweet. I'll stick to my reliable build for now, and if Myth shows up I'll consider it. Arguments like "this goldfish is great" doesn't encourage me to play it. How often does Myth fail to impact the board in a meaningful way? How often is it a bad top deck? These are problems I have with it, in theory.
I think I wrote "traded or even profitably blocked" and not "trade profitability".
Yes, sometimes opening myth does not interact much with fast decks like affinity when they can put together an early kill - no doubt. Wall/finks has upside in those games of letting you dig a card or gain 2. Myth is not a panacea and that is not what I'm trying to communicate. It is simply a 1 mana finisher that you drop early and threatens to interact with attackers until the end of the game, with no ceiling on how large it can get over time.
Seldom a bad topdeck - it's a manasink as well. I'm not trying to convince you to play it - finks/omens/resto is great, but rather trying to explain how the build works. Some of the things you are saying do not reflect my experience with the card.
Arguments like "this goldfish is great" doesn't encourage me to play it. How often does Myth fail to impact the board in a meaningful way? How often is it a bad top deck? These are problems I have with it, in theory.
It was a response to "why not run an actual win con". What does that even mean, what defines an "actual" win condition? These are my playtesting results with Myth. Myth have won me games, fallen short in some. I don't have more to add than my experience with the card, all I know is that it works for me.
When I was playing UW Control, I played 3 condescends and it was really good. The only place it didn't shine was in the Twin matchup where I needed to win counter wars in the late game. Now that almost no decks play counterspells, I strongly feel we should be revisiting Condescend - especially in a post-Eldrazi world (where decks can't just cast all their spells for free).
I have not tested the card in a while, but it seems like it would be a better mana leak vs eldrazi enough of the time to run it. I think the main concern is that against all other decks it is just too expensive to interact early game where the deck is vulnerable. It has good upside so remains a good test card imo.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I have not tested the card in a while, but it seems like it would be a better mana leak vs eldrazi enough of the time to run it. I think the main concern is that against all other decks it is just too expensive to interact early game where the deck is vulnerable. It has good upside so remains a good test card imo.
When I played it, preventing people from playing on curve by threatening condescend was good enough, especially on the play. On the draw it was somewhat weaker but still good enough to stop what rates to be the most dangerous thing in modern (a 3 drop played on turn 3).
If you're packing enough other early game heat (snare, paths, snaps, walls, flares in the SB for infect, etc.) I think it's likely to be better than mana leak.
If you feel it isn't adequately covered by either this or the UW midrange thread, You're free to build your own thread under deck creation; Developing competitive is for approved threads that the forum consensus/moderator opinion deems to be most representative of the deck types qualifying under the tier guidelines.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes, I am a local area mod. WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
Primary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
If you feel it isn't adequately covered by either this or the UW midrange thread, You're free to build your own thread under deck creation; Developing competitive is for approved threads that the forum consensus/moderator opinion deems to be most representative of the deck types qualifying under the tier guidelines.
Much appreciated. Thank you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm the founder and community manager of the following pages on Facebook:
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control
Facebook.com/ModernUWxControl
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control Community
Facebook.com/Groups/MTGModernUWx
I'm also an Admin for one of the premier Modern communities on Facebook:
You justified it well and believe it can be fine in a reactive Control deck without building your deck around Myth. It just feeds off your gameplan.
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control
Facebook.com/ModernUWxControl
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control Community
Facebook.com/Groups/MTGModernUWx
I'm also an Admin for one of the premier Modern communities on Facebook:
Magic the Gathering: Modern Meta Masters
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ModernMetaMasters/
When you get to Verdict, you must close the game out afterwards. I dislike Myth myself, but it's a fine answer to that problem. A lot of UW decks win via Colonnade, Resto and/or planeswalkers post Verdict. Myth is good here. It does require a little build around, but all with good cards
then is a wincon? is fightning a spot with gideon/elspeth, and i take over a planeswalker over myth any day.
wpgstevo say that is like "wall of omens/finks", so its taking a "stall" card spot, since you need to pay for the card and pay for activation, is pretty expensive (and weak, since you must leave mana open) in the early game for stalling, it is a win-more card following this logic.
i insist, not saying is a bad card, i may even see a UWx deck with myth (with probe and other things) but in current decklist in the premier i dont like it, any mtgo result (or gp, etc but not "my local fnm") that can back up myth?
and playing a "control" or more "midrange" decklist is more a meta call than a playstyle preference, at least in my opinion (i have played "both" versions, but to me they are the same deck)
I also made no claim with respect to comparing draw-go UW control to UW Midrange-control - I simply responded to a poster who was asserting draw-go ("purely reactive") to be not viable. I did assert that Myth Realized was the "hero draw-go UW control needed" - not as a univeral card in all UW decks.
Kinda annoying to see so much misrepresentation of my assertions.
No, I don't play on MTGO. Personally, GPs are too far away for me to travel to frequently - I'm not even sure I'd play any form of UW control when I get the chance. It's fine if people prefer the Midrange-Control versions - I have all the cards for it as well and play it sometimes. I like the midrange-control builds.
All I was trying to say was that if you want to play a "purely reactive" build, we have a sleeper card waiting to be explored that fits the gameplan perfectly, and at least for myself, it has been doing the job the "purely reactive" build wants (edit) at a bare minimum of expense both in terms of mana cost and slots on the top end of your curve.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I'm currently sitting at a 64% playtesting win rate over 54 Bo3 games - link, so that's all the credibility I currently can serve the table.
---
I'm not going to touch the points in the discussion that has happened, as I don't have time to actively participate. Instead I'm going to share my thoughts on the card based on my own experience and observations;
1. The context:
I think it's important to realize that Myth shouldn't be slotted into the default UW build. Due to the nature of the card you're required to have a higher spell density than the typical midrange approach. When you look at these restrictions, you shouldn't think about what the card has replaced in the traditional list, but rather see it as an unique build with its own set of pros & cons. I believe Myth facilitates an unique deck in similar fashion as Emiria Control - UW is a vast color combination, builds can coexist.
2. The facilitator:
By including Myth in your build you're committing yourself to a spell heavy deck. The fact that you aren't forced to run any 'bad or specific' cards is important. For example "Thing in the Ice" requires Sorceries & Instants, but highly favors the latter from a gameplay perspective. Myth pretty much work with any non-creature spell, thus we can play our trumps without worrying too much about synergy.
I like to say that Myth gives 'face' to your gameplan - meaning each spell advance your gameplan. This means that a normally "useless" card for UW, like Spreading Seas, can serve a purpose with a Myth on the field. Finally, the spell heavy deck design makes you vulnerable to early creature aggression, and this is why I'm a fan of Lingering Souls and/or Timely Reinforcements in the build.
3. The mana cost:
This is, in my opinion, maybe the most overlooked aspect of Myth Realized that people fail to mention in discussions - it cost one single mana! I feel that most ignore this fact when they compare it to cards like “Thing in the Ice”, three drops or other high cost win conditions like Planeswalkers. There are no other threats in the UWBR color spectrum that can be deployed turn one. That being said Myth normally goes down t2 when we lead with Colonnade.
Now, this is all good theory, but there are merits in the criticism mentioning Myth’s activation cost and the fact that it needs build-up. This is why the card can’t be your only win condition, nor should you design your deck to solely protect it. You need to be smart, know when to attack, and have enough game knowledge to anticipate what your opponent might have that can interact with it.
4. Its role:
The card is without a doubt a win condition, but it’s also a mana sink as the game progress. While the ability isn’t particularly interesting or cheap, the possibility to put a lore counter on a Myth at instant speed let us do something with our mana if the opponent doesn’t do anything worth interacting with. Other obvious traits like immunity to sorcery speed removal and sweepers are also a plus. One interesting aspect is that the card can give accidental information about the opponents hand – if they’re sandbagging cards or leaving mana open you should expect an answer to your Myth, and can act accordingly.
---
Apart from this, the card is nothing more than a cheap beat stick. It has no evasion, however the UW ‘all-stars’ Supreme Verdict & Cryptic Command does a nice job “splitting oceans”. I can’t say that the myth-build is better than the traditional lists – ironically I think UW control might be one of my worse matchups. To end my post; I honestly believe that the card is worth exploring and I know that it’s a working threat in the modern format – how strong is yet to be seen.
When I was playing UW Control, I played 3 condescends and it was really good. The only place it didn't shine was in the Twin matchup where I needed to win counter wars in the late game. Now that almost no decks play counterspells, I strongly feel we should be revisiting Condescend - especially in a post-Eldrazi world (where decks can't just cast all their spells for free).
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Yeah, that sentence became a bit vague, apologies. Also, when I wrote that I failed to realize that low placing results normally aren't shared at mtgtop8 & goldfish.
What I tried to say is that the card seems untested. This definitely do say more against the card's relevance than for it. So I guess the only thing I can do is to keep at it and place well with it myself.
That first bit includes something I'd like to address. Myth does not "incentivize" overextending the way Finks/Omens does. Omens is a body that they must swing into, not one that you might decide to trade with if you have mana open. Finks actively makes them want to add power to the board to combat both the life gain and the recursion. I see Myth the way I would see a mutavault or blinkmoth. It can and I'm sure does become a win con, but like many others say - why not run an actual win con?
Versatility is a valuable commodity as most any UW mage would tell you - so perhaps there is something to Myth. However, I refuse to accept that it forces players to overextend into it. If you trade with their dude, you lose Myth and they cast dude #2. If you don't trade, they don't cast dude #2. And this is with the downside of not being able to both activate Myth and counter a spell on the same turn which means you are losing too much tempo in the early game.
I don't understand what you mean with "why not run an actual win con". Myth is definitely an actual win con, you can't compare it to five-six mana walkers and three-four mana creatures. It cost one mana!
Here's an optimal goldfish example from my deck;
T1 colonnade
T2 Myth + Visions
T3 Souls
T4 Swing with souls, verdict
T5 Flashback Souls, Visions, Path - attack with a 6/6 Myth
It's not uncommon for me to have a 12/12 myth, and I still have access to threats like Gideon, Archangel Avacyn, Souls etc. I don't get why people think you have to give up those cards when you run Myth Realized. You can't replace the card with anything in UW midrange and call it a day, you have to construct a specific type of deck in order to utilize it properly.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eIgitx21UHT6tG7QfgFDJRF5LvV-MkIwkVQ8jaGv5FQ/edit?usp=docslist_api
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control
Facebook.com/ModernUWxControl
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control Community
Facebook.com/Groups/MTGModernUWx
I'm also an Admin for one of the premier Modern communities on Facebook:
Magic the Gathering: Modern Meta Masters
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ModernMetaMasters/
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I'm not sure why you are assuming that the myth will be smaller than the opposing creatures it is threatening to block. The reason it causes over-extensions is because it is often the biggest creature on the battlefield and doesn't die to wrath. So it can just sit there, and unless they play 2 creatures to the board (excluding evasion same as wall/finks), they'll never be able to get through on the ground. goblin guides, glistener elf, wild nacatl... all cards that can be traded or even profitably blocked within the first few turns. Tarmogoyf and Thought-knot Seer also don't stay larger than myth for long.
Myth + spellsnare is a tempo gain, mitigating the early tempo loss. By turn 3, you can activate and mana leak as well. The most compelling reason to play myth is that it has the features covered, and is much cheaper to cast than any other finisher while retaining a higher power ceiling.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I did this because I didn't want to confuse anyone of the difference. Feel free to add this to OP.
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control
Facebook.com/ModernUWxControl
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control Community
Facebook.com/Groups/MTGModernUWx
I'm also an Admin for one of the premier Modern communities on Facebook:
Magic the Gathering: Modern Meta Masters
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ModernMetaMasters/
Yes, sometimes opening myth does not interact much with fast decks like affinity when they can put together an early kill - no doubt. Wall/finks has upside in those games of letting you dig a card or gain 2. Myth is not a panacea and that is not what I'm trying to communicate. It is simply a 1 mana finisher that you drop early and threatens to interact with attackers until the end of the game, with no ceiling on how large it can get over time.
Seldom a bad topdeck - it's a manasink as well. I'm not trying to convince you to play it - finks/omens/resto is great, but rather trying to explain how the build works. Some of the things you are saying do not reflect my experience with the card.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
It was a response to "why not run an actual win con". What does that even mean, what defines an "actual" win condition? These are my playtesting results with Myth. Myth have won me games, fallen short in some. I don't have more to add than my experience with the card, all I know is that it works for me.
I have not tested the card in a while, but it seems like it would be a better mana leak vs eldrazi enough of the time to run it. I think the main concern is that against all other decks it is just too expensive to interact early game where the deck is vulnerable. It has good upside so remains a good test card imo.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
When I played it, preventing people from playing on curve by threatening condescend was good enough, especially on the play. On the draw it was somewhat weaker but still good enough to stop what rates to be the most dangerous thing in modern (a 3 drop played on turn 3).
If you're packing enough other early game heat (snare, paths, snaps, walls, flares in the SB for infect, etc.) I think it's likely to be better than mana leak.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
If you feel it isn't adequately covered by either this or the UW midrange thread, You're free to build your own thread under deck creation; Developing competitive is for approved threads that the forum consensus/moderator opinion deems to be most representative of the deck types qualifying under the tier guidelines.
Yes, I am a local area mod.WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVEPrimary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Much appreciated. Thank you.
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control
Facebook.com/ModernUWxControl
MTG Modern - Competitive: UWx Midrange/Control Community
Facebook.com/Groups/MTGModernUWx
I'm also an Admin for one of the premier Modern communities on Facebook:
Magic the Gathering: Modern Meta Masters
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ModernMetaMasters/