Again, it's not just fetch/shock damage, it's a lot of things:
fetch/shock damage
Thoughtseize life loss
we're a lock deck that often wins on low life
we run 8-11 double black spells in the main and 3-6 in the side
worsens the Burn matchup, which is already pretty tight
might have to drop Mutavault? Or at least 1-2
You keep saying there's no reason not to but you never address (most of) these points. Maybe a splash is still worth it despite them, but I'm doubtful.
I don't view any of these points as valid for a competitive deck. 1, 2, and 5 are also true of every BGx Midrange deck in history and it hasn't prevented them from doing well. They've even made way more headway than we have in solving the Burn matchup with BOTH Souls and Rhino. 3 is only true when the deck is playing from behind; when I was running Nyx in games 2/3 of Burn my life total was much higher than in game 1. 4 is not a legitimate concern if we only splash one color for a few cards; Burn runs numerous RR spells and does just fine with its splashed cards. 6 is a much more legitimate concern but I think we would be able to make up for Muta's loss with other cards in other colors. For instance, if you splashed red, you could either replace the mutas with Lavaclaw as the SCG list did, or just rely on Bolt/Blightning and similar effects to provide a clock and/or deal with small creatures.
These are just not issues. They have become issues in this deck but they are not issues elsewhere. That suggests there is something wrong with the deck (which I don't believe) or something wrong with the way people are thinking about it (which I strongly believe).
What are these super aggressive decks you're so afraid of? You keep mentioning this and I don't really know where you're coming from. Burn, Zoo, Merfolk, and Affinity are all fine/good/great. The only thing at all like that that bothers me is that new Junk list, and that's not super aggressive, just hateful.
There is no Infect issue. There really isn't. At all. I'd be perfectly happy to play against 10 Infect decks in a PT. They run few creatures which makes them very vulnerable to discard, and we have Darkblast (which is offset somewhat by Pendelhaven, but is still very effective overall). Bridge is nuts against them and they often don't have enough answers for it. I have Infect footage on my channel if you haven't seen that will illustrate these points.
The concern with aggro is almost entirely Burn. I do not like that the deck has a 33% win rate in game 1 against the second most-played deck in the format. That puts our games 2/3 too much at the mercy of chance, especially game 3 where we will likely be on the draw. Something like a red or white splash would improve that.
As for Infect, I have seen one Infect matchup on your channel which was a single game 1 match. I would be happy to view others but I don't see any others on this page. That match proved absolutely nothing. The evaluation here of Infect is also really off. How on earth is Bridge nuts against Infect? Their entire squad has 1 power and Hierarch can sneak in regardless of hand size. Become Immense is probably castable as early as turn 3 against us, they run 4 creatures that are totally immune to selective discard (Inkmoth), and Mutavault can't chump 8 of their creatures. They also have at least 6 ways of stopping targeted removal.
Cut is far from broken. I worry you're a little too attracted to the cuteness of Cut and will run it at any cost. I see the benefits but the inability to play it turn 2 or even turn 3 with slower hands is infuriating; I find it difficult to feel like the 1cmc sometimes thing outweighs that downside. I guess I'd be fine with it in a splash list. And again, I love Tasigur in a splash list.
I never said Cut was broken. DELVE is broken. Cut is just a good Delve card. Cut is good when you have lots of Abzan and fine as a singleton against Burn.
Then I guess we should test a list with Souls and Syphon Life, or some 3cmc or less white spell that gains life. Part of the reason I bring up Mutavault is because it's the only manland that costs 1 to activate - I really think any other would be vastly less effective overall because they cost 2 or more to activate (and we'd probably only want to use the ones that cost 3 or more, because of the fixing). I tested Pete's list and Lavaclaw always felt miserable even at its best. But my testing isn't extensive. Vault is good because we can keep up the pressure while swinging - if we couldn't keep up the pressure it would be awful most of the time.
Here is the other video. Thought I had more. Note I was running Waste Not then, and he was running Corruptor.
It's not off. It's nuts because again, they have so few creatures. Usually they have one creature in the opener, we steal it or kill it, and that buys us plenty of time to land and turn on Bridge. This has been my experience over and over again. Not worried about Hierarch in the least. Immense is annoying - no getting around that. But I don't think it sways the matchup that much. Could be wrong. I haven't played against lists runnning 4x yet. Inkmoth is annoying sometimes but usually dealt with just fine between removal, Bridge, and racing. You're playing the matchup in your head - you should know things don't often play out the way you think. I assure you the matchup is good.
Then I guess we should test a list with Souls and Syphon Life, or some 3cmc or less white spell that gains life. Part of the reason I bring up Mutavault is because it's the only manland that costs 1 to activate - I really think any other would be vastly less effective overall because they cost 2 or more to activate (and we'd probably only want to use the ones that cost 3 or more, because of the fixing). I tested Pete's list and Lavaclaw always felt miserable even at its best. But my testing isn't extensive. Vault is good because we can keep up the pressure while swinging - if we couldn't keep up the pressure it would be awful most of the time.
I just think people overvalue Muta. It has been good to us but I think something in its place would be better. It's not like this is some format-defining card we would be stupid not to run, like TS, IoK, or Lilly. This is a card that only Merfolk uses (for obvious reasons) and really doesn't see play elsewhere. If cutting Muta meant adding better cards, I would much prefer the better cards to something we might have become wedded to out of habit and not out of results. Especially if the replacement card was something that effectively does the same thing but better, like Souls. Especially when you consider all the cards that white gives you in the board/main (RIP, Silence, Reinforcements, Path, etc.) this seems like a favorable exchange.
Here is the other video. Thought I had more. Note I was running Waste Not then, and he was running Corruptor.
It's not off. It's nuts because again, they have so few creatures. Usually they have one creature in the opener, we steal it or kill it, and that buys us plenty of time to land and turn on Bridge. This has been my experience over and over again. Not worried about Hierarch in the least. Immense is annoying but they only run 1 I think and even if they have it we can still likely kill the creature or hide behind Bridge. Inkmoth is annoying sometimes but usually dealt with just fine between removal, Bridge, and racing. You're playing the matchup in your head - you should know things don't often play out the way you think. I assure you the matchup is good.
These kinds of videos make me worried that people do not understand how the newer Infect lists play out. Numerous players at PT FRF used 4 BIs in their lists, including Finkel who got 10th in the Modern-only points. That dude you played against isn't even in the same realm: He's using an August 2014 list. He's running slow Corruptors that are relics of the Pod era and has no BI. He also commits an egregious misplay with that Groundswell on turn 3 of game 1. Finally, he's light on fetchlands or has a really terrible draw because he misses a turn 2 Blighted Agent and then gets it discarded. I would happily play against 10 of those guys at a GP or a PPTQ.
I'm not saying that Infect is as bad as Burn. DB in the board will definitely help (although most lists have reduced our DB count significantly). I'm simply saying that unless we have new data, we can't base our Infect matchup assumptions on such old results. Maybe you have more results either anecdotally or in your own matchup analyses, but this is not an open and shut issue from what I am seeing here.
It also doesn't get at the core issue with aggro which isn't Infect at all. It's Burn.
What other Delve card would you want to run?
Tas or Angler. I don't like their anti-synergy with Bridge, but I do like their board presence. I particularly like Angler because it kills the average Goyf and gets all those artifacts/enchantments out of our graveyard that make enemy Goyfs so big. Tas's upside ability is basically useless in our deck unless we want to recur turn 5 IoKs, so it's really just a question of their cost to board presence ratio. We would need to run fetchlands to support either of them though.
If you ignore the "lol" from mestremuten's statement, which hopefully wasn't meant to offend, it is a legit question. Is it for the random effect? Maybe use it to get them to 1 card like an expensive, modern Hymn to Tourach earlier or simply because you didn't have any at your disposal.
But regardless I do like your list, Esperino. Mogis is the only thing that I'm skeptical about but if it works, obviously keep rocking it. And Rakdos Charm for twin, bawhahaha, awesome. Getting that far with that many people is great! I wish we had turnouts like that in my city.
I have a PPTQ coming up next weekend and was gonna use my janky Bg list (I want a G splash but would have to be faster than that for new meta), but believe I should switch back to stock for a decent paper test. We've been having 60-45 per PPTQ lately.
I wish it was for the randomness, but at the point it gets played it's usually for X= 3 or one time even 4 and makes them discard everything, so the random factor doesn't matter.
Congrats to Esperino for finishing 2nd on a Rakdos list. I think I see how the 4 Temple of Malice and single Mogis, God of Slaughter gets you there. I've actually taken the SCG IQ list and tried out Eidolon of the Great Revel and was thinking about Blood Moon. I think there's something to be said for a modified burn/disruption deck over a pure discard engine. I remember commentary on the 8 rack list that Arjan Van Leeuwen took to Pro Tour: You can't make your opponent discard the top card of his library. Blightning makes that less of a problem.
Grats on the placing, Esper. I like the Rack-dos list...especially the Mogis...it makes me smile. A couple questions:
1) I like the Temples, but how often do you find it interferes with T1 discard?
2) I agree with the suggestion of Rakdos's Return as a good alternative for Shatter, but it really depends on your land count and timing. If you are firing it off quite early (eg. X<3) and they are holding more cards than X, then Shatter may be better due to the random factor. If later (eg. X>=3) and you're dumping their remaining hand then the extra damage to the dome from Return would be nice. What is the average value of X when you cast it? Or is there a high variance? Edit: Nevermind...you answered already.
Nihlis, I couldn't agree more with point #1. I've been running a list that is almost exactly Van Leeuwen's but with a very different sideboard, and the last 3 events I've played in were a 4-0 at FNM, a 4-2 at a PPTQ and 6-3 at GP Worcester. One of those losses was to Trevor Humphries after (you guessed it) I mulled to 4 and kept a no lander, and another was a mirror against Alex Finchler, who was also 5-2 at the time with the same list. I think this deck is incredibly well positioned right now and until you've tried the "stock list" I would be very wary of any "improvements" on it.
I want to report a "finish" for 8Rack in a Modern tournament from yesterday because every little bit of public play this deck gets will (hopefully) help it get out of the "developing competitive" section, which is a nice way of saying "Tier 2.5++". And before I get on with it, I want to say this will be a really short "report", mentioning only the list, the match results and some overall things. I neither have the time to get into detail nor want to half-ass it with sentences like "drew X and Y, he had some stuff but couldn't do f(Z) and my Racks eventually got the job done bla bla bla". Sadly, this is what most people do (don't make me have to pull out quotes).
The setting: Modern Monday in my LGS (which is the second biggest and by far the most popular one in the entire city). 2 brackets of 64 players, playing a total of 17 different decks (not counting variations). 5 rounds of action for everybody plus additional 3 rounds for the 16 people who have the highest score in their brackets (basically the two top eights of each pod get to for a third pod and play 3 rounds). My finish - 2nd place. Went undefeated until the last match and with pretty good tiebreakers.
Congrats on the finish. That's the kind of finish I'm excited to see and I think it's a great direction for the deck. I have a bunch of questions about your list, the card choices, and the matchup.
1. How were Blightning's different "modes"? Did you find yourself regularly getting the full 2 card discard? Was it mostly a finisher, hitting only 1 or 0 cards? What matchups did it do well in and in what situations did you wish you had drawn something else?
2. On paper, Temple of Malice looks pretty bad in a deck with 22 cmc 1 cards. Especially because a) some of those cards really need to be played on turn 1 and b) you only have 22 lands which gives you less flexibility in how you drop lands. Do you try to minimize that by not having a lot of CMC 2 cards that you need to curve right into? Temple is obviously a great topdeck later on, but were there early game moments where it caused problems?
3. In how many games did you enter race/burn mode versus control mode? Were there times that your card choices conflicted with either of those gameplay styles? For instance, a turn 3 Blightning might not be the card you want if facing down a Nacatl/Goyf/MS trio.
4. Would you run more or less removal in this metagame? What removal would you change? Bolt is obviously good against these aggressive decks that are preying on less efficient Junk removal, but Bolt is less good against the higher toughness Junk decks themselves.
5. Mogis looks awesome. Did he shine in matchups beyond Junk? What board state was required when you played him?
I like the black/red version of this deck in a metagame that is saturated with Burn; these are colors that really help deal with Burn threats. I also love Blood Moon period and any deck that can run that card is going to have an edge in this format. Not sure if I like it more than a theoretical white splash, but it's a cool starting point.
1. How were Blightning's different "modes"? Did you find yourself regularly getting the full 2 card discard? Was it mostly a finisher, hitting only 1 or 0 cards? What matchups did it do well in and in what situations did you wish you had drawn something else?
2. On paper, Temple of Malice looks pretty bad in a deck with 22 cmc 1 cards. Especially because a) some of those cards really need to be played on turn 1 and b) you only have 22 lands which gives you less flexibility in how you drop lands. Do you try to minimize that by not having a lot of CMC 2 cards that you need to curve right into? Temple is obviously a great topdeck later on, but were there early game moments where it caused problems?
3. In how many games did you enter race/burn mode versus control mode? Were there times that your card choices conflicted with either of those gameplay styles? For instance, a turn 3 Blightning might not be the card you want if facing down a Nacatl/Goyf/MS trio.
4. Would you run more or less removal in this metagame? What removal would you change? Bolt is obviously good against these aggressive decks that are preying on less efficient Junk removal, but Bolt is less good against the higher toughness Junk decks themselves.
5. Mogis looks awesome. Did he shine in matchups beyond Junk? What board state was required when you played him?
I like the black/red version of this deck in a metagame that is saturated with Burn; these are colors that really help deal with Burn threats. I also love Blood Moon period and any deck that can run that card is going to have an edge in this format. Not sure if I like it more than a theoretical white splash, but it's a cool starting point.
1. Blightning performs exactly the way Wrench Mind does, except it also gets in with a Rack's worth of damage. I believe in about 80% of the times I cast it I got the full two cards out of it, but I never shied from bolting their face for 3 mana. It sounds bad when put this way but when it's one of your last cards (or only) and it's a game-winning interaction, why the hell not? But to answer the question directly - most of the time I got full value out of it and very very very rarely I wished I had drawn something else. It shines especially in the Junk(d) matchup where it's Bolt 5-8 as far as killing Liliana is concerned (her -2 doesn't have targets in this deck, but I'm talking about ways to deal damage to her here, for whatever reason). It's also amazing in the Burn matchup because it helps race them (and does a pretty good job at it too, I might add).
2. Temple is actually more of a mid-game thing which helps setup the transition to the lategame by fixing draws on critical turns where it's essential to not run out of Rack gas, get said Rack after having had gas or dig for removal. It's obviously far from a 100% topdeck fixer but it helps a lot. There is a lot of skill into reading which these turns are and playing in accordingly. I find it not a "great topdeck" but rather something I want to have in my hand for when I feel the aforementioned need to. I will mullingan a hand with one land that's just the Temple and I think people who consider playing that sort of thing should be ready to aggressively mulligan. That being said, I'm not happy it's a tapland and I'm not going to say it didn't cause hiccups in matches where I needed to be faster. Which transitions to:
3. It depends on what you're facing, really. Against Burn I knew I needed to be fast, because discard doesn't protect against topdecks and I have no lifegain, so I went into that matchup with the plan to race them. It's also a viable mode against Junk because their lifegain is limited and if you can discard it, then you are free to race. That being said, I actually like beating them in the midgame just before they start to grind with Tasigur. Essentially, with this BR build you can be fast or controlling depending on what you need to be doing at the time. Read the opponent and the matchup and play accordingly. At least for you I know you are skilled do that, unlike... let's not get into that.
4. I wouldn't run more removal. I had the option to completely ditch the Wrenches and go for 2 more Cuts (which, post-ban, is the most powerful delve card in Modern... anyway) but I chose not to. And not just because I feel the need for BLightning 5 and 6. I just never needed it and I ran into 3 Junk decks. Don't forget that Liliana is a removal spell too, and a recurring one. The maindeck Anger helped me with the Lingering Souls and by alternating Lili-Cut-Lili, buying her time to get back up to 2 loyalty, the removal was more than enough (of course, Bolts are also amazing, although in that matchup they go mostly to the face). If you're wondering why it's Anger instead of Pyroclasm - Zoo.
5. Mogis is indeed awesome. I wanted a Rack effect that didn't die to Junk's removal and general artifact hate in the meta, so Mogis was perfect for that. I find that in 90% of the matches the Racks get dealt with relatively easy, so having one that doesn't die was great. Another reason to play him was that I wasn't satisfied with just 8 Racks (which some people suggested actually cutting... crazy stuff if it's your only win con) and you'd be surprised how going from 8 to 9 really makes you see one way more consistently. Obviously at 4 cmc with just the 22 lands, trying to play more than one of him is suicide. As far as board states go, you can play him into anything as long as you're not dying on board. I personally want him to do 2 damage because it's a realiabl and relatively fast clock (as long as it isn't the only source of damage for the entire game, at which point you are likely losing it if that's the case) and I'm always happy if people decide to sac creatures. It's super relevant in the Junk matchup, because they almost always sac their Lingering Tokens, which are more or less the only thing I'm afraid of (because Souls > Liliana).
i think i like the mogis inclusion very much. is there any other permanent the deck can run to contribute to mogis' devotion? a 7/5 might be game ending in the right conditions.
what i like most of the red splash, besides the fact that 4x of the usual removal can go to the face, is the rakdos charm in the sideboard. it handles almost everything this deck has difficulties against: grave hate for either combo, goyfs or dredge, stray chalices removal (or jeskai combo hate), twin hate.
from the top of my head, this red splash makes the first game vs burn more difficult (arguably: it has more burn as well, resulting in perhaps quicker clock) but that should be fixed after g1, maybe with the nyxathid innovation from the side.
it might have difficulties vs zoo and affinity because of the early aggro and no bridges (and still arguably, the stock list depends on a bridge draw and having the opponent not drawing removal for artifact, often with said removal in the main deck), but it has more removal to deal with it.
against white leyline the only answer it has, compared to the stock list, is 2x waste not and lilianas for discard. not exactly wonderful.
please keep in mind that this is just brainstorming, and i hope some more experienced rack players than me can use the input. i like where this is going with the red splash.
The only time you can turn Mogis on, it doesn't matter. You need (aside from him) a Liliana, the Waste Not and a couple of Afflictions on the field, at which point you are already winning. I did get to attack with him once for the entire day.
Also the other problems you have listed are non-existent if you know how to play the deck. Game 1 against Burn is in fact easier - 8Rack has always been capable of matching Burn's speed, the problem there has been the reliability with which we can output our damage. Bolts and Blightning fix that to a great extent and the deck is now actually capable of consistently racing. It also doesn't take too much damage from lands because if you have any sort of experience you'll use a fetch to get the basic mountain first and then avoid taking damage off of lands. There is no room for nyxathid in the side and it would completely defeat the purpose of a "creatureless" build that renders all spot removal moot.
Has absolutely no problem against Zoo or Affinity. You have 10 removal spells and a sweeper maindeck. Bridge is bad against those decks anyway. Leyline is not a problem for a good pilot. Never has been. At best it's mildly annoying.
Yeah I'm going to agree here with therabidmoocow. You guys keep shooting down people in this thread. This thread is really active so I'm always hoping to read a new version of the deck that is doing better then the current all black version that has been playing the exact same cards since this thread started.
I get the sense that you didn't read some of the criticism of the BG Smallpox list that was posted here, or the praise of the BR list that was also posted on this page and the last. The BG list we/I shot down was a mess. It was super removal light, had a messy manabase that didn't actually work with Smallpox, and appears designed for a metagame that doesn't have the Infect/Burn/Affinity prevalence that we see today. Maybe there is a BG build out there that can effectively leverage Smallpox, but that one list was not it.
Then there was Esperino's list which both had results to back it up AND was theoretically well-constructed. It was an interesting take on the BR lists we have seen in this thread with some new tech and strong application of old staples. In fact, I haven't seen anyone criticize any part of that deck in any way that could be interpreted as "shooting [it] down". The only card choice people have challenged is Mogis, which is clearly a techy enough card that it is worth challenging and thinking through in a critical way.
Although I agree with you that this thread has had serious problems with accepting innovation, that is not at all what I am seeing here. In fact, I am seeing quite the opposite; a concentrated effort made by numerous posters to tune, question, and develop the deck towards a competitive format, regardless of old sacred cows.
The setting: Modern Monday in my LGS (which is the second biggest and by far the most popular one in the entire city). 2 brackets of 64 players, playing a total of 17 different decks (not counting variations). 5 rounds of action for everybody plus additional 3 rounds for the 16 people who have the highest score in their brackets (basically the two top eights of each pod get to for a third pod and play 3 rounds). My finish - 2nd place. Went undefeated until the last match and with pretty good tiebreakers.
Also, I'd like to add either/both of your brackets to the spreadsheet. Do you have T8 information for these two events? If you don't have a link you can just report it verbally.
Yeah I'm going to agree here with therabidmoocow. You guys keep shooting down people in this thread.
Did you even look at the deck he posted though? Sometimes shooting people down is the correct response.
Two things. First being i said i in no way had this deck figured out, and it was a work in progress.
The second being yes, i realize looking at the decklist, it looks terrible. Some do when all written out. My version is more of a suicide approach, built for speed and a quick lock. It doesn't care about its permanents or hand, just incremental advantage. Usually dark confidant or mutavault and smallpox don't mix, people want to build a board state. What I've found with my deck is that if mutavault swings in for even one attack, or Bob gets me an extra card, or attack, or block, or even just eats a removal spell, that's fine by me. It's all just a means to an end. The land count admittedly looks low, and would tossing an extra one in hurt it? Probably not. But it's never been an issue for me. My curve is low, with only the four liliana at three on top, and quite often i don't even find myself needing to land her to win, because the sheer disruption of smallpox with the heavy cheap targeted discard will often lock an opponent out for multiple turns around turn two or three. I think what the issue is is that despite my version and the stock version or similar builds sharing a good amount of the same cards is that it plays quite differently, with the end goal being the same, but people are expecting it to play the same way, which it doesn't.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The answer is purple because ice cream has no bones.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't view any of these points as valid for a competitive deck. 1, 2, and 5 are also true of every BGx Midrange deck in history and it hasn't prevented them from doing well. They've even made way more headway than we have in solving the Burn matchup with BOTH Souls and Rhino. 3 is only true when the deck is playing from behind; when I was running Nyx in games 2/3 of Burn my life total was much higher than in game 1. 4 is not a legitimate concern if we only splash one color for a few cards; Burn runs numerous RR spells and does just fine with its splashed cards. 6 is a much more legitimate concern but I think we would be able to make up for Muta's loss with other cards in other colors. For instance, if you splashed red, you could either replace the mutas with Lavaclaw as the SCG list did, or just rely on Bolt/Blightning and similar effects to provide a clock and/or deal with small creatures.
These are just not issues. They have become issues in this deck but they are not issues elsewhere. That suggests there is something wrong with the deck (which I don't believe) or something wrong with the way people are thinking about it (which I strongly believe).
The concern with aggro is almost entirely Burn. I do not like that the deck has a 33% win rate in game 1 against the second most-played deck in the format. That puts our games 2/3 too much at the mercy of chance, especially game 3 where we will likely be on the draw. Something like a red or white splash would improve that.
As for Infect, I have seen one Infect matchup on your channel which was a single game 1 match. I would be happy to view others but I don't see any others on this page. That match proved absolutely nothing. The evaluation here of Infect is also really off. How on earth is Bridge nuts against Infect? Their entire squad has 1 power and Hierarch can sneak in regardless of hand size. Become Immense is probably castable as early as turn 3 against us, they run 4 creatures that are totally immune to selective discard (Inkmoth), and Mutavault can't chump 8 of their creatures. They also have at least 6 ways of stopping targeted removal.
I never said Cut was broken. DELVE is broken. Cut is just a good Delve card. Cut is good when you have lots of Abzan and fine as a singleton against Burn.
Here is the other video. Thought I had more. Note I was running Waste Not then, and he was running Corruptor.
It's not off. It's nuts because again, they have so few creatures. Usually they have one creature in the opener, we steal it or kill it, and that buys us plenty of time to land and turn on Bridge. This has been my experience over and over again. Not worried about Hierarch in the least. Immense is annoying - no getting around that. But I don't think it sways the matchup that much. Could be wrong. I haven't played against lists runnning 4x yet. Inkmoth is annoying sometimes but usually dealt with just fine between removal, Bridge, and racing. You're playing the matchup in your head - you should know things don't often play out the way you think. I assure you the matchup is good.
What other Delve card would you want to run?
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
Thirst for Knowledge % to hit artifact
Good call. The 3cmc spot would be really tight between that, Lily, and Souls, though (Souls is sometimes 2cmc but still).
I just think people overvalue Muta. It has been good to us but I think something in its place would be better. It's not like this is some format-defining card we would be stupid not to run, like TS, IoK, or Lilly. This is a card that only Merfolk uses (for obvious reasons) and really doesn't see play elsewhere. If cutting Muta meant adding better cards, I would much prefer the better cards to something we might have become wedded to out of habit and not out of results. Especially if the replacement card was something that effectively does the same thing but better, like Souls. Especially when you consider all the cards that white gives you in the board/main (RIP, Silence, Reinforcements, Path, etc.) this seems like a favorable exchange.
These kinds of videos make me worried that people do not understand how the newer Infect lists play out. Numerous players at PT FRF used 4 BIs in their lists, including Finkel who got 10th in the Modern-only points. That dude you played against isn't even in the same realm: He's using an August 2014 list. He's running slow Corruptors that are relics of the Pod era and has no BI. He also commits an egregious misplay with that Groundswell on turn 3 of game 1. Finally, he's light on fetchlands or has a really terrible draw because he misses a turn 2 Blighted Agent and then gets it discarded. I would happily play against 10 of those guys at a GP or a PPTQ.
I'm not saying that Infect is as bad as Burn. DB in the board will definitely help (although most lists have reduced our DB count significantly). I'm simply saying that unless we have new data, we can't base our Infect matchup assumptions on such old results. Maybe you have more results either anecdotally or in your own matchup analyses, but this is not an open and shut issue from what I am seeing here.
It also doesn't get at the core issue with aggro which isn't Infect at all. It's Burn.
Tas or Angler. I don't like their anti-synergy with Bridge, but I do like their board presence. I particularly like Angler because it kills the average Goyf and gets all those artifacts/enchantments out of our graveyard that make enemy Goyfs so big. Tas's upside ability is basically useless in our deck unless we want to recur turn 5 IoKs, so it's really just a question of their cost to board presence ratio. We would need to run fetchlands to support either of them though.
But regardless I do like your list, Esperino. Mogis is the only thing that I'm skeptical about but if it works, obviously keep rocking it. And Rakdos Charm for twin, bawhahaha, awesome. Getting that far with that many people is great! I wish we had turnouts like that in my city.
I have a PPTQ coming up next weekend and was gonna use my janky Bg list (I want a G splash but would have to be faster than that for new meta), but believe I should switch back to stock for a decent paper test. We've been having 60-45 per PPTQ lately.
2 Dakmor Salvage
3 Mutavault
13 Swamp
4 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
Creatures
3 Pack Rat
Instants
1 Slaughter Pact
2 Victim of Night
Sorc
4 Inquisition of Kozilek
4 Raven's Crime
4 Thoughtseize
4 Wrench Mind
1 Syphon Life
4 The Rack
3 Shrieking Affliction
4 Ensnaring Bridge
Lilis
4 Liliana of the Veil
2 Bile Blight
2 Darkblast
3 Nyxathid (dont have leylines anyway)
2 Pithing Needle
1 Shrieking Affliction
4 Surgical Extraction
1 Syphon Life
Thinking of swapping a rat for a Bile Blight.
Cube
Terricube
Modern
Legacy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAwIKB_RbU8
EDH - Obzedat, Ghost Council of VALUETOWN BW
Modern - Rack Disruption BR
My Trading Post
1) I like the Temples, but how often do you find it interferes with T1 discard?
2) I agree with the suggestion of Rakdos's Return as a good alternative for Shatter, but it really depends on your land count and timing. If you are firing it off quite early (eg. X<3) and they are holding more cards than X, then Shatter may be better due to the random factor. If later (eg. X>=3) and you're dumping their remaining hand then the extra damage to the dome from Return would be nice. What is the average value of X when you cast it? Or is there a high variance? Edit: Nevermind...you answered already.
Congrats on the finish. That's the kind of finish I'm excited to see and I think it's a great direction for the deck. I have a bunch of questions about your list, the card choices, and the matchup.
1. How were Blightning's different "modes"? Did you find yourself regularly getting the full 2 card discard? Was it mostly a finisher, hitting only 1 or 0 cards? What matchups did it do well in and in what situations did you wish you had drawn something else?
2. On paper, Temple of Malice looks pretty bad in a deck with 22 cmc 1 cards. Especially because a) some of those cards really need to be played on turn 1 and b) you only have 22 lands which gives you less flexibility in how you drop lands. Do you try to minimize that by not having a lot of CMC 2 cards that you need to curve right into? Temple is obviously a great topdeck later on, but were there early game moments where it caused problems?
3. In how many games did you enter race/burn mode versus control mode? Were there times that your card choices conflicted with either of those gameplay styles? For instance, a turn 3 Blightning might not be the card you want if facing down a Nacatl/Goyf/MS trio.
4. Would you run more or less removal in this metagame? What removal would you change? Bolt is obviously good against these aggressive decks that are preying on less efficient Junk removal, but Bolt is less good against the higher toughness Junk decks themselves.
5. Mogis looks awesome. Did he shine in matchups beyond Junk? What board state was required when you played him?
I like the black/red version of this deck in a metagame that is saturated with Burn; these are colors that really help deal with Burn threats. I also love Blood Moon period and any deck that can run that card is going to have an edge in this format. Not sure if I like it more than a theoretical white splash, but it's a cool starting point.
1. Blightning performs exactly the way Wrench Mind does, except it also gets in with a Rack's worth of damage. I believe in about 80% of the times I cast it I got the full two cards out of it, but I never shied from bolting their face for 3 mana. It sounds bad when put this way but when it's one of your last cards (or only) and it's a game-winning interaction, why the hell not? But to answer the question directly - most of the time I got full value out of it and very very very rarely I wished I had drawn something else. It shines especially in the Junk(d) matchup where it's Bolt 5-8 as far as killing Liliana is concerned (her -2 doesn't have targets in this deck, but I'm talking about ways to deal damage to her here, for whatever reason). It's also amazing in the Burn matchup because it helps race them (and does a pretty good job at it too, I might add).
2. Temple is actually more of a mid-game thing which helps setup the transition to the lategame by fixing draws on critical turns where it's essential to not run out of Rack gas, get said Rack after having had gas or dig for removal. It's obviously far from a 100% topdeck fixer but it helps a lot. There is a lot of skill into reading which these turns are and playing in accordingly. I find it not a "great topdeck" but rather something I want to have in my hand for when I feel the aforementioned need to. I will mullingan a hand with one land that's just the Temple and I think people who consider playing that sort of thing should be ready to aggressively mulligan. That being said, I'm not happy it's a tapland and I'm not going to say it didn't cause hiccups in matches where I needed to be faster. Which transitions to:
3. It depends on what you're facing, really. Against Burn I knew I needed to be fast, because discard doesn't protect against topdecks and I have no lifegain, so I went into that matchup with the plan to race them. It's also a viable mode against Junk because their lifegain is limited and if you can discard it, then you are free to race. That being said, I actually like beating them in the midgame just before they start to grind with Tasigur. Essentially, with this BR build you can be fast or controlling depending on what you need to be doing at the time. Read the opponent and the matchup and play accordingly. At least for you I know you are skilled do that, unlike... let's not get into that.
4. I wouldn't run more removal. I had the option to completely ditch the Wrenches and go for 2 more Cuts (which, post-ban, is the most powerful delve card in Modern... anyway) but I chose not to. And not just because I feel the need for BLightning 5 and 6. I just never needed it and I ran into 3 Junk decks. Don't forget that Liliana is a removal spell too, and a recurring one. The maindeck Anger helped me with the Lingering Souls and by alternating Lili-Cut-Lili, buying her time to get back up to 2 loyalty, the removal was more than enough (of course, Bolts are also amazing, although in that matchup they go mostly to the face). If you're wondering why it's Anger instead of Pyroclasm - Zoo.
5. Mogis is indeed awesome. I wanted a Rack effect that didn't die to Junk's removal and general artifact hate in the meta, so Mogis was perfect for that. I find that in 90% of the matches the Racks get dealt with relatively easy, so having one that doesn't die was great. Another reason to play him was that I wasn't satisfied with just 8 Racks (which some people suggested actually cutting... crazy stuff if it's your only win con) and you'd be surprised how going from 8 to 9 really makes you see one way more consistently. Obviously at 4 cmc with just the 22 lands, trying to play more than one of him is suicide. As far as board states go, you can play him into anything as long as you're not dying on board. I personally want him to do 2 damage because it's a realiabl and relatively fast clock (as long as it isn't the only source of damage for the entire game, at which point you are likely losing it if that's the case) and I'm always happy if people decide to sac creatures. It's super relevant in the Junk matchup, because they almost always sac their Lingering Tokens, which are more or less the only thing I'm afraid of (because Souls > Liliana).
what i like most of the red splash, besides the fact that 4x of the usual removal can go to the face, is the rakdos charm in the sideboard. it handles almost everything this deck has difficulties against: grave hate for either combo, goyfs or dredge, stray chalices removal (or jeskai combo hate), twin hate.
from the top of my head, this red splash makes the first game vs burn more difficult (arguably: it has more burn as well, resulting in perhaps quicker clock) but that should be fixed after g1, maybe with the nyxathid innovation from the side.
it might have difficulties vs zoo and affinity because of the early aggro and no bridges (and still arguably, the stock list depends on a bridge draw and having the opponent not drawing removal for artifact, often with said removal in the main deck), but it has more removal to deal with it.
against white leyline the only answer it has, compared to the stock list, is 2x waste not and lilianas for discard. not exactly wonderful.
please keep in mind that this is just brainstorming, and i hope some more experienced rack players than me can use the input. i like where this is going with the red splash.
Also the other problems you have listed are non-existent if you know how to play the deck. Game 1 against Burn is in fact easier - 8Rack has always been capable of matching Burn's speed, the problem there has been the reliability with which we can output our damage. Bolts and Blightning fix that to a great extent and the deck is now actually capable of consistently racing. It also doesn't take too much damage from lands because if you have any sort of experience you'll use a fetch to get the basic mountain first and then avoid taking damage off of lands. There is no room for nyxathid in the side and it would completely defeat the purpose of a "creatureless" build that renders all spot removal moot.
Has absolutely no problem against Zoo or Affinity. You have 10 removal spells and a sweeper maindeck. Bridge is bad against those decks anyway. Leyline is not a problem for a good pilot. Never has been. At best it's mildly annoying.
Did you even look at the deck he posted though? Sometimes shooting people down is the correct response.
I get the sense that you didn't read some of the criticism of the BG Smallpox list that was posted here, or the praise of the BR list that was also posted on this page and the last. The BG list we/I shot down was a mess. It was super removal light, had a messy manabase that didn't actually work with Smallpox, and appears designed for a metagame that doesn't have the Infect/Burn/Affinity prevalence that we see today. Maybe there is a BG build out there that can effectively leverage Smallpox, but that one list was not it.
Then there was Esperino's list which both had results to back it up AND was theoretically well-constructed. It was an interesting take on the BR lists we have seen in this thread with some new tech and strong application of old staples. In fact, I haven't seen anyone criticize any part of that deck in any way that could be interpreted as "shooting [it] down". The only card choice people have challenged is Mogis, which is clearly a techy enough card that it is worth challenging and thinking through in a critical way.
Although I agree with you that this thread has had serious problems with accepting innovation, that is not at all what I am seeing here. In fact, I am seeing quite the opposite; a concentrated effort made by numerous posters to tune, question, and develop the deck towards a competitive format, regardless of old sacred cows.
Also, I'd like to add either/both of your brackets to the spreadsheet. Do you have T8 information for these two events? If you don't have a link you can just report it verbally.
Two things. First being i said i in no way had this deck figured out, and it was a work in progress.
The second being yes, i realize looking at the decklist, it looks terrible. Some do when all written out. My version is more of a suicide approach, built for speed and a quick lock. It doesn't care about its permanents or hand, just incremental advantage. Usually dark confidant or mutavault and smallpox don't mix, people want to build a board state. What I've found with my deck is that if mutavault swings in for even one attack, or Bob gets me an extra card, or attack, or block, or even just eats a removal spell, that's fine by me. It's all just a means to an end. The land count admittedly looks low, and would tossing an extra one in hurt it? Probably not. But it's never been an issue for me. My curve is low, with only the four liliana at three on top, and quite often i don't even find myself needing to land her to win, because the sheer disruption of smallpox with the heavy cheap targeted discard will often lock an opponent out for multiple turns around turn two or three. I think what the issue is is that despite my version and the stock version or similar builds sharing a good amount of the same cards is that it plays quite differently, with the end goal being the same, but people are expecting it to play the same way, which it doesn't.