Hey guys, went back to a more traditional Approach deck (WU) following Pumpmonkey's template, but came into the possession of a Scarab God, so I decided to have some fun and sideboard him in. I added 4 Drowned Catacombs to take advantage of it. Right now the black splash doesn't have any interaction with spells like Fatal Push or Vraska's Contempt because they're too expensive, but I plan on adding some once I can afford them and I'm thinking of adding a couple of Fetid Pools to help smooth out the mana a bit.
I'm thinking of making these changes to my Sideboard, because right now I think it's too messy:
Swap out the Ixalan's Binding and Jace's Defeat for 2 more Negates
Swap out the Azor for another Scarab God (ebay find)
I figure that the Mastermind's Acquisition can fetch an Approach from the Sideboard. The rest of the Sideboard turns the deck into Esper Midrange.
A couple of interesting 5-0 Approach decks posted today.
I've always liked the combination of 4 Opt and 4 Censor. It sacrifices some control elements (less wraths and counters) for more consistent land drops and faster path to Approach game 1. Similar to what Jim Davis ran back in October. . . https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/978629#paper
So, I played standard showdown yesterday and went 2-1, I lost the first round to a R/B aggro deck with bomat, khenra, hazoret, phoenix etc...the works. He got fast starts both games and I got come into play tapped lands and high casting cards in my hand and couldn't recover in time.
The second round I beat a mono-black cycle deck without any problems and the third round I beat a U/B control deck with Scarab god and Kefnet as the only win conditions. At one point in game 2 I had his kefnet under a baffling end and his scarab god under a cast out so he just sat there waiting for me to finish him off. I am testing some new cards in the deck and the sideboard because there is a big tourney at my LGS next weekend and I want to do good there.
As I see it the first game against mono-red or R/B is really dependent on what you draw in your opening hands and how the first 4 turns go, if the opp gets the nuts draw you can't win no matter what you draw, if they get a slower draw then you can stabilize and win. In the second game again you have to draw a good hand and hopefully stabilize before the 5th turn...there's no much to it.
In regards to other decks, the way my deck is bumatchuphould have a good match up against every other deck in the format that is slower than mono-red, if anyone is interested I can post my most recent decklist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"May he who is without mana cast the first spell!"
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
[quote from="xaltair »" url="/forums/the-game/standard-type-2/proven-standard/784306-uw-approach?comment=545"]So, I played standard showdown yesterday and went 2-1, I lost the first round to a R/B aggro deck with bomat, khenra, hazoret, phoenix etc...the works. He got fast starts both games and I got come into play tapped lands and high casting cards in my hand and couldn't recover in time.
The second round I beat a mono-black cycle deck without any problems and the third round I beat a U/B control deck with Scarab god and Kefnet as the only win conditions. At one point in game 2 I had his kefnet under a baffling end and his scarab god under a cast out so he just sat there waiting for me to finish him off. I am testing some new cards in the deck and the sideboard because there is a big tourney at my LGS next weekend and I want to do good there.
As I see it the first game against mono-red or R/B is really dependent on what you draw in your opening hands and how the first 4 turns go, if the opp gets the nuts draw you can't win no matter what you draw, if they get a slower draw then you can stabilize and win. In the second game again you have to draw a good hand and hopefully stabilize before the 5th turn...there's no much to it.
I played in a 34-person PPTQ yesterday, and I'm super stoked to report that I took it down with my current UW Approach build. I'd been testing quite a bit in MTGO leagues (consistently getting 3-2 or 4-1 with one 5-0), and after a number of tweaks, settled on the following list:
There were 6 rounds of swiss, and here is my (admittedly pretty poor) recap of those matchups:
Round 1: GW Tokens
There's something really nice about playing a matchup where you don't worry about opposing counterspells, and just have a legion of 1/1 vamps, kitty cats (Sacred Cat, Adorned Pounder, Pride Sovereign, Regal Caracal), and horses (Crested Sunmare) that you get to Settle/Fumigate at will.
Game 1 was a bit of a grind--he got up to 37+ life, but double approach got me there. The Gidfather did a ton of work here keeping his pouncers at bay and distracting his attackers from me.
I scooped G2 pretty early (turn 6 or so). I was stuck on 3 lands and he had an incredible board and landed a Sunmare after gaining life.
Game 3 he was able to build the board up again, but I had a key Glimmer that netted me a Settle and a Fumigate, and it was a hard lock after that. Win from double approach. Opponent shared with me that he had boarded in a few Gideon's Intervention but he just never saw them--that's pretty much the only way to stop the approach, but it's also manageable (counterspells, Cast Out).
Also, the all-star award goes to Field of Ruin, which took out Adanto's First Fort, Second Fort, and Third Fort (and got one of his duals to help my fixing as well).
One interesting play here: he had a Caracal and a 1/1 Vamp token out and I had Gideon on 3 holding down the fort with Farm//Market in hand. I chose to +1 to neutralize the vamp instead of the Caracal hoping that it would bait him into attacking with the Caracal and it totally worked. 1-0.
Round 2: UB Control
This was a super frustrating matchup, which is too bad because I usually feel pretty favored G1 against UB Control with all their dead cards. I was missing my land drops, he was countering my efforts to hit said land drops through Supreme Will and Glimmer, and he ran away with card advantage via Glint-Sleeve Siphoner and Arguel's Blood Fast. 1-1.
Round 3: UB Control (again)
Redemption time. This time, the matchup fell my way.
G1, I got there with a pretty straightforward double approach.
G2, I got there with a not-at-all-straightfoward double approach with an incredible clutch topdeck. I had 2 approach in hand, and he negated my first with The Scarab God on the battlefield. He's on 2 or 3 cards and I put him on no counterspells, so I go for it. He calmly activates The Scarab God to bring back a Torrential Gearhulk that I had forgotten was in his graveyard, and he negated my approach. This was my only substantial punt of the day (not to say that I didn't have other punts and missed triggers, including several Azcanta scries, but this one almost cost me big).
Well lo and behold, what did I topdeck the very next turn? My third Approach. Sometimes the cards just fall your way. 2-1.
Round 4: UB Midrange
This was a matchup against a friend from my LGS who I consider to be a really really really (really) good player. He won a grindy game 1 that I can't really remember much about. In game 2, he landed a T2 Blood Fast, and I managed to stick a T3 Gideon, which makes Blood Fast way less good. I got a gearhulk down later on and he scooped, moving to G3.
By this point, we had about 9 minutes on the clock, and we played quickly, but he didn't have a ton of creatures and I stuck a Nezahal, which meant that neither of us could get the W. A good battle. 2-1-1.
Round 5: BG Azor's Mastermind
My countermagic doesn't line up well against this deck G1. Essence Scatter is dead, and I rely on Supreme Will to counter some number of spells (although my first choice is impulse mode), but this deck gets a bunch of lands out (Hour of Promise), which makes it much less effective.
G1 he had an Azor's Gateway out and we each had a field of ruin. He attempted to FoR my FoR, and I responded by destroying his only desert--this turned out to be correct because he played Hour of Promise the next turn and wasn't able to get any Zombies from it. But what it meant was that I didn't have a FoR to kill his flipped gateway. He resolved a Vraska, Relic Seeker, and then a couple turns later, tapped his gate for 27 black mana to Mastermind's Acquisition a Torment of Hailfire. I had 2 cards in hand, 1 nonland card in play, and (shockingly) I did not have the 57 life required to survive.
G2 and G3 were much better with Negates, a pair of Forsake the Worldly, and some Caracals in from the board. G2 was pretty straightforward double approach. G3 he had some mana troubles and didn't have the second green to resolve his Carnage Tyrant. He had a Blood Fast going, and I had my legion of kittehs on the board. I had had a Forsake the Worldly in hand for a number of turns, but I was kind of saving it for the gateway, and I was happy to let him continue to Blood Fast himself. When he got down to 8, he activated the Blood Fast, and I forsaked in response. Now he's at 6 and I have 7 damage on board from the cats. 3-1-1.
Round 6: Grixis
I'm sitting at 10 points, which isn't enough for an ID, so my opponent and I are both win-and-in.
For the life of me, I can't remember this matchup very well. I feel favored against Grixis with my counter and removal suite. He played his siphoners and Whirler Virtuosos and Rekindling Phoenixes, but I was able to manage them all with my countermagic and removal. Highlight was when he landed a T2 siphoner and I slash-of-talonsed it the next turn. He said something like, "Huh...didn't know this was even seeing play." And he's right: it's not. But I think it really should be (which is why I played 2 in the main).
Anyway, managed threats, stayed patient until I had 2 approaches in hand, cast one, make him try to take advantage of what he sees as his "opening" to cast The Scarab God and other miscellaneous dudes who will never have a chance to attack, and then approach the next turn. 4-1-1, which is good enough for 7th seed.
Quarterfinals: Grixis
This guy had dropped only one game all day, which was pretty impressive, but I had just come from Grixis so I was in that mindset. He admitted to me beforehand that I was the matchup that he didn't want to face.
This was a matchup that was all about managing my life total and timing out my wraths. He was a very careful player that did not overextend his attacks, which made my settles functionally 1-for-1s, but it's more than that: by not attacking with the squad (in fact, he had a phoenix out that never turned sideways), I'm gaining life each turn even if I don't have the settle.
Minor punt of the day (runner-up punt?): I had scavenger grounds in play and should have activated it on my end step before he could eternalize a Champion of Wits. I eventually did activate it to prevent him from flashing back a spell with Torrential Gearhulk, but doing it earlier would have been better and saved me dealing with a 4/4 and giving him 2 cards.
Double approach G1 and G2, on to the semis.
Semifinals: BR Aggro
And this is the matchup that I didn't want to face. Amazingly, I had avoided aggro decks just about all day, with the exception of GW tokens which is somewhat aggressive.
G1 was a doozy. Bomat, Khenra, Scrapheap Scrounger, the 2/1 that comes in tapped and can recur (can't remember its name)...the works. Farm was good, Slash of Talons was good, wraths were good, Approach was good. He had me down to 1, and after the match, his buddy indicated that he could have won the game (I didn't overhear how). I had approached with Search out, and my scry was to my second approach, so I snuck in the win.
G2 was textbook aggro death by T5. Life total went 20, 19, 18, 12, 6, dead.
G3 he had a really slow start. Land, pass. Land, pass. Land, Crook of Condemnation. These are the aggro matchups we dream about. He resolved a siphoner, I had a slash of talons. He had 2 Phoenixes and a Chandra: I had 2 Cast Out and a Spell Swindle. The answers just lined up perfectly, exactly how a control deck should work. This was like Rocky 4 where Drago seems totally invincible until Rocky draws blood, and then it's all Rocky. G3 I stuck a gearhulk and swung in for 5. This was the first time his life total had changed all game. Got him with beats. On to the finals.
Finals: BG Counters?
This is just my guess what this deck was from sitting next to the guy during the semis. I think he was on the snek, rishkar, ballista deck (which I think I have a good matchup against, but can definitely lead to a blowout on his side). Turns out, he isn't really interested in going to the RPTQ, and that's the reason I signed up. He let me have 9 packs and the invite, and he took home a couple booster boxes.
Parting thoughts
I really liked Gideon as a 1-of. He helps your life total and he can pressure their life total, which is something that can help when you're digging for your Approaches.
Against control, you really want to hold off making your move until you have both approaches in hand. In draw-go, they're waiting for you to tap out to make their move, and that's when to drop the hammer.
I had been playing 3 Field of Ruin and 1 Arch of Orazca, but at the last minute, put in the 4th Field. I think this is correct for a deck that needs double colors to do good stuff (Disallow, Gideon, wraths) and in a meta that includes so many powerful lands.
There are mixed opinions on Opt and Censor. I've used both in various quantities and think there are good things about both. Someone on some board I read called Opt "deck lube" and it's totally right. I love seeing this card in my opening hand and really don't mind it later on when I'm looking for an answer. Also, I think it's strictly better than Hieroglyphic Illumination--if you look to cycle illumination most of the time, you should run Opt because of the scry. If you look to cast illumination, you should run Glimmer for the scry 2.
Slash of Talons is the truth against this meta. So many siphoners and champions of wits have met their grisly end from the talons. Siphoners are a truly powerful card against us--you cannot underestimate the card advantage it provides.
Hour of Revelation wasn't boarded in once. I have it in there for stockpile/drake decks (which I still see occasionally online). I like having it in there.
Spell Swindle is gold. Spell Swindle played off a Gearhulk is even better. I think pumpmonkey pointed this out in an earlier post.
As a side note: I had played UW Approach in 2 PPTQs and a GP last fall and went 2-4, 3-3-1, and 3-x respectively. This was before I decided to plunge into MTGO and do some deliberate practice with the deck. I've concluded that there's really no substitute for getting a ton of reps with a deck (and against other decks so you know the meta) and making small tweaks to see how it makes the deck better/worse.
I played in a 34-person PPTQ yesterday, and I'm super stoked to report that I took it down with my current UW Approach build. I'd been testing quite a bit in MTGO leagues (consistently getting 3-2 or 4-1 with one 5-0), and after a number of tweaks, settled on the following list:
If you test the deck enough and learn it inside and out then you can play it to an unbeatable record in matches easily, also everyone has different kinds of options for the sideboard so play whatever works for you.
Again good job with the deck and explaining the matchups, in my opinion, only Red decks are dangerous enough to be able to beat us game 1 and maybe game 2 if they get the nuts draw, but all the other decks should not be a problem including other control decks like UB control or Grixis control. We definitely have the upper hand against those decks in game 1 and if we sideboard correctly even in game 2.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"May he who is without mana cast the first spell!"
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
If you test the deck enough and learn it inside and out then you can play it to an unbeatable record in matches easily
I agree that extensive testing is critical to both (1) learn your deck inside and out and (2) understand the metagame and what each deck is trying to do when.
I have to say though that I was very fortunate with my matchups. I only faced one aggro-ish deck in the Swiss (I don't consider GW Tokens to be a super aggro deck in the same way that the BR deck is aggro--it doesn't pressure life total quite as much, and its threats are more manageable (no hasters, no Haz, no Phoenix)). I can stumble with a slow draw and still stabilize against midrange and opposing control (except my match 2 against UW control), but if I have a slow draw against true aggro, chances are they're getting the W.
I think that a UW Approach build that's tuned to address the T1-3 creatures that can give us a tough time (Siphoner is really the biggest one as far as I'm concerned) is in a pretty good spot in this meta. My BR opponent in the semis made a comment about how he didn't really have sideboard hate against UW Approach (I'm guessing duress/doomfall/lost legacy?) because he just hasn't seen it that frequently. That seems pretty consistent with the MTG Goldfish metagame stats, which puts UW Approach at 1.41% of the metagame. I'm guessing that will shift after Dominaria drops with all the goodies for UW Control (not mentioning here because I don't think we're allowed to discuss spoilers here?). For now though, it seems to be a very under-the-radar deck to play. And in what I see as a very midrange meta, (1) having a ton of the right answers (slash, settle, fumigate, cast out) and (2) having no creatures (making their cards dead) is a good place to be.
I'm rambling, but my point is that I got pretty lucky to see the matchups I saw, and I also got pretty lucky in some of the individual games with my topdecks. Preparation is essential, knowing the metagame is essential, but no amount of preparation or knowledge will get me consistent wins over Bomat into Khenra into Crasher into Hazoret (with a couple bolts to the face to boot). I'll win some, sure, but I certainly won't win them all (or even most).
I played in a 34-person PPTQ yesterday, and I'm super stoked to report that I took it down with my current UW Approach build. I'd been testing quite a bit in MTGO leagues (consistently getting 3-2 or 4-1 with one 5-0), and after a number of tweaks, settled on the following list:
There were 6 rounds of swiss, and here is my (admittedly pretty poor) recap of those matchups:
Round 1: GW Tokens
There's something really nice about playing a matchup where you don't worry about opposing counterspells, and just have a legion of 1/1 vamps, kitty cats (Sacred Cat, Adorned Pounder, Pride Sovereign, Regal Caracal), and horses (Crested Sunmare) that you get to Settle/Fumigate at will.
Game 1 was a bit of a grind--he got up to 37+ life, but double approach got me there. The Gidfather did a ton of work here keeping his pouncers at bay and distracting his attackers from me.
I scooped G2 pretty early (turn 6 or so). I was stuck on 3 lands and he had an incredible board and landed a Sunmare after gaining life.
Game 3 he was able to build the board up again, but I had a key Glimmer that netted me a Settle and a Fumigate, and it was a hard lock after that. Win from double approach. Opponent shared with me that he had boarded in a few Gideon's Intervention but he just never saw them--that's pretty much the only way to stop the approach, but it's also manageable (counterspells, Cast Out).
Also, the all-star award goes to Field of Ruin, which took out Adanto's First Fort, Second Fort, and Third Fort (and got one of his duals to help my fixing as well).
One interesting play here: he had a Caracal and a 1/1 Vamp token out and I had Gideon on 3 holding down the fort with Farm//Market in hand. I chose to +1 to neutralize the vamp instead of the Caracal hoping that it would bait him into attacking with the Caracal and it totally worked. 1-0.
Round 2: UB Control
This was a super frustrating matchup, which is too bad because I usually feel pretty favored G1 against UB Control with all their dead cards. I was missing my land drops, he was countering my efforts to hit said land drops through Supreme Will and Glimmer, and he ran away with card advantage via Glint-Sleeve Siphoner and Arguel's Blood Fast. 1-1.
Round 3: UB Control (again)
Redemption time. This time, the matchup fell my way.
G1, I got there with a pretty straightforward double approach.
G2, I got there with a not-at-all-straightfoward double approach with an incredible clutch topdeck. I had 2 approach in hand, and he negated my first with The Scarab God on the battlefield. He's on 2 or 3 cards and I put him on no counterspells, so I go for it. He calmly activates The Scarab God to bring back a Torrential Gearhulk that I had forgotten was in his graveyard, and he negated my approach. This was my only substantial punt of the day (not to say that I didn't have other punts and missed triggers, including several Azcanta scries, but this one almost cost me big).
Well lo and behold, what did I topdeck the very next turn? My third Approach. Sometimes the cards just fall your way. 2-1.
Round 4: UB Midrange
This was a matchup against a friend from my LGS who I consider to be a really really really (really) good player. He won a grindy game 1 that I can't really remember much about. In game 2, he landed a T2 Blood Fast, and I managed to stick a T3 Gideon, which makes Blood Fast way less good. I got a gearhulk down later on and he scooped, moving to G3.
By this point, we had about 9 minutes on the clock, and we played quickly, but he didn't have a ton of creatures and I stuck a Nezahal, which meant that neither of us could get the W. A good battle. 2-1-1.
Round 5: BG Azor's Mastermind
My countermagic doesn't line up well against this deck G1. Essence Scatter is dead, and I rely on Supreme Will to counter some number of spells (although my first choice is impulse mode), but this deck gets a bunch of lands out (Hour of Promise), which makes it much less effective.
G1 he had an Azor's Gateway out and we each had a field of ruin. He attempted to FoR my FoR, and I responded by destroying his only desert--this turned out to be correct because he played Hour of Promise the next turn and wasn't able to get any Zombies from it. But what it meant was that I didn't have a FoR to kill his flipped gateway. He resolved a Vraska, Relic Seeker, and then a couple turns later, tapped his gate for 27 black mana to Mastermind's Acquisition a Torment of Hailfire. I had 2 cards in hand, 1 nonland card in play, and (shockingly) I did not have the 57 life required to survive.
G2 and G3 were much better with Negates, a pair of Forsake the Worldly, and some Caracals in from the board. G2 was pretty straightforward double approach. G3 he had some mana troubles and didn't have the second green to resolve his Carnage Tyrant. He had a Blood Fast going, and I had my legion of kittehs on the board. I had had a Forsake the Worldly in hand for a number of turns, but I was kind of saving it for the gateway, and I was happy to let him continue to Blood Fast himself. When he got down to 8, he activated the Blood Fast, and I forsaked in response. Now he's at 6 and I have 7 damage on board from the cats. 3-1-1.
Round 6: Grixis
I'm sitting at 10 points, which isn't enough for an ID, so my opponent and I are both win-and-in.
For the life of me, I can't remember this matchup very well. I feel favored against Grixis with my counter and removal suite. He played his siphoners and Whirler Virtuosos and Rekindling Phoenixes, but I was able to manage them all with my countermagic and removal. Highlight was when he landed a T2 siphoner and I slash-of-talonsed it the next turn. He said something like, "Huh...didn't know this was even seeing play." And he's right: it's not. But I think it really should be (which is why I played 2 in the main).
Anyway, managed threats, stayed patient until I had 2 approaches in hand, cast one, make him try to take advantage of what he sees as his "opening" to cast The Scarab God and other miscellaneous dudes who will never have a chance to attack, and then approach the next turn. 4-1-1, which is good enough for 7th seed.
Quarterfinals: Grixis
This guy had dropped only one game all day, which was pretty impressive, but I had just come from Grixis so I was in that mindset. He admitted to me beforehand that I was the matchup that he didn't want to face.
This was a matchup that was all about managing my life total and timing out my wraths. He was a very careful player that did not overextend his attacks, which made my settles functionally 1-for-1s, but it's more than that: by not attacking with the squad (in fact, he had a phoenix out that never turned sideways), I'm gaining life each turn even if I don't have the settle.
Minor punt of the day (runner-up punt?): I had scavenger grounds in play and should have activated it on my end step before he could eternalize a Champion of Wits. I eventually did activate it to prevent him from flashing back a spell with Torrential Gearhulk, but doing it earlier would have been better and saved me dealing with a 4/4 and giving him 2 cards.
Double approach G1 and G2, on to the semis.
Semifinals: BR Aggro
And this is the matchup that I didn't want to face. Amazingly, I had avoided aggro decks just about all day, with the exception of GW tokens which is somewhat aggressive.
G1 was a doozy. Bomat, Khenra, Scrapheap Scrounger, the 2/1 that comes in tapped and can recur (can't remember its name)...the works. Farm was good, Slash of Talons was good, wraths were good, Approach was good. He had me down to 1, and after the match, his buddy indicated that he could have won the game (I didn't overhear how). I had approached with Search out, and my scry was to my second approach, so I snuck in the win.
G2 was textbook aggro death by T5. Life total went 20, 19, 18, 12, 6, dead.
G3 he had a really slow start. Land, pass. Land, pass. Land, Crook of Condemnation. These are the aggro matchups we dream about. He resolved a siphoner, I had a slash of talons. He had 2 Phoenixes and a Chandra: I had 2 Cast Out and a Spell Swindle. The answers just lined up perfectly, exactly how a control deck should work. This was like Rocky 4 where Drago seems totally invincible until Rocky draws blood, and then it's all Rocky. G3 I stuck a gearhulk and swung in for 5. This was the first time his life total had changed all game. Got him with beats. On to the finals.
Finals: BG Counters?
This is just my guess what this deck was from sitting next to the guy during the semis. I think he was on the snek, rishkar, ballista deck (which I think I have a good matchup against, but can definitely lead to a blowout on his side). Turns out, he isn't really interested in going to the RPTQ, and that's the reason I signed up. He let me have 9 packs and the invite, and he took home a couple booster boxes.
Parting thoughts
I really liked Gideon as a 1-of. He helps your life total and he can pressure their life total, which is something that can help when you're digging for your Approaches.
Against control, you really want to hold off making your move until you have both approaches in hand. In draw-go, they're waiting for you to tap out to make their move, and that's when to drop the hammer.
I had been playing 3 Field of Ruin and 1 Arch of Orazca, but at the last minute, put in the 4th Field. I think this is correct for a deck that needs double colors to do good stuff (Disallow, Gideon, wraths) and in a meta that includes so many powerful lands.
There are mixed opinions on Opt and Censor. I've used both in various quantities and think there are good things about both. Someone on some board I read called Opt "deck lube" and it's totally right. I love seeing this card in my opening hand and really don't mind it later on when I'm looking for an answer. Also, I think it's strictly better than Hieroglyphic Illumination--if you look to cycle illumination most of the time, you should run Opt because of the scry. If you look to cast illumination, you should run Glimmer for the scry 2.
Slash of Talons is the truth against this meta. So many siphoners and champions of wits have met their grisly end from the talons. Siphoners are a truly powerful card against us--you cannot underestimate the card advantage it provides.
Hour of Revelation wasn't boarded in once. I have it in there for stockpile/drake decks (which I still see occasionally online). I like having it in there.
Spell Swindle is gold. Spell Swindle played off a Gearhulk is even better. I think pumpmonkey pointed this out in an earlier post.
As a side note: I had played UW Approach in 2 PPTQs and a GP last fall and went 2-4, 3-3-1, and 3-x respectively. This was before I decided to plunge into MTGO and do some deliberate practice with the deck. I've concluded that there's really no substitute for getting a ton of reps with a deck (and against other decks so you know the meta) and making small tweaks to see how it makes the deck better/worse.
codaddy; Congrats on the great result! Thanks for taking the time to make that excellent summary. An interesting build! All the familiar cards are there but the counts are a bit unique. 3 Glimmer of Genius, 2 Slash of Talons!?
codaddy; Congrats on the great result! Thanks for taking the time to make that excellent summary. An interesting build! All the familiar cards are there but the counts are a bit unique. 3 Glimmer of Genius, 2 Slash of Talons!?
Well done!
Thanks for reading! My preference is to use Supreme Will for impulse mode (I really don't like countering things with it and will only use it as a counter if it's something really gnarly), so having only 3 Glimmer along with the Opts and Searches is usually enough to find what I need.
Until Glint-Sleeve rotates out, Slash is so good. That's midrange's signature turn-2 play (or in the BG or Sultai explore build, Merfolk Branchwalker is pretty common too), and the great thing about Slash on the play is you can let their T2 dude resolve, slash it on T3 attacks, and still have mana up to Essence Scatter their next dude. I'd seen it as sideboard tech in some UW builds, but testing it a bunch in the main convinced me that it's worth a couple mainboard slots. There's a flash enchantment in the next set that has potential (hope that's vague enough to discuss here), but 1-mana instant-speed removal is a good thing.
Until Glint-Sleeve rotates out, Slash is so good. That's midrange's signature turn-2 play (or in the BG or Sultai explore build, Merfolk Branchwalker is pretty common too), and the great thing about Slash on the play is you can let their T2 dude resolve, slash it on T3 attacks, and still have mana up to Essence Scatter their next dude. I'd seen it as sideboard tech in some UW builds, but testing it a bunch in the main convinced me that it's worth a couple mainboard slots. There's a flash enchantment in the next set that has potential (hope that's vague enough to discuss here), but 1-mana instant-speed removal is a good thing.
I tested slash last December and it just didn't cut it, I was playing 3 main deck and I wasn't drawing them in the first 2-3 turns, and basically, after turn 3 they are pretty much useless. The other issue is that while they hit a lot of the mono-red creatures (ahn crop, khenra, bomat, scrapheap scounger etc...) and also Siphoner they don't do much against a lot of the playable green creatures such as jadelight ranger and deathgorge scavenger or thrashing brontodon and with all the green decks running around that's unacceptable.
Due to this situation I have decided to play four Baffling End main deck and so far it has worked great for me, especially against monored or R/B decks since they cannot get rid of it once it hits play and it does take out a lot of their main creatures, it is also good against green decks since it takes out all the aforementioned creatures above since they're all 3 mana casting cost.
On top of that, it hits random 3 casting cost creatures that opponents might play such as kefnet, rhonas, etc...which are all good creatures to get rid off and you can't kill with slash. Of course it's better to baffling end khenras and scrounger rather than just killing them and putting them in the graveyard since they will come back later.
So, the main changes in the deck is playing 2 Torrential Gearhulk which is the first time playing this card, the reason is very simple. I opened one from winning a Standard Showdown pack and then I checked its price and noted they are only about $10 a piece now so I bought the second one to play in this deck. They have been great so far and they're also the reason why I'm playing 1 commit // memory in the deck as well, to take full advantage of the gearhulks.
In case you're wondering why no nezahal in the sideboard it's because I don't need it, I am running all the cheap casting cost creatures which will come out way before Nezahal will and if my opp is playing it then I can deal with it by using cast out, ixalan's binding, settle or fumigate so I don't need my own Nezahal since I can race other control decks with my creatures and beat them that way.
I tested slash last December and it just didn't cut it, I was playing 3 main deck and I wasn't drawing them in the first 2-3 turns, and basically, after turn 3 they are pretty much useless. The other issue is that while they hit a lot of the mono-red creatures (ahn crop, khenra, bomat, scrapheap scounger etc...) and also Siphoner they don't do much against a lot of the playable green creatures such as jadelight ranger and deathgorge scavenger or thrashing brontodon and with all the green decks running around that's unacceptable.
It may be a meta call, but it seems to be Glint-Sleeve Siphoner land out there right now. I don't find Slash to be terrible even late because opponents often have to rebuild with the little guys after a settle or fumigate. I don't mind missing Jadelight because I often get to slash their Branchwalker and then use an Essence Scatter on the Jadelight. (Also worth noting that Slash does hit Deathgorge Scavenger--you just have to cast it in response to the Scavenger's trigger on the stack...Slash will resolve doing 2 damage and the dino will die before it gets +1/+1).
I think that a UW Approach build that's tuned to address the T1-3 creatures that can give us a tough time (Siphoner is really the biggest one as far as I'm concerned) is in a pretty good spot in this meta. My BR opponent in the semis made a comment about how he didn't really have sideboard hate against UW Approach (I'm guessing duress/doomfall/lost legacy?) because he just hasn't seen it that frequently. That seems pretty consistent with the MTG Goldfish metagame stats, which puts UW Approach at 1.41% of the metagame. I'm guessing that will shift after Dominaria drops with all the goodies for UW Control (not mentioning here because I don't think we're allowed to discuss spoilers here?). For now though, it seems to be a very under-the-radar deck to play. And in what I see as a very midrange meta, (1) having a ton of the right answers (slash, settle, fumigate, cast out) and (2) having no creatures (making their cards dead) is a good place to be.
I hope it's not too off-topic, but there is a ton of literature about cognitive biases (Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow is the one most have heard of or read), and it's interesting to see how it plays out in competitive MTG. For example, here: UW Approach doesn't put up a ton of top-10 results, doesn't show up on the Pro Tour, and doesn't feature in articles from pros about the top decks. The competitive MTG community understands that to mean it's not a good deck for competitive events, and thus it is underrepresented at those events because people gravitate to the decks that have been putting up results (Grixis energy, UB control, UB midrange, RG monsters) thinking they are the "stronger" or "better" deck. But by the very nature of more people playing those "stronger" decks, there is a higher likelihood that those decks will put up results, and a lower likelihood that UW Approach will put up results. Taken to one extreme, in a field comprising 100% decks playing mono-W vanilla creatures, a mono-W vanilla creature deck will be the top deck (8 spots in top-8 and the tournament winner). Pre-ban, when the field was 25% Temur Energy and 25% RamRed, there is a very high likelihood that those decks would be the top-performing decks just by virtue of the vast number of people playing them.
This is a longwinded way of saying that I (obviously) think UW Approach is a great deck, I think it has great game against just about every deck in the meta, and it only helps that it's underrepresented at tournaments because other players aren't ready for it.
Obviously, I agree with you and also just to add more info out of the 10 decks only 2 decks are not aggro/beatdown decks, the Ramp deck at number 7 and the U/B control deck at number 4 is the only other control deck. All the other 8 decks are creature beatdown decks which are as we all know much easier to play and win with than straight up control decks.
I have seen many people screw up games even with Grixis decks which are semi control although they run 15-16 creatures which kind of makes them a beatdown deck instead. So, because of this reason most people will not play U/W approach straight up control because it's not easy to pilot and win consistently and you have to make a lot of difficult decisions in every matchup.
It's also the reason why people that did try to play the deck and they lost a few times gave up on it or tried to fit in a 3rd color to improve their so-called matchups with using red for burn or black for removal when the straight up U/W is enough to deal with all the other decks in the format.
I also agree that Dominaria packs some goodies for us and can't wait until the set is out, or at least all the cards are spoiled to discuss some of the possible deck inclusions from the new set just as I did when Ixalan and Rivals came out.
May your sun rise twice in every game!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"May he who is without mana cast the first spell!"
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
Obviously, I agree with you and also just to add more info out of the 10 decks only 2 decks are not aggro/beatdown decks, the Ramp deck at number 7 and the U/B control deck at number 4 is the only other control deck. All the other 8 decks are creature beatdown decks which are as we all know much easier to play and win with than straight up control decks.
I have seen many people screw up games even with Grixis decks which are semi control although they run 15-16 creatures which kind of makes them a beatdown deck instead. So, because of this reason most people will not play U/W approach straight up control because it's not easy to pilot and win consistently and you have to make a lot of difficult decisions in every matchup.
It's also the reason why people that did try to play the deck and they lost a few times gave up on it or tried to fit in a 3rd color to improve their so-called matchups with using red for burn or black for removal when the straight up U/W is enough to deal with all the other decks in the format.
I also agree that Dominaria packs some goodies for us and can't wait until the set is out, or at least all the cards are spoiled to discuss some of the possible deck inclusions from the new set just as I did when Ixalan and Rivals came out.
May your sun rise twice in every game!
Dude, dont assume because people add a third color that they are bad with the deck, <you arrogant ********.> What you are saying is the same reason you run 8 to 12 creatures main deck. Because you are too weak of a control player to play control proper.
Please critique the ideas, (which you did to an extent, however what I highlighted in red is not ok) not the person. Thanks! -- lugger
I think that a UW Approach build that's tuned to address the T1-3 creatures that can give us a tough time (Siphoner is really the biggest one as far as I'm concerned) is in a pretty good spot in this meta. My BR opponent in the semis made a comment about how he didn't really have sideboard hate against UW Approach (I'm guessing duress/doomfall/lost legacy?) because he just hasn't seen it that frequently. That seems pretty consistent with the MTG Goldfish metagame stats, which puts UW Approach at 1.41% of the metagame. I'm guessing that will shift after Dominaria drops with all the goodies for UW Control (not mentioning here because I don't think we're allowed to discuss spoilers here?). For now though, it seems to be a very under-the-radar deck to play. And in what I see as a very midrange meta, (1) having a ton of the right answers (slash, settle, fumigate, cast out) and (2) having no creatures (making their cards dead) is a good place to be.
I hope it's not too off-topic, but there is a ton of literature about cognitive biases (Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow is the one most have heard of or read), and it's interesting to see how it plays out in competitive MTG. For example, here: UW Approach doesn't put up a ton of top-10 results, doesn't show up on the Pro Tour, and doesn't feature in articles from pros about the top decks. The competitive MTG community understands that to mean it's not a good deck for competitive events, and thus it is underrepresented at those events because people gravitate to the decks that have been putting up results (Grixis energy, UB control, UB midrange, RG monsters) thinking they are the "stronger" or "better" deck. But by the very nature of more people playing those "stronger" decks, there is a higher likelihood that those decks will put up results, and a lower likelihood that UW Approach will put up results. Taken to one extreme, in a field comprising 100% decks playing mono-W vanilla creatures, a mono-W vanilla creature deck will be the top deck (8 spots in top-8 and the tournament winner). Pre-ban, when the field was 25% Temur Energy and 25% RamRed, there is a very high likelihood that those decks would be the top-performing decks just by virtue of the vast number of people playing them.
This is a longwinded way of saying that I (obviously) think UW Approach is a great deck, I think it has great game against just about every deck in the meta, and it only helps that it's underrepresented at tournaments because other players aren't ready for it.
I tend to think the community will eventually figure out what the stronger decks are and those will get the most play. As a result, the best decks will ultimately be reflected in the meta-game percentages. I think UW Approach has two fundamental weaknesses: lack of ability to interact with resolved creature(s) early and post-board UB hate in the form of Duress, Gonti, Lord of Luxury, Doomfall, and Negate. I think Eric Froehlich referred to this as a "post-board horror show." Maybe over-stated but funny.
The two weaknesses reinforce each other; the lack of early interaction can leave the board in a sub-optimal state and we need a wrath to clean it up. If that gets negated or discarded at a key time it's a pretty big blow. UB Control is less sensitive to this because their board is in a better state because of Fatal Push and Moment of Craving.
The last major event win for Approach that I can remember is November's Atlanta GP with Alex Lloyd's Esper Approach. He went Esper to help with the early interaction problem. I think Black might help with the discard hate as well because those cards become available to us. I hope to test that on MTGO this week.
That said, you and pumpmonkey have gotten great results with UW Approach and it has consistently posted periodic 5-0 results on Competitive MTGO.
I'll take UW or Esper Approach to the Seattle GP next month!
Well said Hobbits, the choice between UW and UWx comes down to play style. I keep going back and forth between UW and Esper, not sure which I like the most or is the strongest. With Isolated Chapel being reprinted in Dominaria (I think I can say that because WotC 'spoiled' what the next set was going to be already) it will make the Esper mana base smoother. But there are some good looking UW cards in that set also. So we will see.
I like the fact that Approach has fallen off everyone's radar. Means there is a little less sideboard hate or in some cases mainboard hate, out there. GP Memphis showed me that UW Approach has a good match up against all the top decks right now. If I drew a decent hand and made my land drops, I felt like I was favored in every game. The biggest issue was if I didn't do both of those, the deck folded to itself and I sat there while getting my face beat in. That is the main reason I have been running Opt over Censor since then. It really seems to help smooth out the draws and I have fewer games where the deck just folds. Not 100% sold on it yet but still testing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
Currently Playing UW UW Control/Miracles R Skred Red
@pumpmonkey: I went back and forth on Opt vs. Censor as well, and I'm enjoying how Opt has played. I think it allows you to get away with playing 25 lands, although (as you correctly point out), the deck can be its own worst enemy if you miss land drops. Hitting drops 1-5 seems pretty critical in most matchups, so running 26 might even be correct, it's just hard to decide what to cut.
@pumpmonkey: I went back and forth on Opt vs. Censor as well, and I'm enjoying how Opt has played. I think it allows you to get away with playing 25 lands, although (as you correctly point out), the deck can be its own worst enemy if you miss land drops. Hitting drops 1-5 seems pretty critical in most matchups, so running 26 might even be correct, it's just hard to decide what to cut.
After going to 26 lands and 4x Approach, I have very little trouble going turn 7 First Sun Approaches. Baffling End has also been helpflu, not as a turn 2 play per se, but as a mid game speed bump and stabilizer. And a pair of Pull from Tomorrow for the times that I do miss a turn 7 Approach.
So, Sunday I played a relatively big tourney with 17 people and 4 rounds. Unfortunately I went 2-2 and came 7th and they only did top 4 going forward so I would've needed a 3-1 record to make top 4.
Here's a quick report:
Round 1 was versus a U/B control deck without The Scarab God so I managed to approach twice both games and won 2-0 rather easily.
Round 2 was versus a U/W/G ramp approach deck which can make zombie tokens to win with but after sideboard, he brings in Nezahal and Regal Caracal. I won game 1 by Approaching twice. Game 2 was won by him on the back of a Nezahal which I couldn't get rid off due to him discarding 3 cards twice to exile it when I tried to kill it. In Game 3 he brought in Carnage Tyrant as well and I risked an Approach for the first time, but the next turn he cast Carnage Tyrant and he already had Nezahal out, I needed to draw another approach in the next turn or a fumigate or something to wipe the board but I didn't so I lost game 3 to Nezahal and Carnage Tyrant. I can't say much, he was a good player and knew exactly what creatures my deck can't deal with.
Round 3 was versus a R/G/U energy deck with phoenix, glorybringer, whirler virtuoso and team and I won both games by casting Approach twice and taking care of his threats on time.
Round 4 was versus R/B aggro which was running Ammit Eternal main, and I lost both games because he got good draws and I didn't draw a single Baffling End both games, I was forced to wait until 4 mana for settle in both games, and in the second game Sunscourge Champion kept me alive for a few rounds, but for some reason I still couldn't draw a baffling end to exile some of his creatures and he beat me down with hazoret, phoenix, khenra etc... it is a very bad match-up because his whole deck was just threats and I just didn't have enough answers.
So, the result was 2-2, I should've beat the Ramp Approach deck but couldn't deal with both Carnage Tyrant and Nezahal on the board at the same time and against the R/B deck there's not much you can do, you need to drop baffling end on turn 2 or 3 to exile something and then you still need to draw creature kill cards to kill something every turn otherwise you are dead. It's like a lottery, if he draws the nuts then you can't win at all pretty much unless you draw a hand of 3 lands and 3 baffling ends and 1 settle, but most likely he would duress first turn or second turn and you'd lose the settle anyways...also him running Ammit Eternal main deck was a surprise and he hit me for 5 for a couple of turns since I couldn't draw the baffling ends.
I will be giving this deck a rest for the next 2-3 weeks or maybe even wait until Dominaria is out in a month and see how the metagame changes with the new cards, I know our deck will be getting some juicy goodies from that set.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"May he who is without mana cast the first spell!"
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
So, Sunday I played a relatively big tourney with 17 people and 4 rounds. Unfortunately I went 2-2 and came 7th and they only did top 4 going forward so I would've needed a 3-1 record to make top 4.
Here's a quick report:
Round 1 was versus a U/B control deck without The Scarab God so I managed to approach twice both games and won 2-0 rather easily.
Round 2 was versus a U/W/G ramp approach deck which can make zombie tokens to win with but after sideboard, he brings in Nezahal and Regal Caracal. I won game 1 by Approaching twice. Game 2 was won by him on the back of a Nezahal which I couldn't get rid off due to him discarding 3 cards twice to exile it when I tried to kill it. In Game 3 he brought in Carnage Tyrant as well and I risked an Approach for the first time, but the next turn he cast Carnage Tyrant and he already had Nezahal out, I needed to draw another approach in the next turn or a fumigate or something to wipe the board but I didn't so I lost game 3 to Nezahal and Carnage Tyrant. I can't say much, he was a good player and knew exactly what creatures my deck can't deal with.
Round 3 was versus a R/G/U energy deck with phoenix, glorybringer, whirler virtuoso and team and I won both games by casting Approach twice and taking care of his threats on time.
Round 4 was versus R/B aggro which was running Ammit Eternal main, and I lost both games because he got good draws and I didn't draw a single Baffling End both games, I was forced to wait until 4 mana for settle in both games, and in the second game Sunscourge Champion kept me alive for a few rounds, but for some reason I still couldn't draw a baffling end to exile some of his creatures and he beat me down with hazoret, phoenix, khenra etc... it is a very bad match-up because his whole deck was just threats and I just didn't have enough answers.
So, the result was 2-2, I should've beat the Ramp Approach deck but couldn't deal with both Carnage Tyrant and Nezahal on the board at the same time and against the R/B deck there's not much you can do, you need to drop baffling end on turn 2 or 3 to exile something and then you still need to draw creature kill cards to kill something every turn otherwise you are dead. It's like a lottery, if he draws the nuts then you can't win at all pretty much unless you draw a hand of 3 lands and 3 baffling ends and 1 settle, but most likely he would duress first turn or second turn and you'd lose the settle anyways...also him running Ammit Eternal main deck was a surprise and he hit me for 5 for a couple of turns since I couldn't draw the baffling ends.
I will be giving this deck a rest for the next 2-3 weeks or maybe even wait until Dominaria is out in a month and see how the metagame changes with the new cards, I know our deck will be getting some juicy goodies from that set.
I don't know what list you were running, but if it was the list on the last page, it seems like Regal Caracal is a sideboard card you should reconsider. Opponents definitely expect it, but it is so critical for stabilizing against creature-heavy matchups, which seem to be the ones that you struggled against. Even if they contempt the Caracal, you still have 2 lifelinking bodies that can chump their dudes which can buy you a turn or two against Ammits, Nezahals, etc. Sunscourge Champion comes down 2 turns earlier, but it's just as vulnerable to contempt as the Caracal, and it doesn't leave bodies behind. And the times when you can cast back-to-back cats happen more often than you might think, and it's really tough for opponents to deal with a swarm of 3/3 lifelinking kittehs.
I'm also pretty low on Baffling End at this point. Being sorcery-speed makes it so much worse than something like Slash of Talons or even Aether Meltdown (which I'm experimenting with online...not quite sold on it, but it's not terrible either), and the fact that it can't hit the dudes that are really troublesome (Haz, Phoenix, Carnie) really limits its utility.
I've been finding that my post-board matchups with U-based control often look like a race to Nezahal, and the first to cast Nezzie is usually the winner. I wish she had trample, but she's really very good. I like to think when I tap 7 to cast her, my opponent is all ready to cast Negate on an Approach, and that they get really disappointed when they see the 7/7.
So, Sunday I played a relatively big tourney with 17 people and 4 rounds. Unfortunately I went 2-2 and came 7th and they only did top 4 going forward so I would've needed a 3-1 record to make top 4.
Here's a quick report:
Round 1 was versus a U/B control deck without The Scarab God so I managed to approach twice both games and won 2-0 rather easily.
Round 2 was versus a U/W/G ramp approach deck which can make zombie tokens to win with but after sideboard, he brings in Nezahal and Regal Caracal. I won game 1 by Approaching twice. Game 2 was won by him on the back of a Nezahal which I couldn't get rid off due to him discarding 3 cards twice to exile it when I tried to kill it. In Game 3 he brought in Carnage Tyrant as well and I risked an Approach for the first time, but the next turn he cast Carnage Tyrant and he already had Nezahal out, I needed to draw another approach in the next turn or a fumigate or something to wipe the board but I didn't so I lost game 3 to Nezahal and Carnage Tyrant. I can't say much, he was a good player and knew exactly what creatures my deck can't deal with.
Round 3 was versus a R/G/U energy deck with phoenix, glorybringer, whirler virtuoso and team and I won both games by casting Approach twice and taking care of his threats on time.
Round 4 was versus R/B aggro which was running Ammit Eternal main, and I lost both games because he got good draws and I didn't draw a single Baffling End both games, I was forced to wait until 4 mana for settle in both games, and in the second game Sunscourge Champion kept me alive for a few rounds, but for some reason I still couldn't draw a baffling end to exile some of his creatures and he beat me down with hazoret, phoenix, khenra etc... it is a very bad match-up because his whole deck was just threats and I just didn't have enough answers.
So, the result was 2-2, I should've beat the Ramp Approach deck but couldn't deal with both Carnage Tyrant and Nezahal on the board at the same time and against the R/B deck there's not much you can do, you need to drop baffling end on turn 2 or 3 to exile something and then you still need to draw creature kill cards to kill something every turn otherwise you are dead. It's like a lottery, if he draws the nuts then you can't win at all pretty much unless you draw a hand of 3 lands and 3 baffling ends and 1 settle, but most likely he would duress first turn or second turn and you'd lose the settle anyways...also him running Ammit Eternal main deck was a surprise and he hit me for 5 for a couple of turns since I couldn't draw the baffling ends.
I will be giving this deck a rest for the next 2-3 weeks or maybe even wait until Dominaria is out in a month and see how the metagame changes with the new cards, I know our deck will be getting some juicy goodies from that set.
I don't know what list you were running, but if it was the list on the last page, it seems like Regal Caracal is a sideboard card you should reconsider. Opponents definitely expect it, but it is so critical for stabilizing against creature-heavy matchups, which seem to be the ones that you struggled against. Even if they contempt the Caracal, you still have 2 lifelinking bodies that can chump their dudes which can buy you a turn or two against Ammits, Nezahals, etc. Sunscourge Champion comes down 2 turns earlier, but it's just as vulnerable to contempt as the Caracal, and it doesn't leave bodies behind. And the times when you can cast back-to-back cats happen more often than you might think, and it's really tough for opponents to deal with a swarm of 3/3 lifelinking kittehs.
I'm also pretty low on Baffling End at this point. Being sorcery-speed makes it so much worse than something like Slash of Talons or even Aether Meltdown (which I'm experimenting with online...not quite sold on it, but it's not terrible either), and the fact that it can't hit the dudes that are really troublesome (Haz, Phoenix, Carnie) really limits its utility.
I've been finding that my post-board matchups with U-based control often look like a race to Nezahal, and the first to cast Nezzie is usually the winner. I wish she had trample, but she's really very good. I like to think when I tap 7 to cast her, my opponent is all ready to cast Negate on an Approach, and that they get really disappointed when they see the 7/7.
Can you speak some as to your sideboard plan vs. common matchups? I'm just coming back to the game and looking at picking this up since it's up my alley, but am working on figuring out matchups in a meta I'm totally unfamiliar with!
Can you speak some as to your sideboard plan vs. common matchups? I'm just coming back to the game and looking at picking this up since it's up my alley, but am working on figuring out matchups in a meta I'm totally unfamiliar with!
Thanks )
Generally speaking, my plan looks something like this (I confess to being somewhat instinctual with sideboarding--I've tried making notes before hand but find I do better when I go with my gut):
Creature-based aggro decks (RR, BR, UW Cats/Appeal, BW Vamps, UW Auras, UG Merfolk (although haven't played against a merfolk deck in ages...think they're on the decline):
In: Regal Caracal (3).
Out: Search for Azcanta (2), Opt (1), Glimmer of Genius (1)
Caveat: I occasionally bring in some number of negates when playing against B or R decks (if I anticipate Chandra, Duresses, or Lost Legacys boarded in against me) and some number of Forsake the Worldly when playing against W-based decks (to hose their enchantment-based removal and Gideon's Intervention).
UB Control (Grixis control and the mirror are similar):
In: Torrential Gearhulk (3), Negate (3), Jace's Defeat (1), Nezahal (2), Regal Caracal (3)
Out: Slash of Talons (2), Fumigate (3), Farm (1), Essence Scatter (2), Approach (1), Opt (3)
Caveat: I sometimes board Spell Swindle out on the draw, but keep it in on the play (to snag their end-step Glimmers or Gearhulks). I also sometimes board out 2 Approaches on the draw because I'm more likely to have a Lost Legacy go through, and it's great to make them think I only keep 1 in post board so I can then bring one or both back for game 3.
Grixis midrange (other midrange decks are similar):
In: Torrential Gearhulk (3), Jace's Defeat (1), Nezahal (2), Regal Caracal (3)
Out: Approach (1), Opt (3), Search for Azcanta (2), Glimmer (1), Supreme Will (1), Spell Swindle (1)
Similar caveats as above, but for certain midrange decks that use creepy enchantments (Hadana's Climb, I'm looking at you), I may bring in some Forsake the Worldly as well. Running 4 Field of Ruin is helpful against those decks because if they flip it's usually not a huge deal (but Climb gets out of hand very quickly).
Enchantment- and artifact-based shenanigan decks (including UW Drake, BWx Stockpile, Abzan tokens, UW and Esper GPG):
In: Forsake the Worldly (2), Hour of Revelation (1), Negate (3), Torrential Gearhulk (3)
Out: Slash of Talons (2), Farm (1), Search for Azcanta (2), Opt (3), Supreme Will (1)
Caveat: if they include U, Jace's defeat sometimes comes in.
This all being said, I think it's tough to win games 2 and 3 against decks with access to countermagic (U) or disruption (B). I think it's a better strategy to look at Approach as your plan C and aim to win with Gearhulk/Caracal/Nezahal/Gideon beatdowns (plan A) and Ipnu milling as plan B, which is why one, two, or (rarely) three Approaches get boarded out in those matchups.
Hope this is helpful (and if others in the community have suggestions/thoughts, let me know--I'm always looking to improve!)
The Esper Approach list that top 8'ed at the SCG Cincinnati was pretty spicy. 2 counters main and 10 draw spells. I guess it was trying to flip Search as fast as possible. I will have to jam a few games with it online to see, what can I say, I like spicy. And after Domanaria comes out in a few weeks, we get to add Isolated Chapel which will make the mana base pretty smooth.
That list looks pretty interesting. I wonder about consistently hitting double black for the Vraska's Contempt in the sideboard--maybe Hour of Glory if you need extra exile effects? Esper definitely has some good things going for it. I don't have The Scarab Gods online so I haven't built it for testing, but I've always thought a UBw build that splashes white just for Approach might be worth trying.
I feel like Esper is really strong, but with Teferi, Hero of Dominaria and Seal Away coming, not sure if it is needed. And those are just the ones that I have noticed, sure there are more.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
Currently Playing UW UW Control/Miracles R Skred Red
Retired BU Faeries RGW Naya Burn BW B/W Tokens
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
3 Approach of the Second Sun
2 Torrential Gearhulk
1 Gideon of the Trials
1 Metallurgic Summonings
Draw
3 Glimmer of Genius
Counter
3 Censor
3 Essence Scatter
3 Disallow
3 Supreme Will
1 Spell Swindle
Removal
2 Cast Out
1 Ixalan's Binding
1 Gideon's Intervention
1 Farm // Market
3 Settle the Wreckage
3 Fumigate
2 Search for Azcanta
Lands
1 Arch of Orazca
1 Scavenger Grounds
1 Field of Ruin
4 Glacial Fortress
1 Ipnu Rivulet
3 Irrigated Farmland
5 Plains
5 Island
4 Drowned Catacomb
2 Authority of the Consuls
1 Gideon of the Trials
1 Ixalan's Binding
2 Negate
1 Jace's Defeat
1 Dovin Baan
1 Mastermind's Acquisition
3 Regal Caracal
1 The Scarab God
1 Nezahal, Primal Tide
1 Azor, The Lawbringer
Hey guys, went back to a more traditional Approach deck (WU) following Pumpmonkey's template, but came into the possession of a Scarab God, so I decided to have some fun and sideboard him in. I added 4 Drowned Catacombs to take advantage of it. Right now the black splash doesn't have any interaction with spells like Fatal Push or Vraska's Contempt because they're too expensive, but I plan on adding some once I can afford them and I'm thinking of adding a couple of Fetid Pools to help smooth out the mana a bit.
I'm thinking of making these changes to my Sideboard, because right now I think it's too messy:
Swap out the Ixalan's Binding and Jace's Defeat for 2 more Negates
Swap out the Azor for another Scarab God (ebay find)
I figure that the Mastermind's Acquisition can fetch an Approach from the Sideboard. The rest of the Sideboard turns the deck into Esper Midrange.
I've always liked the combination of 4 Opt and 4 Censor. It sacrifices some control elements (less wraths and counters) for more consistent land drops and faster path to Approach game 1. Similar to what Jim Davis ran back in October. . .
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/978629#paper
Mono White enchantment-focused Approach deck:
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/978627#paper
The second round I beat a mono-black cycle deck without any problems and the third round I beat a U/B control deck with Scarab god and Kefnet as the only win conditions. At one point in game 2 I had his kefnet under a baffling end and his scarab god under a cast out so he just sat there waiting for me to finish him off. I am testing some new cards in the deck and the sideboard because there is a big tourney at my LGS next weekend and I want to do good there.
As I see it the first game against mono-red or R/B is really dependent on what you draw in your opening hands and how the first 4 turns go, if the opp gets the nuts draw you can't win no matter what you draw, if they get a slower draw then you can stabilize and win. In the second game again you have to draw a good hand and hopefully stabilize before the 5th turn...there's no much to it.
In regards to other decks, the way my deck is bumatchuphould have a good match up against every other deck in the format that is slower than mono-red, if anyone is interested I can post my most recent decklist.
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
Mtg Lifestyle
The second round I beat a mono-black cycle deck without any problems and the third round I beat a U/B control deck with Scarab god and Kefnet as the only win conditions. At one point in game 2 I had his kefnet under a baffling end and his scarab god under a cast out so he just sat there waiting for me to finish him off. I am testing some new cards in the deck and the sideboard because there is a big tourney at my LGS next weekend and I want to do good there.
As I see it the first game against mono-red or R/B is really dependent on what you draw in your opening hands and how the first 4 turns go, if the opp gets the nuts draw you can't win no matter what you draw, if they get a slower draw then you can stabilize and win. In the second game again you have to draw a good hand and hopefully stabilize before the 5th turn...there's no much to it.
- gudday can u kindly post your deck list. Tnx
4 Glacial Fortress
4 Irrigated Farmland
4 Ipnu Rivulet
4 Field of Ruin
1 Scavenger Grounds
3 Island
5 Plains
Planeswalker (1)
1 Gideon of the Trials
Enchantment (6)
2 Search for Azcanta
4 Cast Out
2 Slash of Talons
3 Opt
3 Essence Scatter
3 Supreme Will
3 Disallow
1 Farm // Market
3 Glimmer of Genius
3 Settle the Wreckage
1 Spell Swindle
Sorcery (6)
3 Fumigate
3 Approach of the Second Sun
3 Negate
1 Jace's Defeat
2 Forsake the Worldly
1 Hour of Revelation
2 Nezahal, Primal Tide
3 Regal Caracal
3 Torrential Gearhulk
There were 6 rounds of swiss, and here is my (admittedly pretty poor) recap of those matchups:
Round 1: GW Tokens
There's something really nice about playing a matchup where you don't worry about opposing counterspells, and just have a legion of 1/1 vamps, kitty cats (Sacred Cat, Adorned Pounder, Pride Sovereign, Regal Caracal), and horses (Crested Sunmare) that you get to Settle/Fumigate at will.
Game 1 was a bit of a grind--he got up to 37+ life, but double approach got me there. The Gidfather did a ton of work here keeping his pouncers at bay and distracting his attackers from me.
I scooped G2 pretty early (turn 6 or so). I was stuck on 3 lands and he had an incredible board and landed a Sunmare after gaining life.
Game 3 he was able to build the board up again, but I had a key Glimmer that netted me a Settle and a Fumigate, and it was a hard lock after that. Win from double approach. Opponent shared with me that he had boarded in a few Gideon's Intervention but he just never saw them--that's pretty much the only way to stop the approach, but it's also manageable (counterspells, Cast Out).
Also, the all-star award goes to Field of Ruin, which took out Adanto's First Fort, Second Fort, and Third Fort (and got one of his duals to help my fixing as well).
One interesting play here: he had a Caracal and a 1/1 Vamp token out and I had Gideon on 3 holding down the fort with Farm//Market in hand. I chose to +1 to neutralize the vamp instead of the Caracal hoping that it would bait him into attacking with the Caracal and it totally worked. 1-0.
Round 2: UB Control
This was a super frustrating matchup, which is too bad because I usually feel pretty favored G1 against UB Control with all their dead cards. I was missing my land drops, he was countering my efforts to hit said land drops through Supreme Will and Glimmer, and he ran away with card advantage via Glint-Sleeve Siphoner and Arguel's Blood Fast. 1-1.
Round 3: UB Control (again)
Redemption time. This time, the matchup fell my way.
G1, I got there with a pretty straightforward double approach.
G2, I got there with a not-at-all-straightfoward double approach with an incredible clutch topdeck. I had 2 approach in hand, and he negated my first with The Scarab God on the battlefield. He's on 2 or 3 cards and I put him on no counterspells, so I go for it. He calmly activates The Scarab God to bring back a Torrential Gearhulk that I had forgotten was in his graveyard, and he negated my approach. This was my only substantial punt of the day (not to say that I didn't have other punts and missed triggers, including several Azcanta scries, but this one almost cost me big).
Well lo and behold, what did I topdeck the very next turn? My third Approach. Sometimes the cards just fall your way. 2-1.
Round 4: UB Midrange
This was a matchup against a friend from my LGS who I consider to be a really really really (really) good player. He won a grindy game 1 that I can't really remember much about. In game 2, he landed a T2 Blood Fast, and I managed to stick a T3 Gideon, which makes Blood Fast way less good. I got a gearhulk down later on and he scooped, moving to G3.
By this point, we had about 9 minutes on the clock, and we played quickly, but he didn't have a ton of creatures and I stuck a Nezahal, which meant that neither of us could get the W. A good battle. 2-1-1.
Round 5: BG Azor's Mastermind
My countermagic doesn't line up well against this deck G1. Essence Scatter is dead, and I rely on Supreme Will to counter some number of spells (although my first choice is impulse mode), but this deck gets a bunch of lands out (Hour of Promise), which makes it much less effective.
G1 he had an Azor's Gateway out and we each had a field of ruin. He attempted to FoR my FoR, and I responded by destroying his only desert--this turned out to be correct because he played Hour of Promise the next turn and wasn't able to get any Zombies from it. But what it meant was that I didn't have a FoR to kill his flipped gateway. He resolved a Vraska, Relic Seeker, and then a couple turns later, tapped his gate for 27 black mana to Mastermind's Acquisition a Torment of Hailfire. I had 2 cards in hand, 1 nonland card in play, and (shockingly) I did not have the 57 life required to survive.
G2 and G3 were much better with Negates, a pair of Forsake the Worldly, and some Caracals in from the board. G2 was pretty straightforward double approach. G3 he had some mana troubles and didn't have the second green to resolve his Carnage Tyrant. He had a Blood Fast going, and I had my legion of kittehs on the board. I had had a Forsake the Worldly in hand for a number of turns, but I was kind of saving it for the gateway, and I was happy to let him continue to Blood Fast himself. When he got down to 8, he activated the Blood Fast, and I forsaked in response. Now he's at 6 and I have 7 damage on board from the cats. 3-1-1.
Round 6: Grixis
I'm sitting at 10 points, which isn't enough for an ID, so my opponent and I are both win-and-in.
For the life of me, I can't remember this matchup very well. I feel favored against Grixis with my counter and removal suite. He played his siphoners and Whirler Virtuosos and Rekindling Phoenixes, but I was able to manage them all with my countermagic and removal. Highlight was when he landed a T2 siphoner and I slash-of-talonsed it the next turn. He said something like, "Huh...didn't know this was even seeing play." And he's right: it's not. But I think it really should be (which is why I played 2 in the main).
Anyway, managed threats, stayed patient until I had 2 approaches in hand, cast one, make him try to take advantage of what he sees as his "opening" to cast The Scarab God and other miscellaneous dudes who will never have a chance to attack, and then approach the next turn. 4-1-1, which is good enough for 7th seed.
Quarterfinals: Grixis
This guy had dropped only one game all day, which was pretty impressive, but I had just come from Grixis so I was in that mindset. He admitted to me beforehand that I was the matchup that he didn't want to face.
This was a matchup that was all about managing my life total and timing out my wraths. He was a very careful player that did not overextend his attacks, which made my settles functionally 1-for-1s, but it's more than that: by not attacking with the squad (in fact, he had a phoenix out that never turned sideways), I'm gaining life each turn even if I don't have the settle.
Minor punt of the day (runner-up punt?): I had scavenger grounds in play and should have activated it on my end step before he could eternalize a Champion of Wits. I eventually did activate it to prevent him from flashing back a spell with Torrential Gearhulk, but doing it earlier would have been better and saved me dealing with a 4/4 and giving him 2 cards.
Double approach G1 and G2, on to the semis.
Semifinals: BR Aggro
And this is the matchup that I didn't want to face. Amazingly, I had avoided aggro decks just about all day, with the exception of GW tokens which is somewhat aggressive.
G1 was a doozy. Bomat, Khenra, Scrapheap Scrounger, the 2/1 that comes in tapped and can recur (can't remember its name)...the works. Farm was good, Slash of Talons was good, wraths were good, Approach was good. He had me down to 1, and after the match, his buddy indicated that he could have won the game (I didn't overhear how). I had approached with Search out, and my scry was to my second approach, so I snuck in the win.
G2 was textbook aggro death by T5. Life total went 20, 19, 18, 12, 6, dead.
G3 he had a really slow start. Land, pass. Land, pass. Land, Crook of Condemnation. These are the aggro matchups we dream about. He resolved a siphoner, I had a slash of talons. He had 2 Phoenixes and a Chandra: I had 2 Cast Out and a Spell Swindle. The answers just lined up perfectly, exactly how a control deck should work. This was like Rocky 4 where Drago seems totally invincible until Rocky draws blood, and then it's all Rocky. G3 I stuck a gearhulk and swung in for 5. This was the first time his life total had changed all game. Got him with beats. On to the finals.
Finals: BG Counters?
This is just my guess what this deck was from sitting next to the guy during the semis. I think he was on the snek, rishkar, ballista deck (which I think I have a good matchup against, but can definitely lead to a blowout on his side). Turns out, he isn't really interested in going to the RPTQ, and that's the reason I signed up. He let me have 9 packs and the invite, and he took home a couple booster boxes.
Parting thoughts
As a side note: I had played UW Approach in 2 PPTQs and a GP last fall and went 2-4, 3-3-1, and 3-x respectively. This was before I decided to plunge into MTGO and do some deliberate practice with the deck. I've concluded that there's really no substitute for getting a ton of reps with a deck (and against other decks so you know the meta) and making small tweaks to see how it makes the deck better/worse.
Congrats on the PPTQ win, a very good job with this deck and it proves my point from this post: https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/standard-type-2/proven-standard/784306-uw-approach?comment=513
If you test the deck enough and learn it inside and out then you can play it to an unbeatable record in matches easily, also everyone has different kinds of options for the sideboard so play whatever works for you.
Again good job with the deck and explaining the matchups, in my opinion, only Red decks are dangerous enough to be able to beat us game 1 and maybe game 2 if they get the nuts draw, but all the other decks should not be a problem including other control decks like UB control or Grixis control. We definitely have the upper hand against those decks in game 1 and if we sideboard correctly even in game 2.
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
Mtg Lifestyle
Thanks xaltair!
I agree that extensive testing is critical to both (1) learn your deck inside and out and (2) understand the metagame and what each deck is trying to do when.
I have to say though that I was very fortunate with my matchups. I only faced one aggro-ish deck in the Swiss (I don't consider GW Tokens to be a super aggro deck in the same way that the BR deck is aggro--it doesn't pressure life total quite as much, and its threats are more manageable (no hasters, no Haz, no Phoenix)). I can stumble with a slow draw and still stabilize against midrange and opposing control (except my match 2 against UW control), but if I have a slow draw against true aggro, chances are they're getting the W.
I think that a UW Approach build that's tuned to address the T1-3 creatures that can give us a tough time (Siphoner is really the biggest one as far as I'm concerned) is in a pretty good spot in this meta. My BR opponent in the semis made a comment about how he didn't really have sideboard hate against UW Approach (I'm guessing duress/doomfall/lost legacy?) because he just hasn't seen it that frequently. That seems pretty consistent with the MTG Goldfish metagame stats, which puts UW Approach at 1.41% of the metagame. I'm guessing that will shift after Dominaria drops with all the goodies for UW Control (not mentioning here because I don't think we're allowed to discuss spoilers here?). For now though, it seems to be a very under-the-radar deck to play. And in what I see as a very midrange meta, (1) having a ton of the right answers (slash, settle, fumigate, cast out) and (2) having no creatures (making their cards dead) is a good place to be.
I'm rambling, but my point is that I got pretty lucky to see the matchups I saw, and I also got pretty lucky in some of the individual games with my topdecks. Preparation is essential, knowing the metagame is essential, but no amount of preparation or knowledge will get me consistent wins over Bomat into Khenra into Crasher into Hazoret (with a couple bolts to the face to boot). I'll win some, sure, but I certainly won't win them all (or even most).
codaddy; Congrats on the great result! Thanks for taking the time to make that excellent summary. An interesting build! All the familiar cards are there but the counts are a bit unique. 3 Glimmer of Genius, 2 Slash of Talons!?
Well done!
Thanks for reading! My preference is to use Supreme Will for impulse mode (I really don't like countering things with it and will only use it as a counter if it's something really gnarly), so having only 3 Glimmer along with the Opts and Searches is usually enough to find what I need.
Until Glint-Sleeve rotates out, Slash is so good. That's midrange's signature turn-2 play (or in the BG or Sultai explore build, Merfolk Branchwalker is pretty common too), and the great thing about Slash on the play is you can let their T2 dude resolve, slash it on T3 attacks, and still have mana up to Essence Scatter their next dude. I'd seen it as sideboard tech in some UW builds, but testing it a bunch in the main convinced me that it's worth a couple mainboard slots. There's a flash enchantment in the next set that has potential (hope that's vague enough to discuss here), but 1-mana instant-speed removal is a good thing.
I tested slash last December and it just didn't cut it, I was playing 3 main deck and I wasn't drawing them in the first 2-3 turns, and basically, after turn 3 they are pretty much useless. The other issue is that while they hit a lot of the mono-red creatures (ahn crop, khenra, bomat, scrapheap scounger etc...) and also Siphoner they don't do much against a lot of the playable green creatures such as jadelight ranger and deathgorge scavenger or thrashing brontodon and with all the green decks running around that's unacceptable.
Due to this situation I have decided to play four Baffling End main deck and so far it has worked great for me, especially against monored or R/B decks since they cannot get rid of it once it hits play and it does take out a lot of their main creatures, it is also good against green decks since it takes out all the aforementioned creatures above since they're all 3 mana casting cost.
On top of that, it hits random 3 casting cost creatures that opponents might play such as kefnet, rhonas, etc...which are all good creatures to get rid off and you can't kill with slash. Of course it's better to baffling end khenras and scrounger rather than just killing them and putting them in the graveyard since they will come back later.
Without further ado here is my latest list:
4 Glacial Fortress
4 Irrigated Farmland
1 Arch of Orazca
2 Ipnu Rivulet
1 Field of Ruin
7 Island
6 Plains
Creatures(4)
2 Torrential Gearhulk
2 Champion of Wits
Enchantments(8)
2 Search for Azcanta
2 Cast out
4 Baffling End
1 Thaumatic Compass
Spells(24)
3 Essence Scatter
2 Negate
2 Supreme Will
2 Disallow
1 Commit // Memory
3 Settle the Wreckage
3 Fumigate
3 Approach of the Second Sun
4 Hieroglyphic Illumination
2 Crook of Condemnation
2 Ixalan's Binding
3 Vizier of Deferment
3 Sunscourge Champion
2 Cloudblazer
1 Thaumatic Compass
2 Crested Sunmare
So, the main changes in the deck is playing 2 Torrential Gearhulk which is the first time playing this card, the reason is very simple. I opened one from winning a Standard Showdown pack and then I checked its price and noted they are only about $10 a piece now so I bought the second one to play in this deck. They have been great so far and they're also the reason why I'm playing 1 commit // memory in the deck as well, to take full advantage of the gearhulks.
In case you're wondering why no nezahal in the sideboard it's because I don't need it, I am running all the cheap casting cost creatures which will come out way before Nezahal will and if my opp is playing it then I can deal with it by using cast out, ixalan's binding, settle or fumigate so I don't need my own Nezahal since I can race other control decks with my creatures and beat them that way.
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
Mtg Lifestyle
It may be a meta call, but it seems to be Glint-Sleeve Siphoner land out there right now. I don't find Slash to be terrible even late because opponents often have to rebuild with the little guys after a settle or fumigate. I don't mind missing Jadelight because I often get to slash their Branchwalker and then use an Essence Scatter on the Jadelight. (Also worth noting that Slash does hit Deathgorge Scavenger--you just have to cast it in response to the Scavenger's trigger on the stack...Slash will resolve doing 2 damage and the dino will die before it gets +1/+1).
I realize I'm quoting myself here, but I just read a Seth Manfield article on TCGPlayer.com for the "Top 10 Decks in Standard," and Approach isn't one of the ones he lists. Article is here: http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/article.asp?ID=14496&writer=Seth Manfield&articledate=3-9-2018
I hope it's not too off-topic, but there is a ton of literature about cognitive biases (Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow is the one most have heard of or read), and it's interesting to see how it plays out in competitive MTG. For example, here: UW Approach doesn't put up a ton of top-10 results, doesn't show up on the Pro Tour, and doesn't feature in articles from pros about the top decks. The competitive MTG community understands that to mean it's not a good deck for competitive events, and thus it is underrepresented at those events because people gravitate to the decks that have been putting up results (Grixis energy, UB control, UB midrange, RG monsters) thinking they are the "stronger" or "better" deck. But by the very nature of more people playing those "stronger" decks, there is a higher likelihood that those decks will put up results, and a lower likelihood that UW Approach will put up results. Taken to one extreme, in a field comprising 100% decks playing mono-W vanilla creatures, a mono-W vanilla creature deck will be the top deck (8 spots in top-8 and the tournament winner). Pre-ban, when the field was 25% Temur Energy and 25% RamRed, there is a very high likelihood that those decks would be the top-performing decks just by virtue of the vast number of people playing them.
This is a longwinded way of saying that I (obviously) think UW Approach is a great deck, I think it has great game against just about every deck in the meta, and it only helps that it's underrepresented at tournaments because other players aren't ready for it.
I have seen many people screw up games even with Grixis decks which are semi control although they run 15-16 creatures which kind of makes them a beatdown deck instead. So, because of this reason most people will not play U/W approach straight up control because it's not easy to pilot and win consistently and you have to make a lot of difficult decisions in every matchup.
It's also the reason why people that did try to play the deck and they lost a few times gave up on it or tried to fit in a 3rd color to improve their so-called matchups with using red for burn or black for removal when the straight up U/W is enough to deal with all the other decks in the format.
I also agree that Dominaria packs some goodies for us and can't wait until the set is out, or at least all the cards are spoiled to discuss some of the possible deck inclusions from the new set just as I did when Ixalan and Rivals came out.
May your sun rise twice in every game!
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
Mtg Lifestyle
Please critique the ideas, (which you did to an extent, however what I highlighted in red is not ok) not the person. Thanks! -- lugger
C Long Live Eldrazi C
I tend to think the community will eventually figure out what the stronger decks are and those will get the most play. As a result, the best decks will ultimately be reflected in the meta-game percentages. I think UW Approach has two fundamental weaknesses: lack of ability to interact with resolved creature(s) early and post-board UB hate in the form of Duress, Gonti, Lord of Luxury, Doomfall, and Negate. I think Eric Froehlich referred to this as a "post-board horror show." Maybe over-stated but funny.
The two weaknesses reinforce each other; the lack of early interaction can leave the board in a sub-optimal state and we need a wrath to clean it up. If that gets negated or discarded at a key time it's a pretty big blow. UB Control is less sensitive to this because their board is in a better state because of Fatal Push and Moment of Craving.
The last major event win for Approach that I can remember is November's Atlanta GP with Alex Lloyd's Esper Approach. He went Esper to help with the early interaction problem. I think Black might help with the discard hate as well because those cards become available to us. I hope to test that on MTGO this week.
That said, you and pumpmonkey have gotten great results with UW Approach and it has consistently posted periodic 5-0 results on Competitive MTGO.
I'll take UW or Esper Approach to the Seattle GP next month!
MTGO Competitive Standard League: 3/12 - 3/18 There is a lot of different decks there, none have more than 2 copies. But there are 2 copies of Approach.
I like the fact that Approach has fallen off everyone's radar. Means there is a little less sideboard hate or in some cases mainboard hate, out there. GP Memphis showed me that UW Approach has a good match up against all the top decks right now. If I drew a decent hand and made my land drops, I felt like I was favored in every game. The biggest issue was if I didn't do both of those, the deck folded to itself and I sat there while getting my face beat in. That is the main reason I have been running Opt over Censor since then. It really seems to help smooth out the draws and I have fewer games where the deck just folds. Not 100% sold on it yet but still testing.
Modern
Currently Playing
UW UW Control/Miracles
R Skred Red
Retired
BU Faeries
RGW Naya Burn
BW B/W Tokens
C Long Live Eldrazi C
Here's a quick report:
Round 1 was versus a U/B control deck without The Scarab God so I managed to approach twice both games and won 2-0 rather easily.
Round 2 was versus a U/W/G ramp approach deck which can make zombie tokens to win with but after sideboard, he brings in Nezahal and Regal Caracal. I won game 1 by Approaching twice. Game 2 was won by him on the back of a Nezahal which I couldn't get rid off due to him discarding 3 cards twice to exile it when I tried to kill it. In Game 3 he brought in Carnage Tyrant as well and I risked an Approach for the first time, but the next turn he cast Carnage Tyrant and he already had Nezahal out, I needed to draw another approach in the next turn or a fumigate or something to wipe the board but I didn't so I lost game 3 to Nezahal and Carnage Tyrant. I can't say much, he was a good player and knew exactly what creatures my deck can't deal with.
Round 3 was versus a R/G/U energy deck with phoenix, glorybringer, whirler virtuoso and team and I won both games by casting Approach twice and taking care of his threats on time.
Round 4 was versus R/B aggro which was running Ammit Eternal main, and I lost both games because he got good draws and I didn't draw a single Baffling End both games, I was forced to wait until 4 mana for settle in both games, and in the second game Sunscourge Champion kept me alive for a few rounds, but for some reason I still couldn't draw a baffling end to exile some of his creatures and he beat me down with hazoret, phoenix, khenra etc... it is a very bad match-up because his whole deck was just threats and I just didn't have enough answers.
So, the result was 2-2, I should've beat the Ramp Approach deck but couldn't deal with both Carnage Tyrant and Nezahal on the board at the same time and against the R/B deck there's not much you can do, you need to drop baffling end on turn 2 or 3 to exile something and then you still need to draw creature kill cards to kill something every turn otherwise you are dead. It's like a lottery, if he draws the nuts then you can't win at all pretty much unless you draw a hand of 3 lands and 3 baffling ends and 1 settle, but most likely he would duress first turn or second turn and you'd lose the settle anyways...also him running Ammit Eternal main deck was a surprise and he hit me for 5 for a couple of turns since I couldn't draw the baffling ends.
I will be giving this deck a rest for the next 2-3 weeks or maybe even wait until Dominaria is out in a month and see how the metagame changes with the new cards, I know our deck will be getting some juicy goodies from that set.
Check out my Youtube channel where I upload MTG content videos twice a week!
Mtg Lifestyle
I don't know what list you were running, but if it was the list on the last page, it seems like Regal Caracal is a sideboard card you should reconsider. Opponents definitely expect it, but it is so critical for stabilizing against creature-heavy matchups, which seem to be the ones that you struggled against. Even if they contempt the Caracal, you still have 2 lifelinking bodies that can chump their dudes which can buy you a turn or two against Ammits, Nezahals, etc. Sunscourge Champion comes down 2 turns earlier, but it's just as vulnerable to contempt as the Caracal, and it doesn't leave bodies behind. And the times when you can cast back-to-back cats happen more often than you might think, and it's really tough for opponents to deal with a swarm of 3/3 lifelinking kittehs.
I'm also pretty low on Baffling End at this point. Being sorcery-speed makes it so much worse than something like Slash of Talons or even Aether Meltdown (which I'm experimenting with online...not quite sold on it, but it's not terrible either), and the fact that it can't hit the dudes that are really troublesome (Haz, Phoenix, Carnie) really limits its utility.
I've been finding that my post-board matchups with U-based control often look like a race to Nezahal, and the first to cast Nezzie is usually the winner. I wish she had trample, but she's really very good. I like to think when I tap 7 to cast her, my opponent is all ready to cast Negate on an Approach, and that they get really disappointed when they see the 7/7.
Can you speak some as to your sideboard plan vs. common matchups? I'm just coming back to the game and looking at picking this up since it's up my alley, but am working on figuring out matchups in a meta I'm totally unfamiliar with!
Thanks )
Generally speaking, my plan looks something like this (I confess to being somewhat instinctual with sideboarding--I've tried making notes before hand but find I do better when I go with my gut):
Creature-based aggro decks (RR, BR, UW Cats/Appeal, BW Vamps, UW Auras, UG Merfolk (although haven't played against a merfolk deck in ages...think they're on the decline):
In: Regal Caracal (3).
Out: Search for Azcanta (2), Opt (1), Glimmer of Genius (1)
Caveat: I occasionally bring in some number of negates when playing against B or R decks (if I anticipate Chandra, Duresses, or Lost Legacys boarded in against me) and some number of Forsake the Worldly when playing against W-based decks (to hose their enchantment-based removal and Gideon's Intervention).
UB Control (Grixis control and the mirror are similar):
In: Torrential Gearhulk (3), Negate (3), Jace's Defeat (1), Nezahal (2), Regal Caracal (3)
Out: Slash of Talons (2), Fumigate (3), Farm (1), Essence Scatter (2), Approach (1), Opt (3)
Caveat: I sometimes board Spell Swindle out on the draw, but keep it in on the play (to snag their end-step Glimmers or Gearhulks). I also sometimes board out 2 Approaches on the draw because I'm more likely to have a Lost Legacy go through, and it's great to make them think I only keep 1 in post board so I can then bring one or both back for game 3.
Grixis midrange (other midrange decks are similar):
In: Torrential Gearhulk (3), Jace's Defeat (1), Nezahal (2), Regal Caracal (3)
Out: Approach (1), Opt (3), Search for Azcanta (2), Glimmer (1), Supreme Will (1), Spell Swindle (1)
Similar caveats as above, but for certain midrange decks that use creepy enchantments (Hadana's Climb, I'm looking at you), I may bring in some Forsake the Worldly as well. Running 4 Field of Ruin is helpful against those decks because if they flip it's usually not a huge deal (but Climb gets out of hand very quickly).
Enchantment- and artifact-based shenanigan decks (including UW Drake, BWx Stockpile, Abzan tokens, UW and Esper GPG):
In: Forsake the Worldly (2), Hour of Revelation (1), Negate (3), Torrential Gearhulk (3)
Out: Slash of Talons (2), Farm (1), Search for Azcanta (2), Opt (3), Supreme Will (1)
Caveat: if they include U, Jace's defeat sometimes comes in.
This all being said, I think it's tough to win games 2 and 3 against decks with access to countermagic (U) or disruption (B). I think it's a better strategy to look at Approach as your plan C and aim to win with Gearhulk/Caracal/Nezahal/Gideon beatdowns (plan A) and Ipnu milling as plan B, which is why one, two, or (rarely) three Approaches get boarded out in those matchups.
Hope this is helpful (and if others in the community have suggestions/thoughts, let me know--I'm always looking to improve!)
SCG Classic Standard - Cincinnati - 3/25/2018
Modern
Currently Playing
UW UW Control/Miracles
R Skred Red
Retired
BU Faeries
RGW Naya Burn
BW B/W Tokens
Modern
Currently Playing
UW UW Control/Miracles
R Skred Red
Retired
BU Faeries
RGW Naya Burn
BW B/W Tokens