Hi everyone.
Just some considerations:
- First, congratulations guyterto for your tournament participation good job, and if it wasn't against your friend you'ld probably had a 5-0 result (UR Delver usually is a good matchup for us)
- Regarding Stony Silence, it is awesome vs both Affinity and Tron. Usually on turn 2 is GG vs Affinity and it buys enough turns against Tron so we can ride to victory. Of course if we have it, we won't be able to use neither Batterskull nor EE, but, at least for me, it's a price i'm willing to pay. Of course this is only valid if Tron and Affinity are played, it doesn't seem the case right now.
- Flashfreeze is a good card, and a solid sideboard option. But which problematic cards would hit that Negate doesn't? I'm thinking only in 3 creatures in T1 decks: Goyf, Rhino and Primeval Titan. Problematic cards that Negate counters and Flashfreeze doesn't: Liliana, Karn, Souls, Hive Mind, Counterspells, Cranial Plating, Path to Exile, etc... For me, i rather have Negate in sb than Flashfreeze.
- I don't think Sulfur Elemental is where we want to go. It's quite weak on his own, without any form of inner protection (hexproof/shroud) and with 2 toughness will die in a battle to almost every creature in modern, it dies to every removal, and it only helps in killing spirit tokens. Izzet Staticaster is, imho, better, it kills the same spirit tokens from Abzan, it kills creatures from affinity, faerie tokens, snapcaster/pestermite from twin, and it's a 0/3, can potentially block goblin guide (and others) and survive.
- Never actually tested Elspeth, Sun's Champion, but her mana cost is a bit expensive - she's in the league of Wurmcoil Engine for instance. Yes, her abilities are pretty good, but looking at top decks that use 6++ CMC cards, we have Tron that generates a lot of mana with Urza's lands and Amulet Bloom, that can generate like 7 mana on turn 2. 5 lands is normal we can get to it, 6 lands could be a bit more problematic, and we can have a dead card in hand. But I may be wrong, this weekend, for instance, i played in a tournament against mirror, and my opponent just slammed an Akroma, Angel of Fury It was pretty cool lol lucky for me i had double bolt in hand, but he lost 1 card i lost 2... Akroma is like 8 mana xD.
- Sower of Temptation is tempting it escapes some removal (abrupt and liliana) and steals a creature. I would prefer if it had flash so we could steal an Emrakul but oh well, we can still use resto in her and steal Emrakul anyway
GP Vancouver, like i suspected after the PT, an increase of Twin decks and a decrease of Abzan, and this is good for us. Splinter Twin is a good matchup for us. Actually, looking at the 5 most played decks in day 2, we have Abzan, Twin, Affinity, Burn and Infect. Imho, only Abzan is bad for a standard UWR Midrange build (of course if infect, affinity or burn can simply get a turn 3 victory is difficult for any deck to deal with). So maybe we could start seeing UWR Decks putting some results in a near future
Against Azban I think we have a couple of paths to take. We can either shave one or none Geist and play a super aggresive game with multiples Valorous Stance, EE, Hellkite against Lingerings etc... or shave all Geist and play a reactive game but then in the sideboard we need Wrath of God, Keranos and late game power.
From my experience, unless we have 2 Sphinx's Rev and 2 Wrath of God to completely build a UWR control deck, plan Aggro is better. It may seem crazy to leave 3 Geist in against Azban, but surprisngly I have a better winrate with that plan than trying to stabilize the board. At least my build, where I have 3 Resto and 2 Cryptics and always a minimum of 3 sb slots dedicated to EE and Valorous Stance, clearing the path for Geist is not that hard at all. Trying to Snapcaster in the opponent's second turn eot so Liliana can't get my Geist makes that plan more viable.
I agree with this, there are 2 paths we can take. Burn is very good vs Abzan. Maybe Boros Charm can help us with that while dealing with +1 lilianas and keeping a blocked geist alive. I'll test online the current version i carry and the more aggressive one, maybe with boros charm instead of snare.
I've played a stronger version of your deck with Geist for a long time. I have 1,000s of games tested, not that statistics mean anything to you, but I digress. Scapeshift is one of your worst match-ups. Typically Geist gets countered or swept away and you are left to hate life. Tron has a lot of draws that just wipe your deck out, you can't claim to have a good match-up there, that's a foolish statement.
My deck also runs multiple copies of Slaughter Games which is the best card in the format against Scapeshift, your deck has zero copies.
I don't use Slaughter Games because:
a) it needs one more colour and that would be bad for the mana base.
b) i have a good matchup vs scapeshift, i rather have in the sideboard cards for other matchups (like abzan)
Regarding tests i consistently play against Scapeshift (a good friend of mine has it an we play a lot), and it's a good matchup for my build. I would say "if it's not for yours, then change it and use Geist" but that would be using your illogical arguments, like you use when talking about abzan. Tron is an even matchup for my build - depends a lot on Geist, Geist turn 3 usually is GG because they don't have blockers meaning i just need to stall their o-stones. Just have to avoid getting to late game, because the longer the game goes, better for Tron player.
Now, about your 1000 games you tested with a "stronger version" (ROFL! and your lack of good arguments continue), sorry if i don't believe in your tests. You are the guy that said "i've never lost to a resolved blood moon so it's not a problem for my build" and then you concluded with "i had an island (those 30% i talked about) and did snap+bolt and won". So, claiming that blood moon is not an issue because you won a match will be the same that you saying that Scapeshift is a bad matchup because you lost a match. I already saw how good your tests are when your arguments are like that. You are also the guy who "never lost to twin", and the guy who has a favourable matchup vs abzan. You should be winning the pro tours, not wasting your time in this forum.
Your match-up versus Scapeshift is quite bad. Geist isn't good against them, contrary to your belief. Geist (if it resolves) gets pyro'd or Angered, no problem. Your match-up versus Tron is also REALLY bad.
LOL, so your non-tests are better than my tests? Where is your empirical data now? You don't have problems with Twin with only 3 paths and Blood moon with 3 basics and 7 fetchs, why would i have against tron or scapeshift?
Actually you are wrong. First Scapeshift players don't play pyroclasm/anger mainboard. After sideboard they bring in 2 max 3. 3 cards in 60 that could eventually kill Geist. Geist kills in 3 turns max, and i have 4 of them (it's statistically more probable that i have geist then they have pyroclasm). Also have counters after sideboard (2x negate and 1x counterflux) that i bring against scapeshift. The plan is stall them and let Geist win by itself. You can't do that, because your clock is not great, but it's something that you conceded in order to have better matchups against, for instance, abzan.
Against Tron, contrary to you, my matchup is not bad, it's even, because i've a better clock than you. Karn can't kill geist, and Tron players are reducing the number of pyroclasms in the deck (it only really hurts affinity, so they are changing it to sideboard at best) leaving only o-stone as a good way to deal with geist. I just need to avoid O-stone for 3 turns with geist in the field. Tron sucks vs burn, and our deck is pretty good doing that.
Your matchups against Tron and Scapeshift are bad, mines aren't, is that simple. I did had the choice of making them worse (by playing splicer) and improving my abzan matches like you did.
For anyone who feels 4 paths are not enough I will recommend Oust. For some reason I rarely see people in this forum running this card even though it's exceptional. It's insane against T1 mana elf and just really good against a big fatty.
I'm willing to test it, the only problem i see is a sorcery. I think it would be awesome if, in response to a fetch activation we could send the creature back to the library. Condemn is another solution, but it means it have to be attacking or blocking.
Boring again. You are a boring person and i've to explain to you over and over:
Blade Splicer, while not fenomenal against Abzan, is better than Geist. Meta is not 100% Abzan.
Geist is better than splicer vs:
- Tron, Scapeshift, Twin, Amulet Bloom, Burn, UWR
Geist is worse than splicer vs:
- Abzan, zoo (The last one is not 100% correct, because zoo creatures will be attacking and in that case geist is a better clock for a race)
You say your matchup vs scapeshift and tron is bad, i say mine isn't. I say my matchup vs abzan is not the best, you say yours is. What i already told too many times is "i'm waiting too see how the meta will shift after this pro tour". It's not playing scissors that you'll win against rock, it's playing paper. You can put a different colour to the scissors, doesn't mean it is favourable to win vs rock. If i want to be able to win consistently win against Abzan, i would play affinity, tron or burn. Do you understand this last part? It means i'm not playing only against abzan. I asked for suggestions to sideboard against it (if i consider it a bad matchup, i want to have answers to improve it after sideboard) and you ask me to change mainboard to have the same problems you have against the non-abzan decks.
If your meta is only Abzan, then you are correct, you should play splicer, better, you should play a different deck than uwr. If not, like mine isn't, we've to accept that some matchups are bad. Hope you finally understand.
Now, you can say "but abzan meta share was 30% in the last big tournament", and that i'ld agree. But like i explained, i don't think it will stay at 30% for long, specially after combo win in that pro tour. Abzan was supposed to be really strong against combo decks, and 2 combo decks reach the finals in a tournament full of abzan. I'm expecting abzan share will be significantly lower (around 15%/20%) in the next GP and an improve of combo meta share. Also online is like 10% (more or less). But 10% is enough for me to want to have some answers in sideboard for it, that's why i have valorous stance and ask for suggestions. I want to improve my abzan match after sideboard, not want to be weaker against other decks by doing that in mainboard.
Vondrack: I'm playing almost the same list but with -3 Snare, +1 Helix, +1 Electrolyze, +1 Cryptic and some sideboard changes.
I feel the same about Spell Snare, when they are not in my list I miss them, and when I have them sometimes they just root in my hand... By now, more burn cards have been working well for me, so I'm sticking with that. If I had to make room for Spell Snare again because of the meta I think I would cut the 5 drop + something else.
Yeah, snares are weird, because in some situations they are simply fenomenal, in others are awful. It's a card of mixed feelings.
I think 4 Path plus 4 Snaps is enough to stop the big creatures. I would think you could race even if you can't kill one of them. If you feel you still can't handle racing with this list than perhaps Geist is not where you want to be. That was one of my conclusions, I have the Blade Splicers. They attack into my golem with Tarmo, Rhino, etc. I let 1st Strike damage resolve and then bolt or Helix the fatty. You can also run a wrath in the sideboard.
Again the Splicer thing. Man, if i'm playing against abzan, they will have like 8-10 removal spells that wouldn't work against Geist, but will work against splicer. Your token will not have first strike, stop insisting on that. And if they kill your golem instead of splicer, you need to have resto or else you'll just end up with a 1/1. Against other decks, like i told you already (and again, we are discussing this), Geist is a much faster clock, that can't be dealt with spot removal. Against abzan is simply sided out on match 2 and 3, and i bring in celestial purge, batterskull, ajani, and, depending on the abzan build (for instance, 4 goyfs, 3/4 oozes, 4 bobs and voices), EE. In the PT abzan was 30% of the meta, but i feel that meta share will not hold - I may be wrong on this, but if it stays at 30% wotc will just ban something again. I think that pod players just decided to keep the colours they were already playing, i'm expecting abzan to go down to 15%-20%. And in that case, Geist is way better against the other decks. Modern is a bit rock/paper/scissors. Sometimes rock will beat paper, but in theory paper will be favorite vs rock. If you want to consistently win against abzan, you'ld play Tron, Affinity or Burn - those are abzans bad matchups, not uwr.
If people give illogical criticisms like the two I've gotten, we don't have to deal with it.
Illogical criticisms? So warning that your list doesn't have many options to deal with Splinter Twin and to be careful with your mana base against, for instance, blood moon, are illogical criticisms? Do you even understand what you are talking about? Do you see how ridiculous are your accusations? You attack the others but then ended up accepting what has been told to you, but of course you'ld never admit that (the extra plains and the extra path). This is a forum, if you don't want to hear other people's opinions, just create a blog.
Similar to when Vondrack was saying that empirical data isn't a good argument and several people put him back into his place.
Don't put words in my mouth, no one said empirical data isn't a good argument, what is not a good argument is testing once ("ohh i used snap+bolt so i won anyway") and now claim you've never lost. While it may be true, it doesn't provide enough data to make that claim. Also, before you collect that sort of data you should test in theory. You can create a deck with 1 emrakul and 59 mountains and win a match. Does it make a good deck? No! But if you won the match, would you start claiming that you've never lost a match with that deck and due to that it is a good deck? What i showed you, in a long post, was that your list could have problems with Blood Moon. Mainboard you had like 30% of getting around a resolved blood moon (it doesn't mean you would win) and after sideboard you had 40% more or less. That previous post was to explain why your manabase was vulnerable. Now you can accept those statistics (it's natural to have some cards that wreck our decks) and that would be reason enough to not change it. It's a very diverse meta, so we can't be prepared for everything. Now, start claiming that is not an issue because you had luck and won a match, is not enough to be considered a vast empirical data. If you're going to every match focus only on having luck, well then, good luck!
Anyway I'm very close to blocking two of them so this conversation can get back on track.
Please do this, i'm tired of your lack of arguments and constant attacks.
Vondrack, I would be very pleased to see your list since it looks we are taking similar paths.
Weird choices may be Stormbreath Dragon instead of Thundermaw Hellkite and the 3 snares. As a 1-of, i was pretty upset that, when i did find and play thundermaw, he ended up eating a path. Altough the lingering souls are a real threat and thundermaw would be better against that, the problem is that, decks that use lingering souls tend to use path to exile as well. The snares i tried to reduce to 2 first, then to remove them completely from the deck, but everytime i play i was always thinking "damn, i could have countered that if I had snares". So decided to put them back. They are good against almost every T1 and T1,5 deck (or at least not completely dead). I'm still a bit divided in eiganjo castle. Sometimes is really good (save geist/clique from a pyroclasm), others is just a stupid plains (or a stupid mountain if blood moon is on the field). I'm expecting Clique to become better now, with 2 combo decks in the pro tour finals. I was about to drop them in ktk meta, but in this meta i'm still waiting to see an increase of popularity in combo decks. If so, i may even consider to bring another Clique.
Regarding sideboard, i've some doubts in the relic and valorous stance. I'm thinking maybe 1 wrath instead of valorous. still unsure. those 2 flex spots are still being tested. I used to like the relic a lot, but right now hasn't been good enough. I have 1 in sideboard to play online (sometimes it happens to play against a graveyard strategy deck) but if i would go to a GP, would be the 1st card in the sideboard to be dropped.
Also, unlike other members of this forum, i'm willing to hear everyone's opinions about the deck and how it can be improved.
Best regards
Vendilion Clique is very loose in this list adding another would be bizarre considering the most popular decks run 3-4 copies of Lingering Souls. Relic doesn't do anything right now besides make your Snapcasters worst. You are also light on red sources. This deck has too many counterspells for a Geist deck. Valorous Stance is also unnecessary, in which match-up do you really need that, please don't say Abzan as your deck at that point is waiting to get run over by being so reactive.
It seems you don't like carrot so this is mostly going to have to be stick to get it through your head. Hopefully you learn from your mistakes, though I have my reservations on that.
Yeah, Clique is something i'm still waiting how meta will shift. In KTK Clique was awful (pod, delver and burn were half of the meta), and at the pro tour i thought "damn, so many abzans, clique will have the axe", but the finals were between amulet bloom and splinter twin, and Clique usually shines against combo decks... I'm waiting to see how meta will shift. I'm expecting combo decks to become more popular now, just need to see the meta share they will have.
I can also add a red source, by dropping eiganjo castle (like i told, not fully satisfied with it). Relic, like i said, is only used online (sometimes i find graveyard strategy combos like the heartless summoning, dredge, living end), in a GP would simply stay home.
Regarding Valorous Stance, which would you suggest as a replacement? I still need more ways to kill x/4++ creatures.
Vondrack, thanks for the cfb article. I have always tried to incorporate actual math into deckbuilding, and it's good to see others are on the same page. Right now, I have a very crude Excel spreadsheet that I use to make manabases, where I can adjust the numbers of each land in my mana base. I have generally only done expected value calculations there, meaning that the sheet can show how many sources of a given color you can expect to have (on average) by turn x. It further subduvides the sources by the amount of damage that would be taken from them. I'll see if I can work one out for varying probability levels (70%, 90%). If there is actual interest, I could share it at some point when it is done.
Of course, there is some give and take here. What I considered my roughly optimized manabase is off from the teamgeist version by 1 land--they use 1 sulfur falls in place of 1 scalding tarn. Mana is close enough to optimal that it almost doesn't ever matter, but the damage is always something to consider based on your meta. In a world where no points of damage mattered, there would be no basics, but running fewer than 4 seems suicidal against blood moon and burn.
Regarding the team geist list, I believe guyterto was interested--how has valorous stance been working out? I currently run one main, and it has been ok. Since it partly fills the role of Resto (save Geist), I went down to 2 Restos to avoid clunkier draws. Those testing the teamgeist version, what have your experiences been?
You're welcome that article is really good and it helps a lot. When building a deck, i use to check those tables to see if everything fits. At the moment, unfortunately, in my list Cryptic is not consistently cast on turn 4, but it's something i've accepted (that's why i just run 1). I have the equivalent of 20,5 blue sources, and for cryptic is necessary 22 blue sources. What i mean is, those tables can be used to help us when building our mana base, but sometimes, in order to play some cards, we have to accept that the 90% he talks will not be achieved.
Haha love how you think it's bad for me to not "hit the percentages" in blue, but it's fine for you. If you can't reliably cast Cryptic on T4 then there is no reason to have it in the deck. You are also way behind on red sources.
I never said it was bad for you to not hit the percentage. Are you again putting words in my mouth? Or haven't you read my post? I just informed how many mana sources are usually necessary to play snap+remand. If you have it or not it's your choice.
Helix is also just a burn spell that goes to the face. The more burn you have, the more 'aggro' you are. Burning out decks is one of our plans
Yes, some burn spells in addition to the 4 bolts are nice is some matchups for the extra reach, but if we look at the largescale meta now (like on the decks that dominated the pro tour), I think the "remove creatures"-plan is more often relevant now than the "burn to the face"-plan. After all, BGx decks build up their creature-base to "pass the bolt-test", so they can discard away your threatening cards and leave you with some useless bolts and helixes in hand. Burn is a problem, but Azorius charm does a good job there too.
I completely agree with you. I already dropped 1 Helix due to that. In this meta, creatures are bigger and pass the bolt test. Valorous Stance was the response from Wizards to "help us"... I'm still not sold to that. Hope that Dragons of Tarkir brings new toys. Until then, we have to play with what we have (and until now, my choices are valorous stance or just bring a wrath...). Have you tested Azorius Charm? How did it worked? It seems to me that is not the perfect answer, for instance against Rhino looks bad.
Vondrack, thanks for the cfb article. I have always tried to incorporate actual math into deckbuilding, and it's good to see others are on the same page. Right now, I have a very crude Excel spreadsheet that I use to make manabases, where I can adjust the numbers of each land in my mana base. I have generally only done expected value calculations there, meaning that the sheet can show how many sources of a given color you can expect to have (on average) by turn x. It further subduvides the sources by the amount of damage that would be taken from them. I'll see if I can work one out for varying probability levels (70%, 90%). If there is actual interest, I could share it at some point when it is done.
Of course, there is some give and take here. What I considered my roughly optimized manabase is off from the teamgeist version by 1 land--they use 1 sulfur falls in place of 1 scalding tarn. Mana is close enough to optimal that it almost doesn't ever matter, but the damage is always something to consider based on your meta. In a world where no points of damage mattered, there would be no basics, but running fewer than 4 seems suicidal against blood moon and burn.
Regarding the team geist list, I believe guyterto was interested--how has valorous stance been working out? I currently run one main, and it has been ok. Since it partly fills the role of Resto (save Geist), I went down to 2 Restos to avoid clunkier draws. Those testing the teamgeist version, what have your experiences been?
You're welcome that article is really good and it helps a lot. When building a deck, i use to check those tables to see if everything fits. At the moment, unfortunately, in my list Cryptic is not consistently cast on turn 4, but it's something i've accepted (that's why i just run 1). I have the equivalent of 20,5 blue sources, and for cryptic is necessary 22 blue sources. What i mean is, those tables can be used to help us when building our mana base, but sometimes, in order to play some cards, we have to accept that the 90% he talks will not be achieved.
If people give illogical criticisms like the two I've gotten, we don't have to deal with it.
Illogical criticisms? So warning that your list doesn't have many options to deal with Splinter Twin and to be careful with your mana base against, for instance, blood moon, are illogical criticisms? Do you even understand what you are talking about? Do you see how ridiculous are your accusations? You attack the others but then ended up accepting what has been told to you, but of course you'ld never admit that (the extra plains and the extra path). This is a forum, if you don't want to hear other people's opinions, just create a blog.
Similar to when Vondrack was saying that empirical data isn't a good argument and several people put him back into his place.
Don't put words in my mouth, no one said empirical data isn't a good argument, what is not a good argument is testing once ("ohh i used snap+bolt so i won anyway") and now claim you've never lost. While it may be true, it doesn't provide enough data to make that claim. Also, before you collect that sort of data you should test in theory. You can create a deck with 1 emrakul and 59 mountains and win a match. Does it make a good deck? No! But if you won the match, would you start claiming that you've never lost a match with that deck and due to that it is a good deck? What i showed you, in a long post, was that your list could have problems with Blood Moon. Mainboard you had like 30% of getting around a resolved blood moon (it doesn't mean you would win) and after sideboard you had 40% more or less. That previous post was to explain why your manabase was vulnerable. Now you can accept those statistics (it's natural to have some cards that wreck our decks) and that would be reason enough to not change it. It's a very diverse meta, so we can't be prepared for everything. Now, start claiming that is not an issue because you had luck and won a match, is not enough to be considered a vast empirical data. If you're going to every match focus only on having luck, well then, good luck!
Anyway I'm very close to blocking two of them so this conversation can get back on track.
Please do this, i'm tired of your lack of arguments and constant attacks.
Vondrack, I would be very pleased to see your list since it looks we are taking similar paths.
Weird choices may be Stormbreath Dragon instead of Thundermaw Hellkite and the 3 snares. As a 1-of, i was pretty upset that, when i did find and play thundermaw, he ended up eating a path. Altough the lingering souls are a real threat and thundermaw would be better against that, the problem is that, decks that use lingering souls tend to use path to exile as well. The snares i tried to reduce to 2 first, then to remove them completely from the deck, but everytime i play i was always thinking "damn, i could have countered that if I had snares". So decided to put them back. They are good against almost every T1 and T1,5 deck (or at least not completely dead). I'm still a bit divided in eiganjo castle. Sometimes is really good (save geist/clique from a pyroclasm), others is just a stupid plains (or a stupid mountain if blood moon is on the field). I'm expecting Clique to become better now, with 2 combo decks in the pro tour finals. I was about to drop them in ktk meta, but in this meta i'm still waiting to see an increase of popularity in combo decks. If so, i may even consider to bring another Clique.
Regarding sideboard, i've some doubts in the relic and valorous stance. I'm thinking maybe 1 wrath instead of valorous. still unsure. those 2 flex spots are still being tested. I used to like the relic a lot, but right now hasn't been good enough. I have 1 in sideboard to play online (sometimes it happens to play against a graveyard strategy deck) but if i would go to a GP, would be the 1st card in the sideboard to be dropped.
Also, unlike other members of this forum, i'm willing to hear everyone's opinions about the deck and how it can be improved.
According to this article (i always check on this when creating my mana base), to consistently cast (above 90% of the time) snap+remand on turn 4 you need 18 blue mana sources. If you want remand, snap+remand on turn 6 you need like 20 blue mana sources.
Pity you don't get it...hopefully someday you will. Calling people that are more advanced than you "arrogant" is the sign of your immaturity. I hope you open your mind someday, I really do, until then keep preparing for those Blood Moons, the rest of us will keep on winning!
Advanced in what? You are not advanced in anything, only in arrogance and stupidity.
Regarding blood moons, i explained why guyterto told your matches against blood moons were awful. If you were a bit humble, you could simply try to understand why others said that and review if your list has a problem or not - or if that its a problem to begin with. Instead, you start attacking the ones who gave you advices or alerted you for some current meta problems your list may have. If you didn't want to be advised regarding your list nor you want to be criticized, then simply don't post your list here. This is a forum, people can criticize and can give you advices if they think it could help you. guyterto alerted you for 2 things your list may have problems with, and your response in both were attacking and being arrogant, not accepting that your list may have flaws. Worse than that, your argument in both of those things were "i've never lost a match against X so i don't care about what you said" - this is not a good argument. It's an argument of an arrogant person who doesn't accept critics nor suggestions/advices. And for that, don't post your list here.
Just some considerations:
- First, congratulations guyterto for your tournament participation
- Regarding Stony Silence, it is awesome vs both Affinity and Tron. Usually on turn 2 is GG vs Affinity and it buys enough turns against Tron so we can ride to victory. Of course if we have it, we won't be able to use neither Batterskull nor EE, but, at least for me, it's a price i'm willing to pay. Of course this is only valid if Tron and Affinity are played, it doesn't seem the case right now.
- Flashfreeze is a good card, and a solid sideboard option. But which problematic cards would hit that Negate doesn't? I'm thinking only in 3 creatures in T1 decks: Goyf, Rhino and Primeval Titan. Problematic cards that Negate counters and Flashfreeze doesn't: Liliana, Karn, Souls, Hive Mind, Counterspells, Cranial Plating, Path to Exile, etc... For me, i rather have Negate in sb than Flashfreeze.
- I don't think Sulfur Elemental is where we want to go. It's quite weak on his own, without any form of inner protection (hexproof/shroud) and with 2 toughness will die in a battle to almost every creature in modern, it dies to every removal, and it only helps in killing spirit tokens. Izzet Staticaster is, imho, better, it kills the same spirit tokens from Abzan, it kills creatures from affinity, faerie tokens, snapcaster/pestermite from twin, and it's a 0/3, can potentially block goblin guide (and others) and survive.
- Never actually tested Elspeth, Sun's Champion, but her mana cost is a bit expensive - she's in the league of Wurmcoil Engine for instance. Yes, her abilities are pretty good, but looking at top decks that use 6++ CMC cards, we have Tron that generates a lot of mana with Urza's lands and Amulet Bloom, that can generate like 7 mana on turn 2. 5 lands is normal we can get to it, 6 lands could be a bit more problematic, and we can have a dead card in hand. But I may be wrong, this weekend, for instance, i played in a tournament against mirror, and my opponent just slammed an Akroma, Angel of Fury
- Sower of Temptation is tempting
GP Vancouver, like i suspected after the PT, an increase of Twin decks and a decrease of Abzan, and this is good for us. Splinter Twin is a good matchup for us. Actually, looking at the 5 most played decks in day 2, we have Abzan, Twin, Affinity, Burn and Infect. Imho, only Abzan is bad for a standard UWR Midrange build (of course if infect, affinity or burn can simply get a turn 3 victory is difficult for any deck to deal with). So maybe we could start seeing UWR Decks putting some results in a near future
Best regards.
I agree with this, there are 2 paths we can take. Burn is very good vs Abzan. Maybe Boros Charm can help us with that while dealing with +1 lilianas and keeping a blocked geist alive. I'll test online the current version i carry and the more aggressive one, maybe with boros charm instead of snare.
I don't use Slaughter Games because:
a) it needs one more colour and that would be bad for the mana base.
b) i have a good matchup vs scapeshift, i rather have in the sideboard cards for other matchups (like abzan)
Regarding tests i consistently play against Scapeshift (a good friend of mine has it an we play a lot), and it's a good matchup for my build. I would say "if it's not for yours, then change it and use Geist" but that would be using your illogical arguments, like you use when talking about abzan. Tron is an even matchup for my build - depends a lot on Geist, Geist turn 3 usually is GG because they don't have blockers meaning i just need to stall their o-stones. Just have to avoid getting to late game, because the longer the game goes, better for Tron player.
Now, about your 1000 games you tested with a "stronger version" (ROFL! and your lack of good arguments continue), sorry if i don't believe in your tests. You are the guy that said "i've never lost to a resolved blood moon so it's not a problem for my build" and then you concluded with "i had an island (those 30% i talked about) and did snap+bolt and won". So, claiming that blood moon is not an issue because you won a match will be the same that you saying that Scapeshift is a bad matchup because you lost a match. I already saw how good your tests are when your arguments are like that. You are also the guy who "never lost to twin", and the guy who has a favourable matchup vs abzan. You should be winning the pro tours, not wasting your time in this forum.
Good luck for your pptq.
LOL, so your non-tests are better than my tests? Where is your empirical data now? You don't have problems with Twin with only 3 paths and Blood moon with 3 basics and 7 fetchs, why would i have against tron or scapeshift?
Actually you are wrong. First Scapeshift players don't play pyroclasm/anger mainboard. After sideboard they bring in 2 max 3. 3 cards in 60 that could eventually kill Geist. Geist kills in 3 turns max, and i have 4 of them (it's statistically more probable that i have geist then they have pyroclasm). Also have counters after sideboard (2x negate and 1x counterflux) that i bring against scapeshift. The plan is stall them and let Geist win by itself. You can't do that, because your clock is not great, but it's something that you conceded in order to have better matchups against, for instance, abzan.
Against Tron, contrary to you, my matchup is not bad, it's even, because i've a better clock than you. Karn can't kill geist, and Tron players are reducing the number of pyroclasms in the deck (it only really hurts affinity, so they are changing it to sideboard at best) leaving only o-stone as a good way to deal with geist. I just need to avoid O-stone for 3 turns with geist in the field. Tron sucks vs burn, and our deck is pretty good doing that.
Your matchups against Tron and Scapeshift are bad, mines aren't, is that simple. I did had the choice of making them worse (by playing splicer) and improving my abzan matches like you did.
I'm willing to test it, the only problem i see is a sorcery. I think it would be awesome if, in response to a fetch activation we could send the creature back to the library. Condemn is another solution, but it means it have to be attacking or blocking.
Blade Splicer, while not fenomenal against Abzan, is better than Geist. Meta is not 100% Abzan.
Geist is better than splicer vs:
- Tron, Scapeshift, Twin, Amulet Bloom, Burn, UWR
Geist is worse than splicer vs:
- Abzan, zoo (The last one is not 100% correct, because zoo creatures will be attacking and in that case geist is a better clock for a race)
You say your matchup vs scapeshift and tron is bad, i say mine isn't. I say my matchup vs abzan is not the best, you say yours is. What i already told too many times is "i'm waiting too see how the meta will shift after this pro tour". It's not playing scissors that you'll win against rock, it's playing paper. You can put a different colour to the scissors, doesn't mean it is favourable to win vs rock. If i want to be able to win consistently win against Abzan, i would play affinity, tron or burn. Do you understand this last part? It means i'm not playing only against abzan. I asked for suggestions to sideboard against it (if i consider it a bad matchup, i want to have answers to improve it after sideboard) and you ask me to change mainboard to have the same problems you have against the non-abzan decks.
If your meta is only Abzan, then you are correct, you should play splicer, better, you should play a different deck than uwr. If not, like mine isn't, we've to accept that some matchups are bad. Hope you finally understand.
Now, you can say "but abzan meta share was 30% in the last big tournament", and that i'ld agree. But like i explained, i don't think it will stay at 30% for long, specially after combo win in that pro tour. Abzan was supposed to be really strong against combo decks, and 2 combo decks reach the finals in a tournament full of abzan. I'm expecting abzan share will be significantly lower (around 15%/20%) in the next GP and an improve of combo meta share. Also online is like 10% (more or less). But 10% is enough for me to want to have some answers in sideboard for it, that's why i have valorous stance and ask for suggestions. I want to improve my abzan match after sideboard, not want to be weaker against other decks by doing that in mainboard.
Yeah, snares are weird, because in some situations they are simply fenomenal, in others are awful. It's a card of mixed feelings.
Again the Splicer thing. Man, if i'm playing against abzan, they will have like 8-10 removal spells that wouldn't work against Geist, but will work against splicer. Your token will not have first strike, stop insisting on that. And if they kill your golem instead of splicer, you need to have resto or else you'll just end up with a 1/1. Against other decks, like i told you already (and again, we are discussing this), Geist is a much faster clock, that can't be dealt with spot removal. Against abzan is simply sided out on match 2 and 3, and i bring in celestial purge, batterskull, ajani, and, depending on the abzan build (for instance, 4 goyfs, 3/4 oozes, 4 bobs and voices), EE. In the PT abzan was 30% of the meta, but i feel that meta share will not hold - I may be wrong on this, but if it stays at 30% wotc will just ban something again. I think that pod players just decided to keep the colours they were already playing, i'm expecting abzan to go down to 15%-20%. And in that case, Geist is way better against the other decks. Modern is a bit rock/paper/scissors. Sometimes rock will beat paper, but in theory paper will be favorite vs rock. If you want to consistently win against abzan, you'ld play Tron, Affinity or Burn - those are abzans bad matchups, not uwr.
Yeah, Clique is something i'm still waiting how meta will shift. In KTK Clique was awful (pod, delver and burn were half of the meta), and at the pro tour i thought "damn, so many abzans, clique will have the axe", but the finals were between amulet bloom and splinter twin, and Clique usually shines against combo decks... I'm waiting to see how meta will shift. I'm expecting combo decks to become more popular now, just need to see the meta share they will have.
I can also add a red source, by dropping eiganjo castle (like i told, not fully satisfied with it). Relic, like i said, is only used online (sometimes i find graveyard strategy combos like the heartless summoning, dredge, living end), in a GP would simply stay home.
Regarding Valorous Stance, which would you suggest as a replacement? I still need more ways to kill x/4++ creatures.
I never said it was bad for you to not hit the percentage. Are you again putting words in my mouth? Or haven't you read my post? I just informed how many mana sources are usually necessary to play snap+remand. If you have it or not it's your choice.
I completely agree with you. I already dropped 1 Helix due to that. In this meta, creatures are bigger and pass the bolt test. Valorous Stance was the response from Wizards to "help us"... I'm still not sold to that. Hope that Dragons of Tarkir brings new toys. Until then, we have to play with what we have (and until now, my choices are valorous stance or just bring a wrath...). Have you tested Azorius Charm? How did it worked? It seems to me that is not the perfect answer, for instance against Rhino looks bad.
You're welcome
Illogical criticisms? So warning that your list doesn't have many options to deal with Splinter Twin and to be careful with your mana base against, for instance, blood moon, are illogical criticisms? Do you even understand what you are talking about? Do you see how ridiculous are your accusations? You attack the others but then ended up accepting what has been told to you, but of course you'ld never admit that (the extra plains and the extra path). This is a forum, if you don't want to hear other people's opinions, just create a blog.
Don't put words in my mouth, no one said empirical data isn't a good argument, what is not a good argument is testing once ("ohh i used snap+bolt so i won anyway") and now claim you've never lost. While it may be true, it doesn't provide enough data to make that claim. Also, before you collect that sort of data you should test in theory. You can create a deck with 1 emrakul and 59 mountains and win a match. Does it make a good deck? No! But if you won the match, would you start claiming that you've never lost a match with that deck and due to that it is a good deck? What i showed you, in a long post, was that your list could have problems with Blood Moon. Mainboard you had like 30% of getting around a resolved blood moon (it doesn't mean you would win) and after sideboard you had 40% more or less. That previous post was to explain why your manabase was vulnerable. Now you can accept those statistics (it's natural to have some cards that wreck our decks) and that would be reason enough to not change it. It's a very diverse meta, so we can't be prepared for everything. Now, start claiming that is not an issue because you had luck and won a match, is not enough to be considered a vast empirical data. If you're going to every match focus only on having luck, well then, good luck!
Please do this, i'm tired of your lack of arguments and constant attacks.
@guyterto, my current deck list:
4x Geist of Saint Traft
3x Restoration Angel
4x Snapcaster Mage
1x Stormbreath Dragon
2x Vendilion Clique
spells
1x Cryptic Command
2x Electrolyze
4x Lightning Bolt
3x Lightning Helix
4x Path to Exile
4x Remand
3x Spell Snare
4x Celestial Colonnade
1x Eiganjo Castle
4x Flooded Strand
1x Hallowed Fountain
2x Island
1x Mountain
1x Plains
1x Sacred Foundry
4x Scalding Tarn
2x Steam Vents
2x Sulfur Falls
2x Tectonic Edge
1x Ajani Vengeant
1x Batterskull
2x Celestial Purge
1x Counterflux
2x Engineered Explosives
2x Negate
1x Relic of Progenitus
2x Stony Silence
1x Valorous Stance
2x Wear // Tear
Weird choices may be Stormbreath Dragon instead of Thundermaw Hellkite and the 3 snares. As a 1-of, i was pretty upset that, when i did find and play thundermaw, he ended up eating a path. Altough the lingering souls are a real threat and thundermaw would be better against that, the problem is that, decks that use lingering souls tend to use path to exile as well. The snares i tried to reduce to 2 first, then to remove them completely from the deck, but everytime i play i was always thinking "damn, i could have countered that if I had snares". So decided to put them back. They are good against almost every T1 and T1,5 deck (or at least not completely dead). I'm still a bit divided in eiganjo castle. Sometimes is really good (save geist/clique from a pyroclasm), others is just a stupid plains (or a stupid mountain if blood moon is on the field). I'm expecting Clique to become better now, with 2 combo decks in the pro tour finals. I was about to drop them in ktk meta, but in this meta i'm still waiting to see an increase of popularity in combo decks. If so, i may even consider to bring another Clique.
Regarding sideboard, i've some doubts in the relic and valorous stance. I'm thinking maybe 1 wrath instead of valorous. still unsure. those 2 flex spots are still being tested. I used to like the relic a lot, but right now hasn't been good enough. I have 1 in sideboard to play online (sometimes it happens to play against a graveyard strategy deck) but if i would go to a GP, would be the 1st card in the sideboard to be dropped.
Also, unlike other members of this forum, i'm willing to hear everyone's opinions about the deck and how it can be improved.
Best regards
According to this article (i always check on this when creating my mana base), to consistently cast (above 90% of the time) snap+remand on turn 4 you need 18 blue mana sources. If you want remand, snap+remand on turn 6 you need like 20 blue mana sources.
Advanced in what? You are not advanced in anything, only in arrogance and stupidity.
Regarding blood moons, i explained why guyterto told your matches against blood moons were awful. If you were a bit humble, you could simply try to understand why others said that and review if your list has a problem or not - or if that its a problem to begin with. Instead, you start attacking the ones who gave you advices or alerted you for some current meta problems your list may have. If you didn't want to be advised regarding your list nor you want to be criticized, then simply don't post your list here. This is a forum, people can criticize and can give you advices if they think it could help you. guyterto alerted you for 2 things your list may have problems with, and your response in both were attacking and being arrogant, not accepting that your list may have flaws. Worse than that, your argument in both of those things were "i've never lost a match against X so i don't care about what you said" - this is not a good argument. It's an argument of an arrogant person who doesn't accept critics nor suggestions/advices. And for that, don't post your list here.