All users will need to merge their MTGSalvation account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Sept 25th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
Treasure Cruisin' Gifts Storm
The Role of Ecosystems in Fantasy Worldbuilding
Life's Legacy: Delving into Delver
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Quote from the n00b king »
    Quote from TheAller »
    That's what I did. I cut Acid-Moss because of BBE. But I think the double red on turn 2 issue is a serious one. Molten Rain seems really clunky in a deck with 7-8 Forests.

    For whatever it's worth, here's my updated list. I want to stress that I'm an advocate of they hyper aggressive version of Ponza. I hate durdling with this deck as I want to end the game asap (the more time you give your opponent, the likelier they are of getting out of the soft lock).

    I'm tooling with the idea of cutting the stormbreaths for Anh-Crop Crasher. This would also allow me to cut a land. I would also likely play a 3rd Stomping Ground.

    I think 4 mana should be the top end of the deck as it allows you to do multiple things per turn. It's rather unlikely that you'll ever get stuck with cards in hands too.

    Why the crasher? Because of BBE. Flipping that guy on T3 and attacking for 6 through a blocker is dope.

    I think if you are considering giving up a slot to Crasher then it would be better to take out Rhonas. Sure you can hit it with BBE but out of your list you would remove 1 of your only 6 targets to get him online naturally if you take out a Stormbreath.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Quote from RochiTomRochi »
    Was there a consensus about Jadelight Ranger? Can it replace Courser of Kruphix?

    Also, what about Merfolk Branchwalker instead of Scavenging Ooze?

    I'm just thinking about the card drawing opportunities in the deck.

    Also also, for what its worth, I'm firmly in the pro-Bloodbraid Elf camp.

    So here is the situation you are looking at. The 2 cards you are looking to replace provide different things than what you are replacing them with.

    For instance Jadelight Ranger vs Courser, Courser has 4 toughness so that is already better than Jadelight because Courser can’t simply be bolted. Bolt is going to be ran even more so now because of BBE. Also the incidental life gain is the bane of burn after you have gained 2 life you have caused the burn player to play yet another spell to close out the game and they won’t waste a Skullcrack to prevent it (I know this for certain as I am a red mage at heart and is the other deck I play for modern). So even though they are kinda similar I would give the nod to Courser

    For your comparison between Brachwalker and Scooze, these are 2 completely different cards. Scooze is graveyard hate and also incidental life gain. Scooze can often get very big if gone unchecked. The thing we need to keep in mind is Snapcaster is going to be everywhere until Jace hype slows down, not to mention the uptick going to be seen in Goyf and KCommand because of BBE so having graveyard hate is going to be key. I think Relic or Grafdigger’s Cage is where you want to be though as they are not as easy to remove. Scooze can help supplement that plan though.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Quote from SpaciousBox »
    I hadn't actually considered the interaction between BloodBraid Elf and Trinisphere. What number of each do we consider to be too many to risk an unfavorable interaction? Or would we simply not play them in the same mainboard?

    I put the Trinisphere in the sideboard. There are enough decks that don’t care about it to run it in the main. Running Trinisphere against the decks that will almost always give you a win (ie burn, infect, and storm) it might be ok to leave the 1 copy of BBE in with the potential to cascade into it.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Ok so far I am making a swap of Thragtusk to the sb and bringing in one of the Finks to the main. It is like having the Huntmaster almost you gain life and a body. I may try to put both Finks in I just don’t know what to take out for it.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Ok I’m gonna let y’all know what I have built thus far.
    22 Lands
    4 Arbor Elf
    4 Utopia Sprawl
    4 BBE
    1 Courser
    3 Tracker
    2 Hazoret
    2 Stormbreath
    1 Thragtusk
    1 Nissa VOZ
    2 Chandra TOD
    3 Lightning Bolt
    1 Mizzium Mortars
    2 Molten Rain
    4 Stone Rain
    4 Blood Moon

    2 Kitchen Finks
    1 Thrun
    1 Wurmcoil Engine
    2 Ancient Grudge
    3 Firespout
    1 Fracturing Gust
    2 Grafdigger’s Cage
    3 Trinisphere

    There is still 1 nonbo I don’t like between BBE and Trinisphere but in those matchups where I bring in Trinisphere I can side out BBE. Still not sold this is the build I am gonna stick with but I am gonna take some time to play test this and report back.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Please test before you hate on the card. Yes it will change the deck construction some but it will be better for it.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Nah Jace is overrated. He much like bitterblossom will hit like a thud. People will try to make it work but will find out it isn’t all that. Between the 2 BBE keeps Jace in check. Joban while some scoff I promise you BBE is what we should be playing at least as a 3 of and will alter the cards we play. Mizzium Mortars definitely makes a case now and BOP is absolutely the worst of garbage.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Birds of Paradise is now gone. Even if you didn’t like all the stats and theory crafting before BBE just makes there literally no argument to run it. BBE into BOP is laughable! I think instead of the 1 Garruk we can run 1 Nissa. And the Huntmaster slots that were used are now BBE. I’m still working on a list but there are some obvious changes that need to be made such as the removal of Beast Within. That card is the only thing I can think of that would be worse than BOP and I enjoyed it before because it was so flexible.

    Once I have done more play testing I will post what I have found is a solid list.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Moonbreaker just for you I went ahead and did those. Here is the breakdown after choosing 3 different configurations (the suggested change of 8 Ramp and 22 Lands, the most common ran of 9 Ramp and 21 Lands, and the highest chance of attaining the desired outcome using 10 Ramp and 22 Lands):

    Scenario 1: 1 Ramp and 1 Land after mulling down to 6.
    8 Ramp & 22 Lands = 54%
    9 Ramp & 21 Lands = 57%
    10 Ramp & 22 Lands = 62%

    So there is a slight increase in the difference from the suggested adjustment to the common build which was 2% to now 3% which still means not significant enough to me. Even the highest chance to attain the probability was still less than 10% difference.

    Scenario 2: 1 Ramp and 1 Land on the draw.
    8 R & 22 L = 69%
    9 R & 21 L = 72%
    10 R & 22 L = 77%

    Literally the exact same separation from the 1st scenario (ie 3% and 8% from the suggested change)

    Scenario 3: 2 Ramp and 1 Land (this should in theory be the best argument for more Ramp cards as there are more desired Ramp cards for this situation.)

    8 R & 22 L = 21%
    9 R & 21 L = 25%
    10 R & 22 L = 30%

    This is where I will rest my case. The most common build gains 1 more percent to put it at a whopping 4% difference. Even in the scenario which should give more ramp cards the best outcome and highest probability of the desire result is still less than 10%.

    If it was over 10% then sure there is a valid argument to be made but the swap from 1 BOP to 1 Land is indeed negligible.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Quote from 0oSunnYo0 »
    10% more mulligans without birds is the killer for me.

    I'm seeing a lot of calculations are calculating what chance we have of finding a 'perfect' opener of exactly 1 dork 2 lands. Even if the best case scenario is only increased slightly by the presence of birds, you will have 10% more hands without a dork straight up without them so the worst case scenario is significantly more likely without birds.

    Less mulligans = more wins. Birds may not make the deck 'more better' but they do make it 'less bad'.

    This is also wrong. Please stop misleading people. I have stated multiple times now the percentages I gave in my breakdown were from x= being exactly and x> being at least.

    I understand where you are getting your number from. You are looking at the probability of not getting at least 1 mana dork in your opener. The problem with that is quite simple.

    Just because you increase your ability to get a ramp card doesn’t mean you will automatically increase your ability to also get your lands too. We need BOTH the ramp and the lands. If you have 1 Ramp and 1 land you will throw it back more times than not. Same with 1 Ramp and no land which is why I did the math as I did.

    So you’re incorrect with your 10% mulligan as it doesn’t look at the whole picture.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Quote from Pistallion »
    So what should we be taking away from these stats? We need to be looking at 8 mana accelerants vs 10 mana accelerants, right?

    I thought I explained the results pretty well in my breakdown but I will try to rephrase it.

    The goal was to find out which Ramp count and Land count would be the best combination to get the opener desired of at least 1 ramp and 2 lands. Technically the best outcome would be to have 10 Ramp and 22 Lands which totals to 53%. The most common configuration of Ponza lists I have seen is 9 Ramp and 21 Lands which gives a 48% chance to have the correct opener.

    The problem is as both Noob King and I stated before that BOP is literally the worst topdeck in our deck. So the percentage needed to be significantly higher in order to justify the reason to run it. We both advocate running just the 8 Ramp and 22 Land because you only drop 2% to 46% from the “common build” of running the 1 BOP.

    If you believe 2% is a deal breaker then that is your call but knowing that hitting a land is better after your opener should persuade you towards the 8 ramp 22 Lands setup.

    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    I just ran the math in my previous post. Running the probability numbers individually ie how you did it doesn’t help. I ran them combined which is needed. If you would like to check my math here is how I did it as an example...

    8 Ramp (Part 1)
    Population size / 60 (deck size)
    Number of successes in population / 8 (how many ramp cards in deck)
    Sample size / 7 (opening hand)
    Number of successes in sample / 1 (we need at least 1 ramp in opener)
    The 2 relevant numbers are
    X= 0.421712174 which equals 42% and is exactly 1 being in opener
    X> 0.653593571 which equals 65% and is at least 1 in the opener possibly more (> is actually referring to greater than or equal to but I don’t have than symbol on my phone)

    20 Lands (Part 2)
    Population size / 60 (deck size)
    Number of successes in population / 20 (how many land cards in deck)
    Sample size / 6 (this changes because we still need 1 ramp card in the opener thus we have 6 cards remaining)
    Number of successes in sample / 2 (we need 2 lands in the opener)
    X= 0.346839017 which is 35%
    X> 0.660462857 which is 66%

    Combine them (Part 3)
    Simple as you multiply them together
    X= 14%
    X> 42%

    Link for how I learned how to run them together.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Ok so I also ran the numbers with different setups. Here is the breakdown of at least 3 mana (1 ramp and 2 lands) being in the opener...

    (When I put x> that mean greater than or equal to)

    8 Ramp 20 Land x> 42% / x= 14%
    8R 21L x> 44% / x= 15%
    8R 22L x> 46% / x= 14%
    9R 20L x> 46% / x= 14%
    9R 21L x> 48% / x= 15%
    9R 22L x> 50% / x= 14%
    10R 20L x> 48% / x= 17%
    10R 21L x> 51% / x= 14%
    10R 22L x> 53% / x= 14%

    What we can deduce from this is we are going to get exactly the 2 land 1 ramp on average 14% of the time.

    Additionally the difference between 8R + 22L and 10R + 22L which is the biggest in gain from the potential of having at least 1 Ramp and 2 Lands is 7%. What I have seen most list play that still run BOP is 1 BOP and 21 lands, as that was what I was also running, but you only lose 2% from that vs running no BOP and increasing the land count to 22 which is what Noob King was advocating for and it seems like the right decision in my book.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Sorry wrong post. Didn’t see the reply to the mana dorks statistics.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on [Primer] RG Ponza / Modern Land Destruction
    Noob king you are literally switching Huntmaster for Lightning Bolts otherwise you would also have pretty close to a “monster build” list. You aren’t that far off from other lists and I can promise you that 2 Lightning Bolts vs 2 Huntmasters doesn’t make you so much faster than the rest of us.[/quote]

    Monster lists play courser and the list that was posted previously? Didn't even run stone rains main (or acid-moss). That's not a ponza list. All ponza lists are like this:

    4 moons, 4 stone rains, 3-4 acid moss, 4 arbor elf, 4 utopia sprawls. The rest is a mix and match.

    I used to run abrade instead of bolt BECAUSE of affinity. But it was mediocre outside of it so i just decided to switch to bolt. Huntmaster is ok, but having 3 chandras and 3 hazoret (hazoret is way better at ending the game quickly. Huntmaster is way too grindy and even encourages you to stop casting spells), i wouldn't want to over load my 4 slot.

    You somewhat proved my point. Monster lists don’t necessarily run Courser, and that recent list isn’t Ponza as the Stone Rains where in the board with no copies of Acid Moss. It was similar to Ponza but not.

    My list is pretty close to yours that is why I can definitely say your deck / version is not drastically faster than other lists.

    My list vs your list:
    +2 Huntmaster -2 Bolt
    +1 Stormbreath -1 Thragtusk
    +1 Inferno -1 Hazoret
    +1 Garruk -1 Chandra

    Hazoret is great at ending the game but is not what you are playing on T2 maybe a play on T3. If you play Hazoret on T2 more times than not it can’t attack on T3 typically where as Huntmaster would be able to attack if you played it instead on T2.

    My list will change to being 3 Chandra and no Garruk once I can pick up another copy, but at that point our list will be almost exactly the same. So I can say without a doubt your version is not as fast as you might think it is.

    I will say I have considered playing 1 Courser over playing the 1 Birds and have been testing it recently as there are 3 burn decks in my local meta right now, but I don’t advocate doing this if I was to go to a tournament. I would just run the 22 land no bird.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.