Magic Market Index for Aug 17th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for Aug 10, 2018
 
Treasure Cruisin' Modern Big Red
  • posted a message on Abzan / The Rock
    The thing is, on the fb page many people say Ballista is always really good when drawn, its not a simple delirium enabler.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Abzan / The Rock
    What do you guys think about playing Walking Ballista, dropping GQ to the SB and playing 4 Traverse like this list: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1276159#paper

    This is not the first time I saw this version now, and I am a little sceptical on 4 Traverse honestly. It feels quite susceptible to GY hate which you should expect quite a bit already.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Mardu Pyromancer
    Its a reasonable approach to hedge against GY hate a little bit. I personally would love to see a Hazoret in there somewhere though. Also a question to ask is whether Kiln Fiend wouldn't be better of a clock against KCI/Tron. There was a version which ran Fiend maindeck also I think. It would also help for the GY hate issue. But I am not sure whether its the right move or not.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Jund
    I am in general no advocate for any build exclusively. And this has tought me the recent history of Jund. My point of view on the recent history, and the best version of Jund, is the following:

    • Before the unbanning of BBE, when you look at the PT where Reid Duke Top 8ted with Junk, Humans and Hollow One started to really strike hard in the meta. If one would be smart there, one could identify here the best decks in the meta already. This was however completely overshadowed by the unban of BBE, the meta was hit with a massive hype for Jace and BBE. People tried Jace to a massive extent, as well as BBE. And since BBE specifically is great against Jace, BBE became the superior card and Jund was quite successful.
    • After that though, people started to look at decks like Hollow One and Humans again. The hype became less and people realized that Jace was not the greates in modern. At this exact point, we would have needed to realize that we are facing a problem of consistancy, where we cannot beat the more consistant and linear aggro decks. 25 land builds and builds with 4 BBE where just not the best way to build Jund then. I think jaberwocki made a really good approach to make a good jund list at that time. The spicey Jund list was proibably close to the best list at that period. Also Mardu became the best midrange deck to fight those linear strategies.
    • As a next step, Control started to rise again. This is the period we are right now, but could be gone soon also. Jund is decent here, since BBE is great vs Control. This is the reason Jund is popping up more here and there.
    • This is the next step which we don't know yet. The modern meta shifts from week to week, and Bridgevine could be the next big impactful factor. It might be that we need to change our strategy again and try to be a more spicey jund style again like jaberwocki played. It might also be that control remains and BBE is still the best way to play Jund.

    So the key takeaway for me is, we don't need to focus on one particular build and call it the best list and call it a day. I think we need to be more flexible and build our deck new from week to week, which could include drastic changes like Looting builds and non looting builds. In a meta this diverse and changing like we have nowadays, I think it is just necessary.

    And everyone on its own may think otherwise about this. This could be due to specific metas in the own hometown (at LGS). So in my mind, self awareness of ones meta is nowadays close to the most important skill a good Jund player needs to have. Simply because of the reasons stated.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Abzan / The Rock
    Yeah, Reid Dukes match really shows how to do it^^

    You can also watch Reid Dukes interview in that PT, where he says you want to be on defense the whole time, but always be aware of possible chip dmg you can get safely in. You need to find a good balance of dealing with the board vs. developing pressure. Playing mana efficient is very important, so I would probably develop a goyf over holding up a Push on turn 2.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Mardu Pyromancer
    I would play Alpine Moon over Damping Sphere since Sphere hurts as pretty bad as well imo.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Abzan / The Rock
    The starting point for the landcount is not the traverse approach but the standard 23 landbase which you see in reid dukes approach for example.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Abzan / The Rock
    Welcome to the forums!

    The question what remains for me is whether Traverse would be just better or not. You obviously aren't that susceptible to GY hate if you choose Oath, but there is a certain failure rate alongside it, plus you have to live with what you reveal with Oath. Sometimes thats useless as well. Traverse allows you 100 % tutor for a basic, and if delirium is enabled, tutor for any creature you want.

    Instead of playing Oath, I would just play Traverse tbh. You can just swap them, and play the 2 copies. I think it would be a bit more consistant.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Mardu Pyromancer
    @T3erbium: Very intense work you did there. Here are some comments on my part on this:

    First of all, your assumption only says you take into account a need for turn 1 black mana and no turn 1 red mana. I think this is a very important detail that you cannot dismiss. Despite the fact that we do not want to cast Looting ideally on turn 1, we absolutely need to be able to do so though. Why? Simply said it reduces the amount of hands you have to mulligan. In a grindy deck where CA matters this is very important. And to add, we also just want to be able to cast Bolt on turn 1.

    My question is concerning about the dmg / manabase number you provided. How do you exactly calculate that? How did you include plays like holding up fetchlands for a Push/Bolt and if there is no target fetching an tapped shocklands etc? I think this is not that simple to determine without serious simplifications that probably carry over a wrong picture.

    When it comes down to replacing Blackcleave Cliffs with Dragonskull Summit for Budget reasons, it is clear that this comes with a cost of consistancy. Since we determined now we absolutely want turn 1 red and turn 1 black on a consistant basis, Cliffs is the clear better choice.

    You can easily determine the loss of consistancy by looking at Frank Karsten's mana source article: It is assumed, that "consistant" means with ~90 % probability. And for each colour, you need 14 untapped sources to have ~ 90 % probability of having the said colour on turn 1. If you now look at your budget manabase, it only contains 12 untapped black sources on turn 1. Just by recalculating that number in the hypergeometric calculator you drop your chance of having turn 1 black source down to 80.9 %. This is almost a 10 % loss in consistancy, which is quite huge over the course of a series of games.

    And I am not so sure the turn 2 matters all that much here. I think if you compare Blackcleave with Dragonskull, the most important aspect of them is turn 1. On turn 2, assuming you have played another land on turn 1, both lands do the same thing 99.5 % of the time. The other 0.5 % is the chance of having exactly 2 Dragonskulls drawn in your first 8 cards and no other land (which matter once every 178 games on average). So overall I am not sure what the benefit is of linking turn 1 black with turn 2 red in the numbers. The important part is here again, that Dragonskull is overall worse than Cliffs on turn 2. But the effect is way more significant on turn 1, which is the main deciding factor. So I would look at the sheer number of turn 1 probabilites here. Because if you played a tapped Dragonskull on turn 1, you also have a red source turn 2 automatically, but the probability of adding turn 2 red source into the turn 1 black source numbers really distort the probabilities of turn 1 black source in my opinion. In your combinatorial calculation your difference in the manabases is only 3-5 %, wheras I showed that on turn 1 specifically, the difference is almost 10 %. That is way more important than the combinatorial number.

    Lastly, overall I think mulligans don't really have a meaningful impact when it comes down to mana sources, it is also not included in the Frank Karsten article. What mulliganing has more of an affect on is on the actual landdrops you make, not linked to coloured mana sources though. Because the consistancy within your manabase you use is also there when you draw fewer cards. You obviously don't have 90 % probability anymore, but this is true for both manabase, so comparing manabases in terms of mana sources should not really have a significant difference in taking a look at mulliganing:

    14 sources:

    7 cards: 86.1 %
    6 cards: 81.2 %
    5 cards: 75 %
    4 cards: 66.5 %

    12 sources:

    7 cards: 80.9 %
    6 cards: 74.5 %
    5 cards: 68.6 %
    4 cards: 60.1 %

    The difference in percentage points when you go down on cards is on a different absolute level, but on a similar relative level. So I don't see a correlation here between the different manabases.

    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Jund
    Oh yeah I am totally with you then. I think overall Ooze is probably stronger than Spellbomb against Control (except against Grixis Control, but against any UWx based Control deck for sure)
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Jund

    I noticed on the sideboard guide on MTGSalvantion, it says board out Scoozes and not board in Nihil spellbombs, I agree with the later, but Im not sure about boarding out Scooze. At a lot of points, all I needed was another beater to put pressure on…maybe next time I’ll cut 1-2 Scoozes. I think this should be changed on the Jund Sideboard Guide Primer.

    One thing that made me feel like Bad Luck Chuck was hitting a dead Abrupt Decay with the BBE Cascade 3 times this tournament, Post-Board!…I play 1 and left it in to hit Azcanta, D-sphere, Queller and other sideboard tech, But next time I’ll will board it out. The 2 Maelstrom Pulses which overperformed the tournament should be enough, to bad they always have the Logic Knot to counter it..


    Concerning Oozes, its optional since Ooze is not particularly exciting against Control decks but okay. The theoretical value of Ooze neglecting a Snapcaster is more theroy than actually truth and that means Ooze is just a bear in that matchups. I included cutting Ooze in the Sideboard option because Reid Duke also tends to cut Oozes in Control matchups. I would not really overthink one particular game where you had too few pressure going. I wouldn't let myself bias my way of boarding in general because of that.

    The same goes for Decay. Its on average good to leave in, I would not suggest to board it out next time just because it was bad one game. Don't be biased! Next time your opponent exiles LoTV with DSphere and you will regret that. It is overall correct to leave it in.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Jund
    I am not quite sold on Cages. It does stop a lot of whats going on, but not all of it. Its not gonna prevent a reveler from being cast cheaply, it doesn't stop bridge. I personally like Surgical in that spot more since it is great vs Tron as well. And if I can improve my tron matchup to a certain extent, I am happily doing so I think.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Mardu Pyromancer
    Quote from sick1982 »
    What would you guys do? You are on the play and don't know what your opponent is up to. Opening hand is:
    Bloodstained Mire, Fatal Push, Thoughtseize, 2x Faithless Looting, 2x Lingering Souls

    Shock + Thoughtseize and go to 15? Looting to drop the 2 lingering souls (and find land or less painful discard spell).


    I would just TS. I would avoid Looting on turn 1 if you don't know the opponent. In grindy matchups your front halves of Souls might be very useful, so I would just play TS.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Abzan / The Rock
    Quote from Brightmist »
    Keeping thoughtseizes in doesn't help the deck grind any better, it actually makes it way worse.

    I feel trying to hit CoCo with thoughtseize is playing not to lose. Eventho it's a 2-for-1, extra removal instead of thoughtseize can still be cashed in more effectively. Like you can't hit topdecked CoCo with thoughtseize, similiarly, you can't hit CoCo with a topdecked thoughtseize if opponent has enough mana open to cash in CoCo.

    CoCo is a high variance card and when it's good, it's really good but you can generally play through it if opponent doesn't hit jackpot and they generally won't since CoCo decks do have a lot of air in the 60 in the form of dorks, this includes bant spirits too.

    Traverse shell doesn't have the most grinding power, it is probably be worse at grinding compared to Jund or any other BGx deck but we have a flexible removal package and combined with our lifegaining threats like scooze and rhino, I feel we can get there against spirits decks most of the time.

    CoCo is also another moment for spirits decks where they have their shields down and you can cash in your removal. You can either hit a creature with coco on stack or hit what they put on the table with ETB triggers on the stack. Nightmare scenario where they hit double drogskol or a combination of drogskol/image/kira to get a lock is pretty rare.



    The point is in my mind, when you leave in TS, you are effecively saying we don't want to grind, but compete playing the tempo game. CoCo is a tempo card, and TS is a card which can snag it also before they could cast it, making it easier for us to put them on chump block mode, since they will less likely overrun us beforehand. But of course there are the obvious downsides to leaving TS against an aggro deck.

    Quote from SmauG »

    I like the math in here, it makes sense. To be critical, would it be the same if the hit was Eidolon of the great Revel? Or do we always just take 2dmg for removing it once it lands? And what if you need your removal for Goblin Guide?
    Love to hear about a more comprehensive strategy versus burn.


    If you can, you almost certainly don't want to hit Eidolon with your discard. Because usually, Eidolon trades best with us, since it only deals 2 dmg and costs 2 mana (when you kill it right away). I would rather take a Bolt/Spike/Rift Bolt. But the problem is it means you absolutely have to kill it first before you do something else. If you can't do that, you probably have to take it with discard though. Overall though I am not too concerned about Eidolon, also due to the fact that we can potentially kill it for free with a LoTV on the table.

    Goblin Guide is indeed also a needed target for removal, but you could potentially take 4 from it if you are light on removal and feel you would get screwed by an Eidolon. I would only do that though if I had a goyf or so to throw in the way of a Guide on turn 2 (otp). When you are on the play, you can even ignore the guide somewhat if you have a turn 2 goyf (and there is nothing more important to do) since Guide would only do 2 dmg then theoretically.

    Overall its all about thinking about how many life we loose with how many mana from them. On average its 3 dmg per mana. If you can get a deal which is below that (one mana 2 dmg in the case of Guide or the best: 2 mana for only 2 dmg in case of eidolon) then you can squeeze the best chance of winning out of that since the opponent can get to a point where they need 1-2 extra drawsteps before they find their lethal spell. If you balance that with an early Goyf, then you can kill the opponent beforehand.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • posted a message on Abzan / The Rock
    Quote from SmauG »
    I'd rather take two on my own terms than taking 3+ in the air with some hexproof giving lord or Queller Backup. It's all about efficiency. Same thing with Burn. Never board out TS. Taking Boros charm has net you +2life. Think about it.


    Uh I have to intervene here :p

    The classic argument of saving 2 life against Burn with TS by taking Boros Charm. I'll give you my perspective on this by linking the sideboard guide from the primer:

    "One of the most common misconceptions involveds around Thoughtseize vs. Burn. Its incredibly bad to leave TS in. But why is that? I often hear people arguing that TS is not as bad against Burn, because you can potentially snatch a Boros Charm or Atarkas Command, effectively gaining 2 life, right? Well, its not that simple.

    I look at Burn as being a combo deck, which just has to resolve 6-7 spells in order to win the game. Generally, each spell will do 3 or sometimes 4 dmg to the opponent, so for 20 life --> 7 spells with 3 dmg per spell or 6 spells with two spells dealing 4 dmg are needed. Burn is a very consistant deck (its a critical mass deck). It will more often than not draw the needed spells and just win. Now, when you are playing TS and taking Boros Charm out of the opponent’s hand, you annul the effect of Boros Charm which would have otherwise dealt 4 dmg to your face. But what you also did through this, is effective casting a free Shock on yourself. Combines this with a simple fetch you potentially did prior to this (even if you only fetched for 1) you effectively cast a free Lightning Bolt on yourself. So what did TS actually do for you? Nothing. You took Boros Charm, but bolted you alongside. You gave the opponent 1 of the 7 spells needed to kill you. (And to note, even if you don’t fetch for 1, you effectively cast a combo spell piece on yourself by casting TS, going down to 18 life and the burn player now just needs 6 instead of 7 3-dmg spells) So to conclude, if you TS the Burn player, you take away one spell they have but they simply have to draw one less spell alongside, which is just doing nothing."

    So do you still think you are likely to save 2 life?

    Now concerning the Spirits matchup I am not sure its basically the same thing with TS. Generally I think its not wrong to take out TS. but Spell Queller specifically makes it a little harder.
    Posted in: Midrange
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.