Quote from RubarbKnight »
Second is how it narrows down the approach towards deck building
- say i build a Niv mizzet deck, i could run a lot of different win cons and strategies. But if i include curiosity, it will always be the most effective way to win. Therefore, no matter how i build the deck, seeing as magic is competitive it will always be a deck with "primary" win con to combo off.
Just to be clear, this is not true. As a six-year player of a rather highly tuned, combo-enabled, labor-of-love Niv-Mizzet deck, I can tell you that the Niv combos hardly ever are the actual win. It's usually something like a Winds of Change with Consecrated Sphinx on board that wins.
Quote from Teysa_Karlov »
Secondly, there is a limit to how much disruption you can run in your own deck before the table is warped around the combo player. For every copy of Pithing Needle, Duress, and Cabal Therapy, which do nothing to further your own victory, merely prevent the combo player from winning, that's a card that isn't making your deck go round. Especially if the combo player is in blue, and can easily tutor for Pact of Negation/Force of Will/Daze. That's the major issue.
The issue you're missing is that just because you are running counters and removal does not mean you are going to have it when that infinite hits the board and ends the game. Especially with an unknown playgroup, which a large percentage of players use. Not everyone has a set group where they know everyone's deck and what their win cons are.
And you just used a variation of the argument I attributed to Carthage : having an answer available (in hand or library) is not always sufficient to stop the combo player, so combo is bad (weak version)/unstoppable (strong version). Your argument is actually making an even bigger, broader, bolder claim than his. Way to double down, I guess.
Magic is a game partially characterized by randomness. This randomness means that sometimes you have or don't have an answer to your opponent's play, whether that's a combo, a massive army, or just a single permanent that neuter a your whole deck. That's just the game, and it is a very poor line of argument indeed to hold that against combo specifically.
1
1
I think a lot of the trouble lantern has with the deck is that the creatures it does have dodge most of your removal. Sure Decay can hit the shadows, but there are bound to be more shadows than decays and we have nothing for angler or tasigur, which will clock you too fast while you're struggling to hit a bridge. BLastR helps shore up that weakness by giving you both removal for the things you can't normally hit and acting like extra bridges in the matchup. Maelstrom pulse is also looking like a card I want to sideboard now for that reason, it can two for one the shadows, which can be big, or it can handle a tasigur or an angler, which is something we don't normally have removal for. Once I get a couple, I'm going to try -2 Brutality +2 BLastR maindeck, and I've already squeezed the pulse into my sideboard.
1
1
Does this mean it's time to try moving the lantern party to eternal???
1
I'm very interested in brewing this Dimir variant further.
How do you feel about the discard suite? Was 6/9 enough for you? I feel like I really want to be on 8 maindeck discard spells, but fatal push also one for ones a creature just as well as the fourth inquisition. You lose out on selection/information though, which worries me.
19 Lands is a lot, but I imagine the fetches offset it some, how did that work for you? Have you had any trouble with singleton ruins? Any thoughts on running duskmantle? Or are these cut to reduce your colorless lands?
No Cranes in blue black? I don't like them in other lists but they seem perfect for the dimir version, especially if you're taking a more relaxed approach and not trying to race the lock down asap, which seems to be the case.
Did you ever feel like tezzeret would have been really good? I had him in at a 2 of in the main deck and he's a good dig effect and a tertiary win on the spot, but I don't know how crucial he is to the deck.
Only 3 whirs? I feel like you definitely want 4, especially if you're running without cranes or other non-mill dig. I was playing 2 bridges and 4 whir and never had trouble with getting it when I needed.
On blind mill: It's valid to say that it doesn't change your odds of seeing the card you want immediately (you need a bridge to stop their army immediately or lose, etc.) as you're just getting a different single random card anyway. But it does change your game state in ways that can matter as you move deeper into the game. The difference is both small and situational, I don't think there's really a right answer, except to say that blind milling for the late game (in the rare cases where you make it very far without seeing a lantern) is worth doing provided you have a recursion tool.
1
Lantern is strong in a diverse meta because it has the tools to tear apart and defend against any deck possible inside the modern cardpool. If you want to succeed playing it, though, you need to be able to quickly assess your opponent's game plan and make a few extremely narrow decisions to shut it down ASAP because the deck does not forgive small mistakes. What to tutor, what to needle, what modes to brutality with, your sequencing etc. You have to be able to make all these decisions perfectly and quickly. Lantern is probably not a deck to try learning on short notice, but if you have the time go for it.
2
In my case I can loop brutality if I must find a way to win without mill (which is extremely rare in the first place). The only deck that could conceivably halt my win with the lock established and safe is something with preboard leyline of sanctity and ways to not care about deckout, which doesn't exist in any meaningful capacity to my knowledge and might take me to time? Even if my opponent was to board in to emulate that, I have nature's claim to remove their hexproof.
The scenarios in which production is actually useful to cementing the lock are so few and corner casey that I think you really just lose out on consistency by including it. And the win the game mode is just totally unnecessary to the deck's gameplan.
2
4 Mox Opal
4 Blooming Marsh
3 Llanowar Wastes
2 Aether Hub
2 Ghost Quarter
2 Academy Ruins
2 Inventors' Fair
1 Sea Gate Wreckage
1 Swamp
Lock
4 Lantern of Insight
4 Codex Shredder
3 Ghoulcaller's Bell
1 Pyxis of Pandemonium
4 Ensnaring Bridge
2 Pithing Needle
4 Inquisition of Kozilek
3 Surgical Extraction
3 Collective Brutality
1 Thoughtseize
2 Abrupt Decay
Dig/Consistency
4 Ancient Stirrings
3 Mishra's Bauble
1 Infernal Tutor
3 Nature's Claim
3 Welding Jar
2 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Pithing Needle
1 Pyxis of Pandemonium
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Collective Brutality
1 Thoughtseize
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Abrupt Decay
I'm really in love with this deck. It 4 ofs my favorite durdley artifact, it's extremely competitive, it's a blast to play and it mines salt like no other deck in magic. There must be something about losing your spells before you even cast them that places it above counterspells on the 'feelbads' hierarchy of answers. It's a great sensation to see my opponents' hands trembling in rage as they mutter scoop and reluctantly pick up their cards to a field full of durdley rocks after realizing they have no outs left in their ever thinning pile. I'll be playing this deck to death for as long as it's around and I hope everyone else here is enjoying it as much as I am.
I've just taken it to my first two paper modern events and had a blast both times. The first week I went 1-2 scoop, however both my losses were due to clumsy misplays. Nevertheless I had some interesting games. Round one I played eightrack, g1 I lost to a couple early racks after not finding answers and failing to keep pace with fair. G2 I crushed him after going hellbent and milling the racks away. G3 I lost lantern to an inquisition on turn one and then got them extracted. But I managed to pull out a tense win scrying him with bauble/ruins every turn and ticking down 1 life at a time as my fair fought against 2 racks I let through early. He had a ravens crime and I had dropped extractions in the board so I couldn't stop him dropping me back to 2 cards every turn. I finally won after flipping him into a needled lily and clawing my way back out of rack range. Round 2 was burn, and I lost game 1 to a risky no land mopal hand I shouldn't have kept. G2 my opponent kept a one lander and I managed to keep him helpless on one land the entire game after blindmilling him off his second land turn one. G3 he drew four eidolons in his opener, which went predictably horrible for me without extractions. Round 3 was affinity and I dropped the match after cracking bauble in the wrong step, big misplay on my part and I would have won the match if not for that.
Next week I learned from my mistakes and did much better, I crushed bant eldrazi, jeskai thing ascension and delver in the first three rounds, then played the mirror at the top table, which turns out to be mill chicken since everyone's shredders will be needled or dead.
So I'm actually contributing something to the thread, these mechanized production suggestions are not good. The deck doesn't need a 'real' wincon. You should never time out if you're on your game (barring slow play). And any of the possible alternatives to the deckout are just going to clutter the list. The only time they're acceptable is if they actively contribute to the lock or building redundancy in the process for reasons that have been stated many times already itt. If you really want something that can end the game with a tangible damage clock, my suggestion is saheeli. She can scry you if you're still looking for lantern and don't know whether to blindmill, she can make copies of rocks/lanterns, she can tutor redundant pieces to solidify the lock against grudge/whatever, and she does nontargeting damage if that's your thing. For 3 Mana as a one of she fits the bill better than anything like mechanized production ever will. Much like spellbomb, she brings something valuable to the table while giving you the clock if you really need it.