- how insensitive
- Registered User
Member for 1 year, 11 months, and 8 days
Last active Thu, Mar, 21 2019 10:49:02
- 0 Followers
- 0 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
Oct 27, 2018Hi barrin_master_wizard It took a while, but I already had the template pretty much made thanks to my previous work on Lantern.Posted in: Control
So, breaking down the data, this is what's going on (please forgive me if you have already figured some of this out, I don't know what parts you don't know, and I'd rather be thorough in the explanation):
Opening Hand Data tab: This is where all of the data from the gameplay videos is entered. I enter in if it's preboard or postboard, what deck the opponent is playing, if the Utron pilot is on the play or draw, if the game is won or lost, if the match is won or lost, who the pilot was, and how many of each card are in the opening hand. The columns on the far right automatically calculate various things, like how many cards are in the opening hand, how many lands are in the opening hand, if there is a blue source in the opening hand, if the hand contains natural tron, if the hand contains two of the three tron lands, etc.
The data in the Opening Hand Data tab is used to create pivot tables that show win rates with various numbers of each card in the opening hand, or comparing statistics based on the columns on the far right (natural tron, etc.).
Weighted Data Trends tab:
Column A has each card name, referenced from the associated pivot table for that card.
Column B shows the number of wins with no copies of the associated card in the opening hand.
Column C shows the number of games with no copies of the associated card in the opening hand.
Column D calculates that win rate, using the numbers from columns B and C.
Column E shows the number of wins with one copy of the associated card in the opening hand.
Column F shows the number of games with one copy of the associated card in the opening hand.
Column G calculates that win rate using the numbers from columns E and F.
Column H finds the difference in win rates between having one copy (column G) and zero copies (column D).
Column I is used to weigh the data. There will be different numbers of games to be compared for each card, since the cards are randomized in the deck. The issue before weighing the data was that something may have a great increase or decrease in win rates when the card is in the opener, but the sample size is too small to be reliable. Thus, I use a function in column I to weigh the data according to sample size. The way the function works is that I divide the number of games the card was in the opener by the total number of games. The more games that the card was in the opener, the larger this fraction will be, and the greater the weight is that will be applied to column G.
Column J is the product of the difference in win rates from zero to one (column H) and the weight (column I).
I also wanted to be aware of diminishing returns, though. Sometimes a card will be great in the opener, but having multiples is not so great for us. So the block of columns K through O do the same steps for the difference between one and two copies, the blocks of columns P through T do the same steps for the difference between two and three copies, and so on.
Columns AE and AF are used to find the overall weighted data trends with diminishing returns considered. If there is no data on having multiples of a card, then column AF will display "No Data". If the overall diminishing returns is negative, column AF will display "Negative". If the overall diminishing returns is positive, the a value (the product of column J and column AE) will be displayed. The function isn't perfect, but it's what I've been using for now.
After I've entered the gameplay data into the Opening Hand Data tab, I update the Weighted Data Trends tab to see if there is new data for having multiples of a card and then sort the rows by columns AF, AE, and J, in that order. Those columns are also color-coded to help read the cards that correlate with wins better or worse.
Additional Data Points tab: Some decks have specific data points that make it unique from others. For example, with this deck we might want to compare hands that have natural tron to hands that do not. Or, we might want to compare win rates of being on the draw naturally versus being on the draw with Gemstone Caverns in hand (putting us "on the play", in a sense). It gives us win rates for the different numbers of lands in the opener, number of cards in the opener (mulligan trends), win rates if we have a blue source in our opener, etc. There's plenty more data points we can look at, but that's where I ask for suggestions. What specific combinations of cards do people want to see? I can set up the spreadsheet to look at exactly that, usually.
As for using the spreadsheet for deckbuilding and tweaking, I need to reiterate what I've posted before (and on reddit).
First, I should probably explain the approach. Using the idea that every competitive Modern deck is designed to either deny the opponent the ability to have significant interaction with the gamestate, or to minimize what interaction they are allowed to have with the gamestate, the first few turns of the game are key to how each Modern deck will successfully accomplish this task. The phrase "Modern is a turn four format" is probably not new to anyone reading this, and pretty much aligns with this concept. If a deck isn't trying to either win as quickly as possible, denying the opponent the "time" (future turns) to make significant interaction, then it's probably trying to stop the opponent from achieving a quick win. Our goal in Mono Blue Tron is to either deny the opponent from making the plays they need to win as soon as possible or to delay them until we can make more significant plays. In those first four turns each player will have access to ten cards on the play or 11 cards on the draw, assuming neither player takes a mulligan. Thus, the opening hand will account for between 64% to 70% of the resources available to maintain control of the direction of the game during those crucial turns.
So, with the idea that our ability to maintain some control over the first few turns of the game is (or just survive that long) is going to be crucial to winning the game, I focus on the opening hand. It is very important to pay attention to more than just columns AF, AE, and J! For example, it may look like Island is the "worst card correlating with win percentages in the deck". But this does not take into account the context! What kind of opening hands would an experienced Utron pilot keep that did not have an Island in the opening hand? Well, a hand with natural tron and a Wurmcoil is a great example. That's quite a good opening hand. If we actually look at the win rates of opening hands with an Island, we'll see that the win rate is 66.46% (315/474 games). That's still quite an impressive win rate. It just happens to be lower than the win rate of hands that are kept without one Island. Paying careful attention to each number is very important here, otherwise we could easily be misguided or misinterpret the numbers, as you mention above.
What I've been doing to use this data to tweak my list is to pay attention to the cards that correlate the best with increased win percentages, but also pay attention to the diminishing returns. Here are some examples:
Supreme Will: This card seems to correlating quite well with increased wins, but the diminishing returns shows a sharp decline. The sample size on the diminishing returns is also quite small, though. Thus, for now, I know that I would love to have one in the opening hand, but I'm not ready to risk increasing the chance of having two. Therefore, I run three in my main.
Chalice of the Void: Nearly the exact same scenario as Supreme Will, above. I run three of these as well.
Thirst for Knowledge: Yes, it's pretty much ubiquitous that we run a full playset of this card. For me, though, it's comforting to see the numbers support this decision. I don't want to simply believe something is true because it's popular and everyone agrees that it's true, I want to know what is true.
Remand: See Supreme Will and Chalice of the Void explanations Same scenario, I run three.
Now, I've skipped over Condescend and Anticipate. It appears that it might be better if we cut a Condescend for the same reason that I only run three Will, Chalice, and Remand. I just haven't personally pulled the trigger on that yet. I'm inclined to cut the fourth Condescend for an Anticipate, which scores great. These are my flex numbers for now.
The wincons (Mindslaver, Wurmcoil Engine, Ugin, etc.) are obviously not the best to have in the opener. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that having a 6+ drop in the opener isn't going to get us far in the first few turns without somehow assembling a fast tron. This does not mean we cut these cards, it just means that we need to be aware of how these cards are going to affect our chances at winning when they're in the opening hand. Most of that's relatively common sense, though.
I also use the data to figure out what the best performing sideboard cards are. For example, Summary Dismissal seems to perform very well, as does Spreading Seas, Negate, Silent Arbiter, and Filigree Familiar. Each of these cards are great at multiple matchups (Silent Arbiter being amazing in one of our worst matchups, Merfolk!).
So that's the spreadsheet, explained, and how I prefer to use the data. When combined with pierakor's MORT data (which gives better data on which wincons and singletons work the best, but isn't so good at finding correlating wins for cards that are run in multiples), we can use actual empirical data to tweak and build the deck.
Oct 23, 2018First, let me start off by saying, "whew". That was a lot of workPosted in: Control
Just finished entering all of the matches from pierakor's "mono best tron" playlist, plus SwissRolls' games, into the sheet. We now have 960 games of Utron analyzed. You can view the spreadsheet here. Some key takeaways that I've noticed:
Best scoring three cards: The tron lands
Gemstone Caverns gets us just under a percent increase in win percentages when we're on the draw.
Best nonland cards to have in the opening hand are, in order, Repeal, Condescend, Supreme Will, Chalice of the Void, Anticipate, Thirst for Knowledge, and Remand.
Worst cards to have in the opening hand, in order from worst to best, are Treasure Mage, Ugin, and Wurmcoil Engine. Expedition Map is the next worst after that, but actually has a positive correlation to win percentages so long as there are no multiples. Ugin and Wurmcoil seem pretty self-explanatory for not being so great in the opener, but I'm a little more surprised at Treasure Mage. I suppose it makes sense, though. The body is fine, but what we get is useless if we don't live long enough to cast it. Having something that actually disrupts the opponent seems to perform much better for us.
The deck mulligans relatively well, going from a 69.41% win percentage with a full opener to 63.59% with six cards.
The deck performs relatively well with varied numbers of lands. Four is best (74.89%), followed by three (68.38%), five (64.15%), and two (63.12%).
Quite a bit more information to be gleaned there. Feel free to check it out, I figure it could help lead to some good conversation about deck tweaks.
Jul 1, 2018I managed to finish in 64th place for the open and I'm happy with that although I wanted better. For the decklist check two posts up, I don't feel it's needed to repost it. Here I'll do a breakdown for the 15 rounds I played but I won't go too into the match specifics instead I'll general matchup advice, maybe one or two interesting points so that this post isn't super long and it will be more helpful.Posted in: Control
Round 1: Eldrazi Tron 2-1 This matchup is favored for us, plan is to stick a wurm and counter their stuff while stopping the 1 or 2 ulamogs. Bring in the bigger removal and threats, take out the non-tron ramp and repeals and chalice
Round 2: 1-2 Affinity This matchup is bad but not the worst by far. Ballista is the MVP here and its hard to lose with it. Bring in all the removal, the mass bounce, cut a slaver, a titan, the solemn, the talismans and everything else you think is too slow
Round 3: 0-2 Humans This matchup is pretty 50/50 depending on their draw. I mulled to 5 both games so not much to say. Go up removal take out as much counter magic as you can starting with remands and then getting condescend and cut the slow ramp.
Round 4: 1-1 Affinity Somehow managed to draw with affinity. Opp was pretty new to the deck and playing super slow, g3 I had an angel and chalice on 1 but couldn't assemble slaver lock in time. Same sb advice as above
Round 5: 2-0 G-tron Was feeling pretty down here as my start was bad but came back with a win in a tough matchup. Bring in the land hate and try to do everything possible to surgically a tron piece. Its the best way to win post-board. Idk how you win g1 just get lucky I guess
Round 6: 2-1 U/W Control A good matchup for once! Just save your counters for when they play something that actually matters, or you are resolving a threat. Try and bait them with non game ending threats first and save your salvers/titans for when it is most likely to land. Go up counter magic go down removal, although I keep 1 dismember in. Take out non-tron ramp.
Round 7: 2-0 Sultai Delver Opp played basically sultai control, found out they had delvers after the match. See u/w control same plan
Round 8: 2-0 Ad nauseum Also an excellent matchup, counter their combo ez. Chalice on 0 is key here to stop pact go up counter magic down slow ramp and big threats
Round 9: 2-0 R/G Eldrazi A pretty good matchup sb and plan is the same as eldrazi tron in round 1.
I won't do the day 2 matches as there wasn't much to talk about as my performance was poor (2-4) and it didnt reflect how the matchups normally go. For the record I beat Hollow One, lost to Elves, Blue moon,U/B Faeries, and G/W Value but lots of mulligans and some poor play on my part. One of the wins was a bye as well.
Overall thoughts on the list/event: I mostly enjoyed the main deck except for a couple of things. Chalice didn't feel good in the main and I'm not sure it belongs there, it's pretty slow on the draw and I think it could be better to just be another ballista or something. For the side, I dont know if 2 spell pierces is needed and spreading seas is always questionable. TKS was great and comes in a lot of matches. I will be doing some experimenting on stream with some different ideas I have. For the tournament I'm really unhappy with my day 2 record and know I could have done better but 64th isnt bad and it does cash so overall it's ok. If you have any questions about the list, a matchup, or whatever ask and I'll answer it. As a reminder I stream at twtich.tv/rjawa so follow me there and you will get a better insight into the deck.
Jun 30, 2018Finished 6-2-1 after day one of the SCG Open today which is good enough to make the day 2 cut. Had a rough start but managed to get 5 wins in a row in order to stay alive. Prob the lone U-tron player on day two so hoping to win some matches and get the deck on the map. Expect a full write up here after the event and I'll talk about it on stream too. In case you cant wait, here is a link to the 75 I played: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1163423#paperPosted in: Control
Apr 18, 2018Posted in: ModernQuote from NovemberMagnus »So I want to try brewing in modern, but I'm not sure if it's worth it. I'm pretty new, so I don't quite have a grasp on the speed of different formats, but I've heard of some pretty scary things in modern. Like, apparently there's a deck that swings with a 14 power flier (or something like that) on turn 3 with average draw? Yikes.
If it's that fast a meta, then I'm kinda worried all my johnny combos will just be blitzed down before I get to do anything, and here I thought that this would be a format that allowed more creativity than standard. But a guy at my lgs told me that maybe 1 card a set sees any modern play. That sounds like, REALLY stale.
So just how high is the power level here compared to standard? Is there any room for rogue decks here? Or will the local modern events just eat me alive if I bring anything less than a tier 1 netdeck?
honestly, modern is a mix. the power level (and complexity) is a significant cut above standard, but it's definitely not as extreme as you've been led to believe. Modern is almost the home of rogue decks these days. the number of new cards which impact Modern is actually pretty high. What you usually don't see is those new cards outright supplanting the mega pillars of the format such as tarmogoyf. However, the metagame of Modern always swings around a bit after a new set-release as things balance out, and cards such as fatal push, as foretold, hollow one and kitesail freebooter can spawn whole decks out of nowhere or up-end the format entirely for months.
modern decks on the whole tend to utilise a lot of synergy rather than raw power. this is true for all the major archetypes. even aggro decks often have a synergistic combo-esque element i.e. burning-tree emissary+reckless bushwhacker. the best decks right now are probably as follows, but it changes frequently:
humans and affinity are synergy-based aggro decks that use mostly small creatures (e.g. champion of the parish and vault skirge). Humans overcomes this issue because their creatures are disruptive (e.g. kitesail freebooter) and therefore able to pick apart opposing decks while presenting a fairly quick clock. Affinity overcomes the tiny creature problem (e.g. ornithopter) by playing cards like cranial plating and arcbound ravager.
Hollow One is a new deck and is a mix of aggro/combo. It's a slow aggro deck, but a couple of synergistic combo elements allow the deck to put down very aggressive starts every few games which boosts its overall win % by a reasonable amount. it's currently quite popular and some have called it the best deck in modern (debatable! but i can see why they'd say it for sure).
Jund is a slower, midrange deck that plays lots of cheap removal and ways to disrupt an opponent's hand. It leverages this advantage by playing the most efficient cheap threats in magic, such as tarmogoyf. it keeps players in topdeck mode with liliana of the veil and out-advantages opposing topdecks by having man-lands such as raging ravine and card advantage from cards like dark confidant. It recently got a boost from bloodbraid elf, which was banned for a few years and is now legal again. Jund is the only deck on this quick breakdown which favours card power over synergy.
New decks crop up all the time, and the metagame is always shifting around, so it's the opposite of stale. In fact, this actually freaks some people out:
- many modern players assume modern is this hugely stable format where decks maintain a roughly equivalent status in the metagame all the time. In fact, decks swing in and out of popularity on a regular basis in predictable cycles, but it doesn't stop a paranoid vocal part of the community from calling for bans like crazed maniacs every time a new deck swims up to the top tier for a month or so. keep an eye out for this, it's both funny and infuriating.
the modern metagame (to roll with my point above) varies cycles of about a month. most decks in modern float around being visible but rarely win anything outright. That's modern in a nutshell. Expect to see a wide variety of decks when you play, but don't expect them to consistently stay at the top. As soon as one deck does well, everything shifts subtly to beat it, and the cycle continues. What's 'the best' and 'banworthy' right now will be mid-tier reasonableness in a month or two. Rogue or fringe decks put up results all the time, even winning GP level events. in amongst this variation, there are a few stalwart decks which do a great job of always being baseline playable. Abzan/Jund (one of them, at least) is a good example of this. there's always a playable midrange deck, although which one does change over time. Tron and affinity are other examples - never busted, just always there. Lower down the tier-roster we have decks like Merfolk, which while always there and baseline playable is rarely if ever top-tier. decks like that are great for local events and as a rogue contender for some larger tournaments.
the format of modern is fast, but not really fast in the sense that you've been led to believe. Mainly it's fast in the sense that you always need to have done something meaningful by turn three, to either a) interact with your opponent and stall what they're doing or b) get aggressive.
what that means isn't perhaps as intense as you suggested in your above post. your disruption could be as little as lightning bolt or an inquisition of kozilek, and that's usually enough to give you a nice start if your gameplan is to lightly disrupt and then beat down your opponent with value creatures such as grim flayer or snapcaster mage. it's rare for decks to outright win on turn three or four, but it does happen if you can't interact with them somehow. mainly though, you'll be seeing aggressive decks (either combo or aggro) winning around turn 5. Most combos in modern rely on creatures in some form, so creature removal tends to be at a premium in the format overall. for instance, devoted druid and vizier of remedies gives you infinite G, which is a popular combo from the last six months or so. hollow one uses burning inquiry to drop an early 4/4 or two. that's a pseudo combo which is also remedied by decent creature removal. I could go on, but you get the idea.
the best removal spells in modern are these:
two and three mana options are played far less, but do see occasional play if the deck wants it (i.e. abrupt decay and kolaghan's command both see reasonable play)
at Modern tournaments, you generally see most opponents rocking something from the top 2 tiers of Modern. That's pretty broad (around 80 decks overall) and you'll certainly see historic/new/rogue/fringe decks with some regularity, but it's generally the norm to see most opponents playing something with a proven record in the format. more competitive players will switch around between what's "tier 1" so keeping an eye on those can give you a hint on what to expect. There's usually some kind of 'new hotness' floating around in modern, and there'll always be a chunk of players building and testing these new decks. keeping abreast of the modern news will keep you prepared for this. on a local level, players often get known for playing a specific deck, so "the storm guy" etc. This is actually a really great part of modern and allows for conversations and a sense of community as people master their archetype or even switch around between different ones.
there's a few 'controversial' decks in modern. for the most part, these decks are mid-tier reasonable decks that have been floating around for some time and occasionally appear in a top-8 or something. They slide in and out of popularity, and it's great that these decks are able to exist because it allows more people to express themselves through their own playstyle. some people just love to hate them though. Tron is one such deck. On the face of it, it's a completely reasonable ramp deck and plays big colourless cards to take over, from about turn 3-4 depending on the draw (e.g. karn liberated). it's pretty good against the slower disruptive decks, but poor against fast aggro and combo. it does beat up on slower and jankier brews something terrible, so it makes sense that a certain proportion of players would dislike playing against it. Another such deck is lantern control. Lantern is... well it's absolutely miserable to play against, but as a deck it's a fascinating clockwork arrangement of tiny insignificant pieces. it uses lantern of insight and codex shredder to manipulate what their opponent gets to draw, denying them threats and answers and usually just giving them lots of lands. it stops creatures with ensnaring bridge, and wins by milling the opponent out with multiple shredders. it's a slow painful way to lose, but the design of the deck itself is brilliant and inspired.
keep an eye out for vocal and hateful players who rail on specific strategies. you'd be wise to just ignore them, honestly. play what you want!
the long and short is that modern is hands down the most diverse format in magic. It rivals and arguably surpasses Legacy in terms of complexity and 'amount of play' to the format (although of course, the character and overall 'feeling' of both formats is quite different). It's Wizards' most popular format in terms of bringing in audiences when large events put up livestreams, it allows you to master a pet deck. If you are honest and logical about how to build for the Modern format, it's also a brewer's haven (although as a large competitive format, it definitely punishes shoddy kitchen-table brewing). You'll frequently see people playing wild and wacky decks you've not seen for years, or ever, and you'll also get plenty of opportunity to play against top tier strategies.
by quite a few metrics, Modern is currently the most significant competitive format, and it's incredibly rewarding. What it requires from players though (if you want to succeed) is the ability to take a step back and realise you have much to learn. even the most seasoned pro players enter into modern self-assured by their superior magic-playing ability only to get trashed by people who have 1000+ reps with their pet elves deck or whatever. as a result, modern does get somewhat of a bad rep from a certain part of the magic community. usual complaints are "it's too high variance" and "it's too uninteractive". These comments don't look at the big picture and fail to explain how the same modern-invested players consistently do really well in the format, even playing wildly unfavoured decks. What those comments do show rather clearly is that even some of the best magic players in the world can be a bit stumped by modern when they first get into the format. That's a lesson to be humble. Playing Modern and doing so consistently well is a pretty big step-up in terms of developing your magic oeuvre, and it takes reps and time to properly get to grips with such a broad format. It's super fun, engaging, challenging and complex but it's a steep learning curve if you are going to be rocking tournaments and want to be hitting top-8s and stuff.
oh and if you care about financial aspects, in the long-term modern is cheaper to play than standard (no rotations).
if i had to give any parting advice, it would be the following:
- research and familiarise yourself with the broad swathe of top tier decks in modern. this forum is a reasonable place to start, and mtggoldfish.com is another. just googling a deck name is often enough to find decent resources. look at top 32s and Day-2 metagames from recent GPs for an idea of what the format looks like overall (ignore top-8s if you want to understand a metagame, they are a highly variable snapshot and never representative of the larger picture).
- when starting to play, go for a proven deck of some kind. doesn't have to be tier 1, just something that's seen a reasonable amount of play. There are so many to choose from you'll find something you like. Check out forums and articles on the deck and get to grips with it. from there you'll learn more about the format at large, and some of the considerations which you'd completely miss as a brand new player to the format.
- don't enter into modern expecting to be able to brew new decks for the format. it just won't work. Learn about the format first, get some games under your belt and a good grasp of what's possible and what isn't. Some decks in modern seem weird and unintuitive, but work because of the nature of Modern (lantern control is an example).
- try not to skimp on your manabases. most proven decks have very refined and carefully crafted manabases, and it's far more important in Modern than it is in standard to get this bit right. there's a few corners you can cut (you'll find these out the more you research) but overall that's a mistake a lot of players make when transitioning to standard (at least, for a while). worth mentioning - once you've got modern staple lands like fetches and shocks, keep 'em. those guys are not for trade. there is so much overlap in their usage in Modern that nearly every deck wants some number of them. having a decent selection of modern staple lands will negate most of the cost of trading or buying into a new deck as well. so if you stock up on lands, switching around between decks becomes fairly easy (for the most part).
- have fun, find other modern players and talk/share ideas about the format on the regular. Modern is very much a communal affair and you won't get far playing lone wolf, trying to solve anything in splendid isolation. most of all PLAY. get in the reps. learn and learn some more.
if you want to improve your competitive edge in constructed, I can't think of a better format.
take it easy bud.
Apr 16, 2018Alright ladies and gents. Here are my takeaways from my recent testing. I tested against Jund and Boggles.Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
I know I sound like a broken record, but Bedlam Reveler is sooooo good here. Snapcaster Mage and Reveler give us the card advantage needed to keep up with Jund. As for my sideboard I currently only side in three cards - Celestial Purge, Chandra, Pyromaster, and Jace, the Mindsculptor. I basically just make the curve slightly higher with higher impact card on the top end. The games will likely go a bit longer because of all of the removal that both decks have. Therefore, having some high end threats that offer card advantage can be super helpful. Honestly, the pure tempo style deck doesn't really work because of all of Jund's removal spells and hand disruption. We need some haymakers against them They do take a load of damage from their lands and Dark Confidants so burn spells are very useful. Slip Through Space is also very good here.
My basic plan is to keep up with them for the most part in card advantage and then burn them out or kill them with a lot of attacks for 3 damage or so. Basically classic aggro-control. Geist obviously makes this a lot eaiser.
-They take a lot of damage from lands, thoughtseize, and bob so burn is good here and you can take an aggro control style plan.
-A few high end spells that specifically offer either damage or card advantage are necessary- Reveler, Snapcaster, Jace, Chandra, Hazoret, etc
-Slip Through Space and Emerge Unscathed are also very good against Goyf decks.
-Spell Snare is very useful against them if you run it.
-Spell Pierce also over-performed in a lot of my games against Liliana, Kologhan's command, Maelstrom Pulse, etc.
This was an idea from one of my friends because it won the last GP and he was definitely right because it did well again this week.
In game one it's just super hard to win, especially if they gain life. On the play we can definitely get out ahead and use spell pierce, spell snare, remand, etc to keep them from a big threat an win. On the draw, it's probably a 80/20 matchup in their favor. Echoing Truth is a true blow out against them. On one play the opponent attacked with a 9/7 boggle with two Ethereal Armor and a Rancor on their creature. I cast Echoing Truth during combat and blocked with a snapcaster mage and the boggle died. It was the blowout I needed to win the game.
Post board we get a ton better. Deflecting Palm is an absolute house against them. As is Engineered Explosives. When I drew one or both of those cards I typically won the game. Blessed Alliance is also good, but many of the new decks run the cartouche that makes a creature for that reason so it's not as strong. Counter magic was surprisingly good against them even remand. Spell Snare is also great. The one card we really want to keep them off of is Daybreak Coronet. I pathed my own creature in one game to avoid them gaining life and it helped me win the game.
I basically tried to get myself to a point where I had access to snapcaster mage with deflecting palm and/or echoing truth and the game was rather winnable from there. Spellskite may need to make a comeback into our sideboards if boggles continues to grow. This is almost the exact opposite of jund in the fact that we want to become a rather lean deck with less top end. We still want to play an aggro-control style game plan, but moreso towards the aggro or tempo end of the spectrum.
Many of the boggles lists are running main deck Leyline of Sanctity so burn becomes a tough call. I still want burn to finish them off, but I do sideboard out some burn because of Leyline.
- Post board Deflecting Palms are amazing. EE is great as well.
- The mainboard cards that really matter are echoing truth and counter magic especially spell snare if you have it in your deck
- May need spellskite in the future if boggles grows.
- Keeping them off of Daybreak Coronet is a must.
- Leyline can be tough because burn helps us finish them off. I side out a few burn spells, but also side out a number of paths.
This week I will work on testing against the hollow one deck because I haven't played against it much and need some practice.
Apr 4, 2018CurdBros (and everyone interested in playing Naban), I guess you already saw this?Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
GofyTomcat1, 3 Emerge AND 2 Distortion seems a bit much but it also seems very good with your creatures. How often do you win with this deck?
I am still playing this deck online
and this Friday I'll take it to FNM.
On MTGO I am having a blast with it. Geist & Little Gideon are best friends! Also, Lavamancer is awesome combined with Slayer's Stronghold
Mar 7, 2018I think you're spot on in regards to how our gameplan works out. Also, I also have to agree that we must respect the different approaches to the deck.Posted in: Control
At this point, I think there's two different approaches that we can try and see which one's better.
One is to design our deck around the gameplan that we should always focus on getting Tron. Think of it as a Gx Tron with interaction.
And one is to use Tron as a "bonus" and not design our entire deck around it (kind-of like Eldrazi Tron I suppose), playing lower curve cards like Thought-Knot Seers and other easier to cast cards.
For the first style that's more focused on Tron, I think cards that can dig AND be something else should be the main focus like Supreme Will for instance. The deck should focus on the higher-end and ways to get there without dying. I think this is what the deck was originally designed to do, but it's just faltered with all the cheap Modern interactions in the recent years (or the uncounterable creature decks). The deck should almost feel like a Titanshift in that it focuses getting mana while surviving on the early turns with cards like Steel Wall or Solemn Simulacrum. It should emphasize surviving and ramping. Maybe Gifts package or other "Fact or Fiction" cards like Epiphany at the Drownyard, Truth or Tale, and Fortune's Favor are something to consider.
The second style of deck should perhaps be lower to the ground, disruptive, and almost be a tempo-based aggro deck. So you will have Thought-Knot Seers, Chalices, Remands, etc. Perhaps playing more Walking Ballistas would help. Its plan should focus on landing threats constantly while protecting them with counterspells or swinging tempo by using cards like Remand, Repeals, and Commit//Memory. Its main finisher should not cost more than 6-7 mana so it would play more Wurmcoil Engines.
I agree that Mono-U will almost always be a Tier 2 deck, but Lantern Control is too and it's pulled off some great results in the past few months. Same goes for Eldrazi Tron in that it was a Tier 2 deck that was always there but it was polished to win some majors.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.