CurdBros (and everyone interested in playing Naban), I guess you already saw this?
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
- how insensitive
- Registered User
-
Member for 7 years and 8 days
Last active Sun, Aug, 9 2020 11:15:44
- 0 Followers
- 0 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-
Apr 4, 2018StevomatUWR posted a message on Jeskai Tempo /Delver/Prowess ("The Jeskai Way" )Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
-
2
repeatsyx2 posted a message on [Primer] MonoU Tron - "The well-oiled machine"I 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. -
2
thnkr posted a message on [Primer] MonoU Tron - "The well-oiled machine"@Funslaver, I added quite a few games/matches to the spreadsheet, and some of the numbers did change a little. A quick summary:Posted in: Control
- - Gemstone Caverns numbers went up. I adjusted my personal list to reflect this, one in the main and one in the side.
- - Thirst for Knowledge is in the positives now, so I've updated my list to include one.
- - Oblivion Stone's gone down, decreased down to one.
- - Walking Ballista is now among the higher scoring cards, so increased to three.
- - Spatial Contortion dropped, cut down to one.
- - Repeal and Remand are both among higher scoring cards, increased number to four each.
- - Chalice of the Void increased, added back to the main.
- - Wurmcoil Engine tanked, cut down to one.
- - Dismember is now in the positives, so added back to the main.
- - Field of Ruin has some decent numbers, better than straight Island. Added one. Same with Oboro.
- - Finally got some Trinket Mage numbers. Looking good so far, added one.
- - The diminishing returns on Expedition Map isn't looking so good, but I don't know that cutting any of those is a good idea. The individual numbers on it validate keeping four in the deck, at least for now, in my opinion.
So, as of right now, my list based on the numbers looks like this:
DeckMagic OnlineOCTGN2ApprenticeBuy These Cards Land (24)
1x Academy Ruins
1x Gemstone Caverns
7x Island
1x Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
1x Field of Ruin
1x Tolaria West
4x Urza's Mine
4x Urza's Power Plant
4x Urza's TowerInstant (20)
4x Condescend
1x Cyclonic Rift
1x Dismember
4x Remand
4x Repeal
1x Spatial Contortion
4x Supreme Will
1x Thirst for Knowledge
Planeswalker (1)
1x Ugin, the Spirit DragonCreature (8)
1x Platinum Angel
1x Torrential Gearhulk
1x Treasure Mage
1x Trinket Mage
3x Walking Ballista
1x Wurmcoil Engine
Artifact (7)
1x Chalice of the Void
4x Expedition Map
1x Mindslaver
1x Oblivion Stone
I still have another ~175 matches of data to enter, currently at 313 games. I also added a tab to the spreadsheet where I can edit a list and use the diminishing returns values for cards to tune it. I hope to get a few games in at some point, but between work, family, entering data, etc., there's not a whole lot of time available. I figure the data would be more useful to everyone than some results of me trying to pilot it, so that anyone can use the data as a tool to tweak as they see fit. -
2
Funslaver posted a message on [Primer] MonoU Tron - "The well-oiled machine"I am very torn on cutting a thirst. On one hand, it is my favourite draw spell and I've never even considered having one a bad thing. On the other hand, if the data really does show that one in our starting hand is bad, cutting one strikes me as a move toward the right direction.Posted in: Control
My experience may be different because I'm new to competitive magic,but for the first three turns I'm constantly flying by the seat of my pants. It's pure panic and I'm flailing about trying to stay alive. It's resident evil 1, and I haven't found a weapon yet.
Now what I want the most of the deck is for each card to do something for me in this time. I want things that scale so that I don't have a hand of nothing at the start, and draw appropriate "level" spells at the end. As a very limited paper player, I have partially judged my spell choices based on how my opponents react physically. Spell burst, rift, supreme will, and ballista/tolaria have all been all stars. They feel so strong or at least usable at any time. (Supreme will t3 just feels so GOOD). I just have a lot more confidence if my hand has a supreme will in it than a thirst. It seems better in most early game situations.
That being said, cutting more than one thirst feels like I'm sinning, and to cut it completely is blasphemy and I'll have none of it, good sir.
Part of shoks success is the not being sober part, guys. It's a key strategic detail you all are missing. I've never played at my lgs sober and I've never gone below 2-2. -
1
thnkr posted a message on [Primer] MonoU Tron - "The well-oiled machine"Wanted to post a quick summary of findings so far in the data. I've currently put in 76 of the 300 matches in pierakor's playlist for the deck, coming to 201 games analyzed.Posted in: Control
A few of the cards have some decent amount of movement as data is entered. Examples of this are Wurmcoil Engine, Platinum Angel, and even Condescend to a degree. There are some cards that seem consistent in their rankings. Examples of this are Expedition Map, Supreme Will, and Spatial Contortion, which seem to consistently remain among the top cards in the ranking, and Chalice of the Void, Thirst for Knowledge, and Solemn Simulacrum, which consistently remain among the bottom in ranking.
With this in mind, I've started considering how we can use this data to find a good direction for the deck. As it stands, it seems that our main goal is to simply use our counters and bounce spells to stall the board state, and then try to stabilize and win through one of the heavy spells. This doesn't seem to be entirely consistent in how it plays out, but that seems to be the general direction.
Using the data, I am seeing that Oblivion Stone seems like a great reset button for when we inevitably run out of ways to stall our opponents. If we can stall to the point where we are constantly resetting the boardstate with O-Stone and Academy Ruins, this buys us time to just naturally keep drawing further counters and bounce spells. From there, we can slam our heavy hitters and win. Thus, my thoughts are that we use O-Stone as our "turn the corner" card, meaning it might be best to run three of them to ensure that we draw them in a timely manner. I'm still not sure of what the best 75 will end up being, but this seems to be heading in the correct direction.
For anyone who hasn't seen the link yet, you can find it here. I plan on bringing my list to my LGS and giving it some runs here in a bit. There were no Modern players there last night, but hopefully I'll get some decent games in today. I'll try to keep some notes and report back on how it goes. -
3
thnkr posted a message on [Primer] MonoU Tron - "The well-oiled machine"Sure thing!Posted in: Control
So what I do is enter in each individual games' data (preboard or postboard, opponent's deck, on the play or draw, if the game was won or lost, if the match was won or lost, the date, the pilot, etc.).
Part of that data is I enter in what cards are in the opening hand for each game, and how many. I have it set up with pivot tables for the "Weighted Data Trends" tab to see what percentage of games are won when a specific card is in the opening hand. So as of right now I have 71 games of data entered. We can look at how Condescend correlates with win percentages as our example. There were 45 games where there were no Condescends in hand, and 24 of those were won. So the deck was able to win 53.33% of the games without Condescend being in the opening hand. There were 19 games with one Condescend in the opening hand, of which 13 were wins, giving us 68.42% of those games won. That gives us a 15.09% increase in win percentage when one Condescend was in the opening hand. So Condescend looks like a decent card to have in the opener so far.
However, we want to account for sample size. This is where a weight is calculated. To do this, I divide the total number of games in which a Condescend was in the opener by the total number of games (so, 26/71). The greater this fraction, the more games will have data on this specific card, and therefore the more reliable the data is on that card. I then multiply the "delta" (increase in win percentage that correlates with this card) with that weight, giving us our weighted %.
I then have the spreadsheet rank each card by the weighted score, column J. Sometimes we'll have more than 1 of a card in our hand, though, so there are additional columns calculating that. All of that is then used to find the average increase as numbers of that specific card in the opening hand increase. So, a card could be great in the opener, but multiples might score lower, implying that we might not want to run four of that card, maybe three or two instead. This helps account for diminished returns from that card.
So I have it ranking each card primarily by column J, then tiebreak with column AE(for diminished returns).
I then use all of this to help me determine an optimum list. For example, you'll see that Supreme Will, which most lists only run as a singleton, scores much better than Thirst for Knowledge. This isn't something that many people would be able to intuit, and apparently haven't as of yet. However, it makes sense in hindsight, after looking at the data. Supreme Will does nearly the same thing as Thirst, but has a second relevant mode, on curve. It even digs a card deeper than Thirst. We see that Spatial Contortion also has high correlations with increased win percentages, which makes sense. The deck is already relatively strong against slower matchups, and weaker against quick, aggressive decks that get in under our counters. Contortion helps with this weakness, while not interfering with our preference for colorless Tron lands.
With this data, I built the following list and played at my LGS tonight:
Now, I'm not convinced that this is a perfectly tuned list either, but I feel that it's a step in the right direction. I decided that Gemstone Caverns is probably better either left to the sideboard, only to be brought in when it has the chance to hit, or dropped altogether. I'm not entirely confident in the Batterskull, but tried it out anyways. I was also not sure about Commit//Memory, but it actually performed very well in practice. Fabricate likewise performed well, and being able to choose exactly the card I need instead of being forced to pick the most applicable of either 6+ or 1- cmc artifacts was very nice. The card that had the biggest impression on me was Supreme Will, in that it worked perfectly with Condescend. Condescend was able to be my early pre-Tron counter, or my late post-Tron counter. Supreme Will was usually my follow-up pre-Tron counter if I needed it, but when combined with Expedition Map and Condescend's scry effect, I was able to use it to assemble Tron very effectively if I didn't need to counter anything.
And again, all of this kind of makes sense, in the game theory sense. I've mentioned the use of minimax and expectimax before, particularly it's use as it applies to the design and construction of Lantern. Supreme Will was able to fill this role for the deck, in reducing the opponent's relevant options as necessary, but also increasing our options as needed.
I haven't fully assembled a sideboard yet, but my preliminary sideboard looks as follows:
- 4 Spreading Seas
- 1 Spatial Contortion
- 3 Warping Wail
- 1 Gemstone Cavern
- 1 Sundering Titan
- 1 Chalice of the Void
I'm kind of tempted to up the number of Chalice in the sideboard, but I was very happy with being able to find it when I needed in the main thanks to Expedition Map and Tolaria West, while keeping pressure with the other counters. Being able to Chalice on one and then land a Platinum Angel was very effective.
EDIT: I would like to note, both Oblivion Stone and Walking Ballista also seem to score well. However, my LGS did not have these cards on hand for me to pick up to include into my deck. That is why I don't have a 2nd Stone and a Ballista in my list. - 4 Spreading Seas
-
5
Darkx87 posted a message on [Primer] MonoU Tron - "The well-oiled machine"@repeatsyx2Posted in: Control
I don't disagree. While thinking on the issue and writing my post, I did feel conflicted. You're correct in saying that UTron is a unique deck because, at times, I see it as a control deck, others, as an aggro deck, others as a combo deck. It has so many different spells that do multiple things that it can flow into and mold into what you want / need it to be, assuming you can get to the answers.
However, upon seeing numerous posts about it being a control style deck and finding it to be a quasi-control deck myself, I analyzed it from that perspective and the shortcomings I see in playing it as a control deck, based on the card choices we have relative to other control decks.
I don't think you're wrong in saying it's akin to a Gx Tron deck, in that what we're looking to do is jam huge threats that stick. However, if you look at the Gx Tron decklist and video matches, it seems to either: 1) hit Tron incredibly fast and overwhelm the opponent (ie OMG T3 Karn, derp); or 2) control the board state through sweepers and targeted removal like Ballista, until it can hit a huge threat and overwhelm the opponent.
UTron lacks the ability to hit Tron quickly on a consistent basis. We have far fewer digs and tutors that get us to Tron, relative to Gx Tron. Jamming an early game threat and overwhelming the opponent is far less likely to occur. READ - less likely, not impossible.
Thus, we're more on the same line as the 2nd route Gx takes, which is controlling, not only, the board, but also the stack. Because of this, our deck has a larger control component to it than Gx Tron and can't be said to be a true comparison. Just as you mentioned that we're not a true control deck either. We have too few blue sources to consistently hit a T1 Serum and don't have 8+ counterspells that we recur with 4 Snapcasters. We are certainly an amalgamation of both these styles.
I think the ultimate question is, how do you make the 2 styles work together and consistently operate as a cohesive unit, rather than consistently opposing one another? By this, I mean, if we're going to aggro, we need to get to Tron and jam those threats. If we're going to control, we need to be able to stall the board and stack long enough to have the mana to jam and protect the threats we have. It's tough to do that when your mana bases aren't perfectly in sync and when your threats don't always pull double duty as control elements.
One method for counteracting this is sculpting your draws or increasing the amount of draw you have, in order to hit more cards and increase the odds of hitting what you need.
I lean towards Bauble for this purpose for a few reasons: 1) 0 CMC - no blue to worry about and, as mentioned previously, Chalice usually finds it's way onto 1 CMC, so it gets around that; 2) Artifact - can be discarded to Thirst can be recurred with Academy Ruins (if you wanted); 3) Optional Scry - your opponent's top deck, or your top deck (obviously, you can't put it on the bottom, but you know what the draw will be); you then have options to alter or manipulate the draw by cracking a map, tutoring, etc.
Also, just for further clarification on why I bring this up... It's not because I think the deck is bad or incapable of posting good results. We've clearly seen many 5-0 MTGO finishes and a recent 15th at a GP, so the deck can perform. I have also gone 4-0 and had great results at my LGS. It's a matter of, are there weakness, inconsistencies, or issues with the deck that make it a less consistent performer than other Modern decks? If so, what, if anything, can be done to improve the deck and make it a more consistent competitor?
There seems to have been very few changes over the past few years to the core of the deck, with only minor modifications to the typical 5-10 "flex" slots in the deck. I have seen no Top 8 finishes at any major, live event in that time. Why? Is the deck bad? Is there nobody playing it at these events? Is the deck played by the wrong caliber player? Or, something else?
Based on my playing the deck and reading this board, and others, the most common thing I see is - "consistency". Coupling that concern with the fact that the deck does play similar to a control deck, I looked to the major control decks putting up results for comparison. As I mentioned in my post, the primary differences seemed to be draw engines and threat types. Concluding there wasn't much we could do about the threat types, but could only really play with which of the threats should remain and the correct number of each to employ, I looked at the draw engines.
Control decks rely on having answers, consistently. They need to have the right answer at the precise moment, or they crumble. What gives them that consistency? They see a lot of cards, via draw engine, and the manipulate the cards they draw through scry abilities. We have Condescend for scrying, we have Thirst for drawing, and our Remand/Repeal suite plays double duty as counter/bounce and draw. However, we don't have anything T1 that draws and often times we're not hitting anything that begins the draw / scry engine until T3. Thirst is 3 CMC, we can't effectively counter or bounce anything until we have at least 2 mana, which is our opponents' T3, when on the draw, and often times opponent isn't playing relevant things to counter until T3 ("It's a T3/T4 format").
So, what can we do in those first turns to increase the cards we see and our ability to sculpt the hand for later turns? The same thing control decks do. Low CMC draw engines like Serum, Opt, or Bauble.
This is just one idea for how to improve the deck's performance, if, in fact, it actually needs tweaking, as opposed to an actual professional caliber pilot to win a major event with the current list and show that where we're at is as good as it gets. -
4
Darkx87 posted a message on [Primer] MonoU Tron - "The well-oiled machine"I've been thinking on this, based on my experience and comments from others... If we're a quasi-control deck that plays Tron for the big threats, and other goodies, should we not be looking at UW and Jeskai Control lists for inspiration on number of and type of threats, sweepers, and counterspells? Maybe it's already been done in the 540+ pages of this thread, but I don't recall seeing it, in my various adventures through here. Nonetheless, here goes...Posted in: Control
Using recent MTGTop8 lists from GP Lyon and SCG Indi. Also, only looking at the Main, not the sideboard.
UW Control -
Permanent Threats (6-7): 4 x Colonnade; 2-3 x Gideon
Lesser Permanent Threats/Utility (2-4): 2 x Snapcaster; 0-2 x Clique
Counterspells (7-8): 3-4 x Cryptic; 1 x Logic Knot; 1 x Negate; 1 x Remand or 0-2 x Mana Leak; 1 x Spell Snare
Target Removal (6): 4 x Path; 2 x DSphere
Sweepers (3): 3 x Verdict
Draw Engines (7): 4 x Serum; 2 x Azcanta; 1 x Sphinx's Revelation
Double Duty Draw (3-4): 3 x Cryptic; 1 x Remand
I'm not sure where to place Jace, Architect of Thought in here, so I have omitted him.
Jeskai Control -
Permanent Threats (3-4): 3 x Colonnade; 0-1 x Gideon; 0-1 Gearhulk
Lesser Permanent Threats/Utility (4): 4 x Snapcaster
Counterspells (8): 4 x Cryptic; 3 x Logic Knot; 1 x Negate
Target Removal (4): 4 x Path
Double Duty Removal/Other (8): 2 x Electrolyze; 3 x Bolt; 3 x Helix
Sweepers (1-3): 1-2 x Verdict; 0-1 EE
Draw Engines (7-8): 3-4 x Serum; 0-2 x Opt; 2 x Azcanta; 1 x Sphinx's Revelation
Double Duty Draw (4): 4 x Cryptic
Comparing Both Decks -
Permanent Threats: 3-7 Total, with the majority also serving as lands
Lesser Permanent Threats/Utility: 2-4 Total, with the majority being Snapcaster
Counterspells: 7-8 Total, with the majority being Cryptic, which performs double duty as draw engine (usually) and stall tactic (tapping creatures)
Target Removal: 4-6 Total, with the majority being single target Paths
Sweepers: 1-3 Total, with the majority running 3 and the majority of those being Verdict
Draw Engines: 7-8 Total, with the majority being 4 x Serum and 2 x Azcanta
"Traditional" U-Tron - (Looking at the "stock" Pierakor, Shoktroopa, and recent 15th GP Lists)
Permanent Threats (5-6): 1-2 x Wurmcoil; 1-2 x Mindslaver; 1 x Ugin*; 0-1 Titan; 0-1 Gearhulk
Lesser Permanent Threats/Utility (5-6): 1 x Angel; 0-1 x Solemn; 1-2 x Treasure Mage; 0-1 x Trinket Mage; 1 x Snapcaster; 1 x Ballista
Counterspells (7-9): 4x Condescend; 2-3 x Remand; 0-1 x Spell Burst; 0-2 x Supreme Will
Target Removal (4-5): 2-3 x Repeal; 0-2 x Spatial; 0-2 x Dismember; 1 x Cyclonic Rift*
Sweepers (2-3): 1 x Cyclonic Rift*; 0-1 x EE; 1 x OStone
Draw Engines (4): 4 x Thirst for Knowledge
Double Duty Draw (4-6): 2-3 x Remand; 2-3 x Repeal; 0-2 Supreme Will
Permanent Counters (1-4): Chalice of the Void
This issue analyzing the U-Tron board is that most things serve 2 purposes (e.g. Ugin as target damage, targeted removal, sweeper, and more; Cyclonic Rift as targeted bounce and sweeper bounce; etc.). I've attempted to just place things in their primary intended or utilized role, fully recognizing that many can be used for 20 different things, depending on the line of play.
A few things that pop out at me are -
1) Threats: U-Tron seems to be a more threat dense deck than other control decks. The reason I say this is not just sheer number, as the numbers are actually nearly identical, but because the threats in the control decks also serve as lands and are not "dedicated" (ie solely) threats.
2) Draw Engine: The draw engine in the control decks is substantially higher and on a lower curve, 4-5 1CMC spells in Visions/Opt. Dedicated draw in the control decks is 7-8, versus 4 in U-Tron. The double duty draw is quite similar, 3-4 Cryptics in the control v. 4-6 Repeal/Remand and 0-2 Supreme Will in Tron. Substantial differences are, again, that 2 of the draw engines serve double duty as lands (Azcanta) and are permanents. Additionally, the double duty draws in Cryptic are substantially better in the mid to late game, because of the different modes, while Repeal/Remand and Supreme will are substantially better in the early game and require creativity in the late game, to make work in their primary modes of counter/bounce.
Another huge caveat to this analysis is that we utilize the Trinket and Treasure Mage packages for targeted draw (ie tutoring). These serve double duty as permanent threats, albeit, light ones, and 1 time draw (barring any bouncing and recasting shenanigans).
3) Targeted Removal and sweepers: Quantity and CMC are about the same. The primary difference is bounce v. actual destroy/kill/exile. Our targeted removal allows opponents' threats to be replayed.
4) Snapcasters: Every control deck runs 3-4 Snaps. This allows for the recurrence of nearly every spell in their deck, since they're running so few non-land permanents.
What does this all mean and what are the takeaways?
For me, dedicated draw and threats seems to be the key differentiating areas.
The low CMC of control's draw engines creates a competitive advantage over our deck. Additionally, the density, through the ability to recur them through Snapcaster, the late game double duty of Cryptic, and the permanent state of Azcanta, is a huge advantage.
The double duty of their threats also creates a competitive advantage. By this, I mean, the ability to have threats serve a vital purpose of generating mana in the early game and then being able to convert to threats in the late game makes them superior. These threats allow for that greater number of draw engines and utility spells.
Those are the 2 primary weakness, relative to the control decks, that I see in UTron. The ability to sculpt the hand for consistency is something that UW Control excels at and I think is echoed here in the forums. Whether it's issues with the correct mana (e.g. not enough blue or no tron to cast the big threats), or the wrong answers during various portions of the games. We have amazing utility throughout our deck, in that nearly ever spell serves double duty, but it's consistently getting to those at the right time that can be problematic.
The other part of that inconsistency is the relative threat density. Because we have more "non-double duty" threats, they are dead cards until we are ready to threaten our opponent with them. Given the issues getting to tron or building the mana to cast them, those threats can be dead for several turns. Depending on your draw, that can be a significant number of dead cards in your hand.
Obviously, to fix this we either incorporate more draw engines into the deck, reduce the number of threats, reduce the number of non primary threat and non primary counter type spells, increase the number of dual purpose threats, or some variation of all.
As for viable cards that can accomplish those things -
I don't know of any man lands that we can incorporate that would help in the current scheme of our deck that would be anywhere near what Colonnade offers or the current threats in the deck. Thus, I don't think man lands are an option for us, BUT I'm definitely open to hearing otherwise.
Reducing the number of threats, overall, is something I don't think is vary viable either, but looking at the overall makeup of those threats is where we can improve, I think.
Universally, Ugin, Mindslaver, and Wurmcoil are used and generate great results. They are central cards to the deck and I cannot think of anything that would operate to replace them or perform better. The debate on these seems to center around, 1 or 2 copies in the main. Again, almost universally, 2 of one of those 3 is better in certain matchups than others, while each is extremely weak in certain matchups.
Platinum, Titan, and Gearhulk are continually questioned. Like the three above, each of these can be a rock star in certain matchups and each can be completely underwhelming, relative to its cost. Gearhulk has the added disadvantage of requiring 2 U to cast. As much as it pains me to say, I think these would be the easiest to cut out of the deck, as they are the narrowest threats, with the least utility in the broadest number of matchups, relative to Coil, Slaver, and Ugin****. Additionally, we are the only deck that looks to run either Titan or Angel, which I think speaks to the narrow nature of these cards as threats / utility.
Solemn, Trinket Mage, and Treasure Mage are great utility cards and chump blockers. However, I think they also meet the criteria for things that are relatively weak and don't operate to address the larger issues we have. Undoubtedly, the mages are exceptional at tutoring up specific threats / answers, but if we have a bigger/more efficient draw engine, the need for those specific tutors decreases. Similarly, the reduced need for U mana and the blind draw off of Solemn is waning and, as has been noted, is relatively weak, compared to the other things we have/want/need in the deck.
In terms of actual draw engines to use, I think that depends on the rest of the deck and, largely, the number of Chalices being played. Chalice seems to find its way onto 1 in most matches. Making things like Serum and Opt far less appealing. This makes something like Mishra's Bauble a great contender. Each of these 3 has various pros/cons to it, from instant speed, to deeper scrying, to 0 CMC, so I think that requires some testing and consideration with personal deck design choice, especially related to Chalices. I have looked at only these 3 because I believe the draw engine issues are early game ones especially. Getting to the cards and hand we want early on is the weakness.
I hope to test a few of these ideas over the next few weeks. I think I'll start with cutting the Trinket/Treasure Mages, Angel, Titan, etc. and incorporating Bauble or Serum in their places.
-
5
Twanicus posted a message on Jeskai Tempo /Delver/Prowess ("The Jeskai Way" )Greetings from Planet Mardu. Saw the matchup guide, thought id offer some insight from the other side of the table. Selfeiseks list has been getting a bunch of spotlight as of late, but as Corbin Hostler showed with his list (Thank you mr hostler for playing midrange for a change) youre probably going to see a lot of variation from deck to deck. I personally run pack rat over pyro cuz they end games faster, and i have a planeswalker suite to back it up, but thats just me.Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
Anyway, i first have to give Curd a nod on the counterspells, after the initial discard barrage there isnt a whole lot Mardu can do about them. Cryptics in particular are crippling due to the inherent card advantage. Longer games tend to favor jeskai as well, so dont be afraid to slow roll threats and drag it out, we have no cantrips and cant refuel without (usually) sorcery speed spell and creatures. Your manland (collonade) is also leagues better than vents as the game grinds on, so protect that as much as possible.
The burn is incredibly relevant. Bolt snap bolt to the dome is great against everyone (except maybe souls sisters) but Mardu in particular is notorious for punching itself in the face. I run a playset of helix and burn is still a problem match up, that carries over to jeskai when im taking 6 a turn from geist, or even 2 a turn from a queller holding my removal.
Mardu beats Jeskai tempo by stripping its answers early and overwhelming it before it can recover. If you run spell pierce, dont hesitate to stop a Thoughtseize or IoK. Just keeping that hand info away from Mardu is sometimes enough to slow them down and get it into your court. Save remands for the back half of souls, thats all its really good for against us unless your coming in for the kill. Dont assume that Lily isnt in the 75 when getting ready to drop a geist, i dont think selfeiseks list is the final iteration and she is too powerful to be completely left out. All in all, play patiently, embrace the grind, and know that the longer the game goes the better your chances.
I leave you with this final bit of spice to warn you of the unfinished nature of Mardu. Guttural Response is a card, and i have ran them in my 75. It has made for some game ending plays and eyebrows raised through their hairlines. =)
Hope this wall of text has some value for you all. From all of us at planet mardu: Safe Journies, and Kill All the Things. -
2
CurdBros posted a message on Jeskai Tempo /Delver/Prowess ("The Jeskai Way" )Need More DPS- I agree with both of your recent thoughts. I too added a second Spell Queller to my main deck and it has been very good. It fits very well into our deck because it gives us additional pressure and adds additional "counter magic" at the same time.Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
Search for Azcanta has been amazing for me in the sideboard. I don't have room to add a copy to the main, but it has been great in the sideboard for my build against grindy matchups. The scry ability alone is nice so you don't hit too many land drops in those matchups because I typically win those matchups by having a greater mass of spells than they have.
Something I have been noticing is a lot of Blood Moon going around. I added a second Island to the maindeck a little while back. With the breach deck doing well lately and with people likely wanting to try Gerard Fabiano's Temur Moon deck, I will be making sure to play around blood moon.
The matchup of the week for this week is - Mardu Pyromancer.
Here is the list- https://mtgdecks.net/Modern/mardu-aggro-decklist-by-selfeisek-718311
I jammed against this matchup in my last playtest group and the results were rather promising. We have tons of removal for their threats and the deck seems fairly week to counter magic, especially Remand. They want stuff in their graveyard and when you remand the spell you basically time walk them. In addition, you can remand flashbacked spells and they are countered. They also have no way to stop you from burning them out. I won probably a little over 65% of the games against them, so I from my small sample size, I don't think this will be a tough matchup for us. The games that the opponent won were typically when they were on the play and had multiple hand disruption spells in their opener and/or were able to cast multiple Lingering Souls and/or Bedlam Revler.
Important cards in the matchup are - Geist of Saint Traft, Lightning Bolt, Lightning Helix, Electrolyze, Slip Through Space, Remand. I know Geist sounds a little counter intuitive because they play tokens, but all of their removal is blanked by a geist. He is especially good in this matchup if you have Slip Through Space, Distortion Strike, or Emerge Unscathed. I spoke about Remand above. The burn spells are very effective as removal and for their life total. They take a rather large amount of damage from their fetches and thoughtseize so burn becomes very attractive in this matchup. Cards like Electrolyze and Forked Bolt do double duty by being able to remove multiple tokens or go to the face. Echoing Truth is great against tokens, but didn't make the cut because it is poor against Bedlam Reveler.
Sideboard options- Engineered Explosives, sweepers, all graveyard hate, Izzet Staticaster, Surgical Extraction, Celestial Purge.
Anything that deals with tokens as well as most things that deal with the graveyard are very good against them. Celestial Purge hits nearly all of their important permanents so that is a great catch all against them.
Let me know what I missed and what you think of this matchup. Here is the list I am currently running-
As always I am playing the deck at 61 cards and 19 lands. I have found this to be my sweet spot for the land count.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
2