Upon high demand I made a counterpart for my recently published Rock compact SB Guide for Jund as well. So I present you the newest addition to the primer, a compact SB Guide for Jund, which you can download. It features the gauntlet used in the primer as a guide to quickly have access to the ins and outs of a particular matchup. Right now I have linked V1.0, but I will keep it updated. I hope this handy tool will serve you well! You can find the link in the primer.
Good job, but some matchups missed. What about Amulet Titan, Death and Taxes, BW Eldrazi?
I will add those matchups gradually over time depending on their popularity in the format.
Having some doubt regarding siding out Inquisition of Kozilek.
I understand that we are siding out inquisition vs some matchup that will :
1. grind and topdeck war in long game except for blue control decks (midrange)
2. fast and aggro and able to dump hand very fast (affinity)
3. 3cmc & below card are extremely less (eldrazi variance)
But i discovered from the sb guide that is LoK bad against company deck as well? If siding out, how many copy to side out? eg. Counter company, bant company, elves etc.
Its because those matchups are attrition based. Like in the mirror your discard spells are terrible topdecks. You can decide to only cut a few copies (like 2-3) and leave some copies in though. If you do that though, that means you are deciding to not commit to a full grindy gameplan. This would make sense if you feel that your opponent is stronger in grinding (which a deck like GW Company certainly is) which means you are the aggressor then.
Thank you for your fast response, I begin to understand how those attribution deck works, please correct me if I am wrong here.
Their playstyle is most likely midrange swingy deck, play dork and ramp mana turn 2 into 3 cmc threat, and can even choose to go wide to kill opponent without rely on combo-ing and could switch to a value deck where they also could play 2 for 1 value stuff such as Voice of Resurgence, finks, Eternal Witness, Collected Company to bury their opponent.
They could possible play their value cards before turn 4 or 5 and all their hand left with some valueless card or redundant cards. This is where there is a dilemma on Inquisition's role here. Inquisition still isn't bad as it serve turn 1 discard to review information as well as grab a value / combo piece / destroying their next curve. Hence, game 2 we try to reduce 2 copies of IoK but not all of it since we are leaving 4 discard anyway (2 IoK 2 TS) still hope to draw them on turn 1-2 to discard their stuff in early game. But since they are clearing off hand and try to play their stuff few turn later and we are most probably end in topdeck war if we are able to survive from their early swarm with single removals. And IoK is not much relevent here.
If you guys are interested, I wrote a guide for building consistant manabases for GBx decks. Here you can see in detail how I do it and what I think about it. Lately people don't pay enough attention to this topic, and manabases are all over the place. If you are interested in being consistant, then I would advice reading this.
Really a good read material for me as a Jund beginner Appreciate for your write-up.
I am agreed on the point that utilization of every single mana to reach the max point of deck's consistency. We should try to play every spell in our hand without leaving any room for unused mana to get value and outgrind opponent as many of our spells are 1 for 1 or 2 for 1, and we are able to do so as every turn we able to hit land drop. No matter how, Jund playstyle is winning mtg game by out-value opponent. With present of red with bolt, BBE and command, we can be on fast and on par with other aggro deck compared to BG rock or other blue control decks.
Just some point in my head, we will need to fix our color first, I would know that first few turn would be painful due to fixing the manabase. If the beginning hand is abit risky and painful, do we still play the spell consistently especially against fast deck such as human and hollow one? We know they will have a fast play, do we start with fetch to thoughtseize? or turn 2 still hit dark confident assume there is no other best turn 2 play?
Just want to know your idea and opinion on consistency VS matchup or risky play.
I don't yet fully know what I think of this decklist, seems like a metagame call at first, but I am very interested
It seems like the base idea came from DSJ that replacing Traverse with cantrips. I think that build just hotcake for single moment and I still believe that we need our snappy and commands to do close the gap for our bad matchups. Smash some artifacts from affinity, crushes chalice and even get us ready to grind against controls deck. But one thing is that its hard for a grixis DS play alike DSJ. They have their explosiveness, but we have our late game stable.
1
Thank you for your fast response, I begin to understand how those attribution deck works, please correct me if I am wrong here.
Their playstyle is most likely midrange swingy deck, play dork and ramp mana turn 2 into 3 cmc threat, and can even choose to go wide to kill opponent without rely on combo-ing and could switch to a value deck where they also could play 2 for 1 value stuff such as Voice of Resurgence, finks, Eternal Witness, Collected Company to bury their opponent.
They could possible play their value cards before turn 4 or 5 and all their hand left with some valueless card or redundant cards. This is where there is a dilemma on Inquisition's role here. Inquisition still isn't bad as it serve turn 1 discard to review information as well as grab a value / combo piece / destroying their next curve. Hence, game 2 we try to reduce 2 copies of IoK but not all of it since we are leaving 4 discard anyway (2 IoK 2 TS) still hope to draw them on turn 1-2 to discard their stuff in early game. But since they are clearing off hand and try to play their stuff few turn later and we are most probably end in topdeck war if we are able to survive from their early swarm with single removals. And IoK is not much relevent here.
1
Really a good read material for me as a Jund beginner
I am agreed on the point that utilization of every single mana to reach the max point of deck's consistency. We should try to play every spell in our hand without leaving any room for unused mana to get value and outgrind opponent as many of our spells are 1 for 1 or 2 for 1, and we are able to do so as every turn we able to hit land drop. No matter how, Jund playstyle is winning mtg game by out-value opponent. With present of red with bolt, BBE and command, we can be on fast and on par with other aggro deck compared to BG rock or other blue control decks.
Just some point in my head, we will need to fix our color first, I would know that first few turn would be painful due to fixing the manabase. If the beginning hand is abit risky and painful, do we still play the spell consistently especially against fast deck such as human and hollow one? We know they will have a fast play, do we start with fetch to thoughtseize? or turn 2 still hit dark confident assume there is no other best turn 2 play?
Just want to know your idea and opinion on consistency VS matchup or risky play.
1
It seems like the base idea came from DSJ that replacing Traverse with cantrips. I think that build just hotcake for single moment and I still believe that we need our snappy and commands to do close the gap for our bad matchups. Smash some artifacts from affinity, crushes chalice and even get us ready to grind against controls deck. But one thing is that its hard for a grixis DS play alike DSJ. They have their explosiveness, but we have our late game stable.