Magic Market Index for October 12th, 2018
Magic Market Index for Sep 28th, 2018
Magic Market Index for Sep 21st, 2018
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    I agree with Raver.

    Dead//Gone seems incredibly loose to me and never understood why you would play it. Thargtsuk might be sth for GBx decks or Control matchups since its really sticky and ahrd to answer cleanly but LE has enough bad matchups where i dont want to give away a sideboard slot for swagdaddy.
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Thanks, this makes sense.
    If the plan is to race burn, would you even bring in Thragtusk? And how about Street Wraith? It allows for our most explosive starts, but normaly any deck would side them out against burn.

    I still find boarding difficult with this deck. Is there a consensus sideboard plan for the updated deck in this meta?
    Otherwise - how do you prioritize boarding out cyclers compared to other cards?
    A lot of the artifact hate in the board seems like it could be boarded in in the dark against a lot of decks, expecting Relic / Spellbomb. Is this correct to do?
    Do you usually keep Beast Within post board for the utility or use the slots for better suited sideboard cards?

    Hey disciple! First things first: i don't think there is really a consensus for sideboarding since eg. against burn people are not on the same page about Boar / Gnaw / Leyline of Sanctity. Some like leyline some "like" boar. That's how you beat burn basically, it's a bad matchup. But i lean on boarding out Wraiths and keep BWs since they bring in hate and we dont have enough to bring in (shriekmaws and boars/ leyline)
    I try to keep in as many cyclers as possible and if necessary board out 2 mana cyclers first. Beast withins depend on the matchup. Where you struggle to interact or land destruction is simply incredibly strong i keep them. Against humans i would not keep BWs since their interaction is freebooters, meddling mages and thalias where Shriekmaw and Anger of the Gods comes in handy so we have enough cards to bring in. Against Ad Nauseam keep the BWs.
    Hollow One is another difficult one but i like boarding in the last Faerie Macabre. you can keep BW if you expect black leyline which some lists play some dont. If they dont BW is pretty bad and can make room for Chewers or maws. i'd recommend testing this matchup a lot and still it feels unpredictable.
    Affinity is overload on chewers and macabre and keep in the archfiends since they are usually game over. BWs sucks here imo since they dont play RiP, they mostly rely on cage, which we dont care about.
    Against tron just chewer and board out ifnir and macabre in that order. keep in BWs. if you play moon moon them.
    bogles is usually auto win.
    for jund shriekmaws are really good and macabre too but SSG sucks. if you play moon moon them. its a good matchup though.

    hope this helps a bit. thesere are the most important ones. try to side out ifnir in mu where he is bad and dont board him out against x/1 strategies like peezy affinity or even merfolk, though x/2. Smile
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Quote from Capt. Nick »
    I'm kicking around the idea of putting together Living End. I know the list is pretty well established at this point but is there any reason the deck doesn't play Forbidden Orchard in some number? It gives you control of keeping Demonic Dread live and is an untapped multi-color land. Seems like interesting consistency tech at the least.

    SO the main reason why people dont play orchard is it is incredibly bad if you've resolved a LE, but need to cast some spell(s) to finish off the game or at least cycle. And if you need to tap orchard for that that is very bad especially since our manabase is so incredibly stable for a 19 lands deck. Beast within and fulminators can act as a target for dred too, so there is no real need. Also Orchard pressures yourself in matchups where you are not pressured at all like UW COntrol which is basically the only place where you really need it (plus maybe ad nauseam but too few people play it).
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Well the meta favors LE a lot since so much jund and therefore bogles are running around which are probably the easiest matchups.

    sure i know these scg lists are usually trash chandra and kalitas caught my attention but nvm then.

    well first archfiend is way easier to hardcast plus i dont even think weaver is superior. Archfiends ability is way more relevant than you might think. It wrecks affinity and lingering souls completely while being good against other creature decks still and not only forces himself through but other attackers too or at least makes them small which is huge for the carabid.
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    I feel like 2 Beast Within is the right number unless the meta is overloaded with Rest in Peace decks. Chance of drawing one if you play 2 are reasonable with all the cycling.

    The 3 Archfiend are far more interesting. I'm also always looking at the third wondering if i want it but everytime i deicide to go for it they clunk up. maybe im just incredibly unfortunate. Also the Dresher list is loaded with spice in the sb. Somebody has any experience with some of these sb cards (eg. Kalitas and Chandra)?
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    I think i like the 3rd Archfiend over the 1 archtitects. Also the shriekmaw over the bow i guess since you already play leylines to hedge them. good luck in sydney! looking forward to hear from your results
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    i think you are cutting yourself off of the power the deck has which is killing pretty reliably on turn 4 while wiping the board and still havin access to disruption. let ponza be ponza
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    not only a living end player but also a werder bremen fan i see? i already got a lot of sympathy for you Wink i wish you the best of luck in sydney!

    list looks decent so far. i would play 8 cascade spells. 7 is one too few and if you play 7 i would suggest a kari zev's expertise in addition to that maybe. Sideboarding is weird sometimes. while i dont play leylines im far from satisfied with boars. i will test leylines for sure at some point. if you already have them give it a try, sure. nobody playing this deck to some extent would ever be like "oh hell no to leyline, brindle boar is the by far the best thing in my life"
    i think you can cut the 3rd Beast within in the main for an additional faerie macabre maybe making room for an anger of the gods or a sluaghter games/lost legacy depending on what you face. but thats just my preference/experience. with access to 3 chewers and 4 macabre you dont really need a kolaghans command i think
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Hey guys, I’ve been over at the Jund thread for awhile now, figured I’d stop in and see what’s shakin’.

    Do we have a champion out there right now representing and advocating for us? I value all the grinders’ experiences and observations and whatnot, but it’d be nice if we had our own Duke in our corner or some SCG articles to mull over. Anyone know any good streams/videos?

    Is there any kind of consensus right now on what the deck should look like? All the lists lately have been running so many Archfiends. It’s such a bad cycler. Can someone tell me why it’s a four-of in so many list? I’m guessing it’s for our secondary game plan, which is hardcasting fatties? The format has slowed down a bit so I can see where he can be considered more applicable than before. Macabre seems a little worse and Fulminator a little better than before. I think I’d run a 2/4 split of them now. Before the unban and meta shift I was running 4/3.

    On Grove of the Burnwillows, I like the card a lot. What’s the right call? Two, three, or four copies?

    I put the deck down for awhile because I love Jund and had to take advantage of getting BBE back, but by now I’ve gotten quite a few tournaments in with it and I’d like to start shaking things up at my LGS and running LE again, albeit intermittently.

    I’m trying to find some opinions or someone I can take as an authority on the matter to help me build this deck again for the new meta.

    First things first: welcome back then piney!

    Sadly there is no real Reid Duke-ish advocate for LE. Although Martin Müller form Denmark and Joel Larsson from Sweden are farily popular sympathizers with LE and represented LE at World Championship 2016. Larsson even producing content for CFB sometimes, although mostly not LE content. Some people also name Travis Woo, which i personally never really liked nor agreed on with about deckbuilding choices.

    Speaking consensus i think its settled you play 3 SSG in 19 lands lists and 4 in 18 lands lists. Also the 4 Fulminators are mandatory imo. I play 4 Cerodon 4 Horrors and 4 Carabids, which is what most lists run since these are the most effective numbers for killing people. But some people value easier cycling costs higher. Also mostly 2-3 Beast Withins is a staple and 7-8 cascade spells into 3 LE.

    As far as Archfiend goes: yes, its by far the best creature to hardcast. It hits very hard can become incredibly disruptive and with 5 cmc and 4 toughness is basically asking for path terminate or board wipe. That being said i play only 2 since its really clunky to cycle as you pointed out correctly. I feel like g1 is where this deck already wins most of the fair matchups and i dont want to change that due to too many archfiend. Archfiend is really good against affinity even when cycling and can be hardcast which is why i still play 2 and feel like thats about the right number. 4 is way too many imo.

    Grove: i play 3 copies and 1 blooming marsh next to the 4 cliffs. i could see playing 4 grove and 4 cliffs but i like the 5th black fastland that is also capable of helping with violent outburst, which is my reasoning behind it. i played with gorges for a very long time and when in could afford the groves i did and never wanted to go back. i feel like anything below 3 groves is loosing consistency if its not for budget concerns. obviously there is always room for some spicy tech but i would go with 3 groves if you play the 4 horrors.

    hope this helps at least a little bit. happy to have people back on the LE train again!
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Quote from Raver »
    For reference, here's what i'm currently experimenting with/running

    Against burn i'd go something like

    -2 faerie macabre
    -3 beast withins

    +4 leyline
    +1 Shriekmaw

    My thought process on not cutting street wraiths is that i'm aggressively mulling for leylines, some guy did the math and mulling to 5 produces very good odds of having at least one leyline in the opener so i'm playing the numbers and it's either boom or bust for me, very few hands are going to get me to keep it if it doesn't have leylines otherwise.

    As for replacements in the sb, whatever you had for burn originally gets shaved for leylines, possible some anti-combo stuff (there's a lot of overlap with leyline)

    Okay, thanks for the insight! Although i like your approach i'm not a fan of kari zev and 3 beast within. THe tend to clunk up a lot for me. Also kessig wolf run is quite interesting to force through some, also makes ifnir less clunky, i guess.

    I cant afford to cut the second anger here since i face a lot of merfolk and dredge and it shines in these matchups. Thats basically what my weird one of macabre in the sb is for.

    Are you cutting the beast withins since your burn opponents do not play RiP? or is it more like "if they're having it i wont win anyway"?

    Interesting points you made especially the Shriekmaws main. Like stated above i test a lot against affinity so i'm always intrigued to not play it but maybe i should give it a try. I've just recently cut the 3rd trap because i usually only need one and tend to draw them in multiples if i play more than 2
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    So to the Leyline faction:

    How do you board? Sth like out 4 Wraith 2 Macabre/fulminator in: 4 leyline 2 Shriekmaw ? And what did you cut for the leylines in the sb? im interested in testing it online. Thanks for the reply!

    -2 Boar -1 Beast Within -1 Macabre in the sb?
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Agree with Raver. Although gnaw is the higher impact card i feel like i always need to work a lot more to make it be useful and guiding out a boar is pretty "good" no matter what in my experience.

    I dont have experience with leyline so you might be right, can only judge about cards i played with. Also siding out fulminator sure is a good option but i dont have enough impactful sideboard cards that i can cut them. and sometimes guiding one out on the play slows them down enough. I know it's not great but our entire deck is not that great against burn anyway really.

    @gruulsmash i posted my configuration on page 360. 3 SSG 3 Macabre 2 Ifnir 2 beast within is the interesting numbers in the main though.

    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Hey guys !
    Finally found some time to write about my testing results. So i'm really interested in your feedback.

    VS Burn

    Game 1
    Started the first match on the draw, which was very unfortunate. He played t1 guide revealing a living end, which is the wrost feeling possible with this LE really. He then play t2 eidolon and got me to 4 when i finally could have wiped and won. But ediolon is party pooper. Really unfortunate game overall, didnt keep track of what i kept sadly, but the LE reveal felt already deiciding.

    From here on we deicided to play sideboarded games only. this was mainly to get into "the mood".

    Game 2
    First strategy:
    Out: 4 Street Wraith In: 2 Shriekmaw 2 Brindle Boar

    We played 3 games like this. Won then lost then won again so 2-1 in sideboarded games with this strategy. Not sure about this configuration. It seemslike the safest strategy by far, but still ahving beast within felt way too clunky, maybe because he never had his rest in peace but yeah not sure. So i deicided to mix this up a bit just for science.

    So i changed to side in 2 Street Wraith again and sided out the beast within. we alos played 3 games like this, again went 2-1. But ssg + brindle boar is too much for them really which happened 2 times , also no RiP.

    For the last 3 i deicided to side the wriath out again for some spice in form of anger of the gods. turns out this was the amtch where he drew his rest in peace. 2 times. turns out its hard to win at that point, although fulminators gave their best. lost 0-3.

    I build my sideboard to be able to create sideboard packages eg. agaisnt burn -4 Wraith +2 SHriekmaw +2 Boar and ahve these packages for most matchups. still burn is an exceptioanl bad matchup really. they are fast, they dont care about a good ol' wipe and their topdecking is way better.

    next matchup will be affinity. first strategy seems best. the life loss is more relevant than you want it to be. and even though its a race basically wraith is too risky. also having beast within for possible RiP seems reasonable. Shreikmaw and Boar both seems irreplaceable. Maw for eidolon especially. So nothing special to find in this matchup. SSG helps a lot to keep up the tempo you lose due to removing the wriaths.
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    Quote from kodieyost »
    I play three basics, 2 swamp 1 forest. 4 catacombs 1 foothills 1 mire. 4 blackcleave, 3 grove 1 tomb 1 stomping 1 blood crypt (19 total). Post board my fetches only grab basics unless I already have them in hand. Swamp cycles everything except ceradon. Once you have blood moon, swamp + any land = all your mana required.

    Exact same approach here, i just dont run a foothills, but ive thought about it already. Sometimes 6 fetches ist too much, sometimes its good. Try youself, it's a personal preference i guess.
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • posted a message on [Primer] Living End
    The only one of those that moon is relevant for is Grixis, the other two very easily could play blood moon.

    I played 3 moon for a long time in board, now down to just 2 and considering a singleton

    Sorry for the confusing comment. I just play against these decks a lot because i found them to be quite tricky matchups and i test a lot of diefferent sideboard startegies against them and thought you might be interested in the testing results. No correlation to Moon though for Burn and Affinity. Its just the matchups im most familiar with.

    I just feel like sideboarding with LE is the most difficult aspect of the deck, especially for new players.
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Proven
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.