MTG Salvation

So Thing in the ice doesn't die to anger, I know when thing first came out people were testing it in all sorts of deck types and it has since moved mostly to a tempo UR list. I was playing it for a while in a footsteps combo deck as a two of alternate win con and it worked great. I think I might be testing thing with main deck angers next time I get to play. I went 3-1 again at my LGS a few days ago but lost to humans so I'm trying to make that matchup better. Young Pyromancer did a well most games I got him out but I think Thing in the ice could have been pretty ok in the same spot and allowed me to have some main deck answers for the humans and RG aggro deck I faced. The biggest consideration about main deck anger is the 4 liliana of the veil I play, wanting double red and double black along with cryptic mana seems too painful. I kind of then see the thought process with thing, because then if we include something like manamorphose, it becomes a spell slinger/tempo kind of build that begs you to include more cards that fit that theme.

I think those are some super great suggestions, and can help us to play to the board more. You make an awesome point that we still do have an engine, the cool thing about mardu is they go looting into souls, into reveler, which gives them more lootings and more souls. We have Kommand getting snapcaster, rebuying it or bouncing it with cryptic. I think the difference is they are adding more power to the table while we are generating value and being more controlling. Is talrand, sky summoner unplayable? What is the mana cost we consider when considering adding cards to the deck? I know at 4 mana he's competing with cryptic command which is a pretty big deal. If talrand, sky summoner is not playable, even though I might put him akin to the scorpion god in godshadow's list, is evacuation a card we want? It helps us to stabilize the board, bounce snap, rebuy more value?

I feel like we need another value card for the graveyard, something like bedlam reveler of lingering souls that mardu has. Although I think mardu relies a lot more on graveyard recursion, I also like we don't usually rely on our graveyard so much that grave hate affects us. I think the only real downside to playing Azcanta is that it makes you vulnerable to grave/enchantment hate. I think think twice is borderline playable, or something like forbidden alchemy. It might be a bit mana hungry but I've been thinking about those cards plus something like torrent of souls to have a small reanimator package but that kind of morphs into a different deck.

I bought a dreadbore going to swap it out for the pillar of flame for now. I've been experimenting with different sideboards so I'll probably change that a bit next time I play. I'm thinking about going up to 4 pyromancer but not sure what to cut at this point. I may move to a version that has more 4 of's, and test that for consistency.

Played at a FNM, went 3-1. Really liking this deck, still need to tweak the sideboard more. I really want to try to get 4 pyromancer in the main, currently playing two.

Round 1 played against naya zoo, 2-1. Opponent was really salty, I drew pretty well, drawing kalitas both games, but I feel like it's a great matchup. He had too much burn for me the first game but after sideboard I had anger and kalitas and EE. Having some amount of lifegain in your sideboard is key, What does everyone else think?

Round 2 I played against BW Smallpox 1-2. This was a hard game and the tokens ended up getting the best of me. I was testing out slaughter games in the side and while it was ok the second game, I sat with them in my hand for the third game and he ended up grinding me out with lingering souls and bitterblossom. I picked up a dreadbore and I will be playing that from now on because I think it improves this matchup. He had fulminator mage which really set me back, I was more prepared for bloodghast. While slaughter games wasn't super great, it was able to take away his Gideon, ally of zendikar which I don't think we can beat some days. When you are playing against a deck with Liliana of the veil do you typically side out your discard? Should I have put in counterspells? I feel like discard was dead so I took it out but this was a match where 4 pyro in the main would have made it winnable.

Round 3 I played against affinity, 2-1. I feel like affinity is always a good matchup. Artifacts I think have been in a bad spot for quite some time in modern and I really love a version of grixis with 4 kommand. I had the typical sweeper into liiana make you sack etched champion play and it felt real good. Although I did cut some lilianas in the sideboard games, the sack effect is super relevant.

Round 4 I played against bogles 2-1. You would think this would be a bad matchup? Game 1 I luckily mulliganed a 5 lander into a hand with 4 lands, and a liliana and thought scour. He had 10 power in play on turn 3 and I made him sack it! Game two I was able to last for about 20 turns chaining snapcasters but leyline of sanctities were too much. Game three the engineered explosives was actually what allowed me to take over the game and land a liliana. I won with tasigur and pyro tokens.

I super like this deck but there is a tension between maxing out on threats. Control lists seem really disjointed in modern lately, I feel like we should be taking more advantage of the ability to play all 4 of certain cards. Does it really matter with consistency or am I crazy? How much better is 4 cryptics versus 3? How do we make that all mesh together and what does it mean in deckbuilding when we put together a sort of a highlander type of list? Can someone propose a list with only 4 of's and test? How does everyone feel about counterspells? Is a list with 1-4 counters even worth it or should be changing gears to a more proactive gameplan at that point? I am almost willing to try a list that's super proactive with 15 counters in the board and see how that works. At this point I think we have a lot of good matchups and would rather devote 5,6,7 cards in the board to a few matchups like tron and combo.

Awesome reply! I've been trying to see if I could get the discussion to branch out and get more input on the practices that players are using. I see lots of differences between players lists but not a whole lot of explanation, I agree we should pioneer our own plan of attack. When I think about things, my previous post speaks to what I've experienced and what I've learned works best for me.

Maybe we can get people to talk about what it means for an archetype that has to heavily adapt to the metagame. When I think about that, the more the metagame gets skewed in one way or another, my sideboard cards start becoming main deck. I've noticed Reid Duke does the same kind of thing, I saw an iteration of jund where he commented he was playing a nihil spellbomb main. Sure this can come down to what removal we are playing, like bolt versus fatal push. I am liking a single pillar of flame. But I think there's a hump for this deck about playing sweepers in the main that I wanna see what is working for people.

Ya I think a lot of players get trapped by building with cards and ignoring synergy. In control, we want to pull ahead with 2 for 1's. We want to guarantee that our opponent will draw lands, which will be dead cards because their deck might only need 4 lands. When we get to the late game, and they have 5 plus lands in play we are gaining an advantage over what they are drawing each turn.

I specifically think there are lots of pros or I guess people writing articles that don't really think about what they are writing. They don't think or proofread after they write it sometimes like on Tcgplayer. I've seen before, especially before upcoming tournaments that they will write about decks specifically to deceive people or promote strategies that are bad. After all that is what makes tournament or competitive settings lots of fun, metagaming can be quite a mental exercise and game theory is part of what has made this game last for so long; the vast number of cards allows for so much creative design. But with defined archetypes I think we should include more unified thinking and educate our peers on the best practices in deck building.

1. If you have a card that is the best or most important card in your deck, play 4. Play tutors to find that card. Play other cards that synergize with it. We should be playing 4 cryptic 100 percent. We should be playing 4 Kommand 100 percent.
2. Play 2 for 1's in control, or creatures that are resilient. If we could be playing cards like voice of resurgence or tireless tracker we would. But pyromancer and snapcaster are the creatures we choose because they interact with our other cards best. They generate advantage. This is why Nicol Bolas does not work.
3. In my opinion, I have always struggled with variance when I play a deck with any less than 25 lands. I know all about turbo xerox, but I still find that variance affects us negatively when trying to get to the late game. In addition, turbo xerox does not take into account lands with utility abilities. Lands like field of ruin are basically worth a card in the main deck and smooth out our games by making our starting hands have enough lands.

How does everyone build their sideboard these days? 0-15 removal spells, hate cards, additional threats? Curious how everyone thinks about it with this deck, are people planning on sideboarding to be more proactive or controlling?

Are there some matchups that we really want to shore up, and if so how? I think there's a consensus that lots of people think tron is a bad matchup for example. If that's the case, why aren't people allowing for more sideboard cards? Typically I haven't seen more than 3 cards against tron. Usually people are playing 3 fulminators, or they're playing a couple ceremonious rejection.

I personally like playing the proactive version of control with lots of discard and few counters. So in my sideboard I've put in lots of counters because they work against control and give a better chance against combo. But this always gets me thinking that dispel is a good card, and most decks that you bring in dispel against they are going to bring it in against you.

I always like having a few extra creatures in the board because usually they take out their removal, but lately I've seen cards like young pyromancer and anger of the gods in the side. That can't be right can it? How can we build a control side without any nonbos?

Yes it's cool to see the different lists between players, the game night I went to had me in second place and the first place player was also playing grixis control. I asked him about his list, he was only playing tasigur as a win con. I saw that he was also playing Jace, the Mind Sculptor. It looked like he had a lot of copies of fatal push as well.

A couple pages ago people were talking about the new Nicol Bolas, I don't think that we need him but it's a cool card and eventually they are going to print a card that makes cards transform similiar to moonmist.

Played this deck today there was around 10 people.


Went 4 rounds:

Round 1 was versus rat tribal. 2-0. I was able to stop him from locking me out with chittering rats eldrazi displacer. Targeted discard was real bad, I took those out and put in more creatures. He did have rest in piece and path to exile, but I was able to out value him. Pyromancer was very good both games. Liliana also closed the door first game where I would have struggled otherwise I think.

Round 2, mono black devotion. 2-0 he was a new player but was able to keep pace really well.

Round 3, humans. 1-2. I literally drew all lands the first game. Second game I got him locked out with liliana. Third game he had a fast start and I sided in too many 4 drops. I drew them all and he had mage on liliana with thalia out to stop 4 drops. Also, I had a good opener but got stuck on 3 lands for a turn or two. Very close had I drawn anger of the gods at any point I think I would have been able to play kalitas and win.

Round 4, black/white eldrazi taxes. 2-1. Pyromancer was good here to generate value. He wasn't able to Gq me ever since I always had removal for his first couple plays. I had some good moments where I bounced his threats and inquisitioned them as well. He had quick thought knots game 2 and I stumbled. Game 3 I milled a thundermaw early with thought scour and was able to get it back with kommand later to kill his flickerwisp and stall him. Would have liked to have the third anger of the gods this game but having double red is tough with all of the other card requirements.

Some thoughts are that I absolutely loved having four field of ruin, I think it was great each game except one but I lost that game mostly because of not enough mana, not because of the color. I still love having 4 liliana. Even though it can be challenging going double black into triple blue for cryptic, you can discard anything and recur it or flash it back so it still provides value. I haven't gotten a fourth snapcaster but I think three is fine. I need to tweak the sideboard quite a bit still, and I'd like to try to get a third pyromancer in the main.

Quote from Craigory »

My local meta has a lot of jeskai control, and after playing against the new teferi versions, I’m convinced we are solid favorites in the matchup. Having to commit 5 mana on your turn is a huge liability in blue mirrors, and jeskai opponents are almost never safe in playing it.

I think in general, people get caught up looking for haymakers in grixis, and it’s just not necessary. Kommand loops alone give grixis a better end game then every deck in the format except tron, so there is no real reason to dedicate slots to clunky planeswalkers.

Sorry but I have to disagree that grixis has the best endgame. An artifact based deck using thopter sword combo seems like it might have the edge. I know we might have artifact destruction but we would have to separate between the foundry and ensnaring bridge which means we might run out of options in the endgame. Also blue tron and mindslaver lock is a solid endgame as well.

How does everyone think about the control mirror as far as: do you build your deck to be good versus control, or do you put cards in your sideboard? Honestly I try to build good versus aggro and put a couple more threats in the sideboard. Sometimes it might be best to ignore the matchup? Is liliana still the best planeswalker ever? If she's not then Jace is right?

If we're going to play something 4 mana we already have so many better options like Kalitas or Olivia Voldaren. I really like thundermaw helkite and torrential gearhulk as well. Is there anyone agreeing with the whisperings that teferi is better than JTMS in modern? Personally I don't think so, but I love to hear people's opinions. It has really been interesting how all I am hearing recently is that Jace doesn't do anything and that he was supposed to be so broken but he ended up being fine. I also haven't seen lists with more than 2 copies of Jace ever, when he was unbanned I tried him out as a 4 of and I think he does a lot of things great.

Seems to me like I watch a lot of matches/streaming against tron, so why aren't we lumping them all into the same slot and playing more things that deal with lands like spreading seas? Even though tron might not be considered a large percent of the meta I think that number becomes a lot higher when you add together all of the decks using tron lands plus scapeshift or other land based combo. We really should be playing spreading seas, it's a hard argument to add too many field/ghost quarter effects though because of the shard mana base.

Do cards like seas get the same response from most people that it isn't instant speed? The only real similiarities between decklists, especially Corey's, are that people think playing at instant speed is better than using all of the cards we have access to. I think that way of thinking only helps when playing against control which we have at least an even if not a good matchup against depending on how you build your deck and sideboard. Liliana is an absolute nightmare against control and I don't see why we don't have more people playing her in grixis.

And why isn't anyone playing angler anymore? Have most people shifted over to death's shadow variants? I've thought about playing it in the sideboard, but is there anybody out there thinking this deck needs more threats?

How about playing waste not against hollow one, they can't take it off the table except with EE and it also seems ok against mardu pyromancer.

Played this at fnm, I went 3/1
Round one I played against mill: got demolished game one, game two I was able to control with discard, and game three was awesome!!! Game three opp archive traps me and I drop a turn 1 gurmag angler and ride it to victory.
Round two I played against eldrazi tron, I kinda hoped to ignore the tron matchup and I feel now after the tourney I could devote more sideboard to it and be fine.
Round 3 I played against devoted druid with naya colors and had mono removal and planeswalkers, couldnt be a better matchup.
Round 4 I played against affinity and the 4 kolaghan's command did work.

Some thoughts are most lists people are playing are vastly different but I wanted to chime in and say this list I like a lot. I only have 2 snapcasters that's why I'm playing gearhulk and vryn's prodigy so I still have 4 of those effects. I don't think I'm ever playing a black deck without 4 liliana of the veil. Mind sculptor was also very good, being able to fateseal and close out some games. I didn't get to play against jund, which I'd really like to test. I'm sure I need some spreading seas in the board, and I don't have any field of ruin so that's why they're excluded. I really liked having a flawless manabase and it really helped with consistency. Plus, with my games against tron field of ruin might not have even mattered. He had natural tron game 1 and turn 1 expedition map game 2 into turn 3 tron. Without huge changes to the main deck, what are some suggestions on sideboard?