I personally don't agree with a few slots. Particularly the Harm's Way.
I don't think you're going to lose the game from them 1-for-1'ing your threats when you can just refill with Cruise + burn them out.
I think YP is great in a deck where you're fighting to keep your threats alive (with your harm's way and such) so their absence confuses me. But, i mean you put up results with it, so i can't really argue.
I do think it's a little beyond the pale from what i'd consider a 'stock' UWR Delver. And i can't agree that your slots are optimal.
Mantis Rider is intriguing, though. But, playing the typical 12 creature package + 2 Snapcasters has never made me feel threat light; at no point in time have i felt i couldn't close out a game.
I'm not a huge fan of the 3 drop dudes in general, but i play 19 lands so there's that.
arguing semantics of archetypes name is probably in the top 5 of least productive forms of conversation in a MTG forum. Especially when you both are talking about the same thing.
I'll concede that point. Right now I am arguing with his definition of what Tempo/Aggro-Control is and whether my deck is a pile of aggro and control cards mashed together, not about whether Tempo is Aggro-Control.
it sort of is, though. I think "mashed together pile" implies some sort of negative connotation, which is rather unfair. But Tempo decks usually are cheap control elements paired with hyper efficient aggro elements. Think Lorwyn Fairies with Cryptic Command.
You run plenty of cheap control cards: Bolt, Path, Helix, and your Counter suite.
And you run plenty of hyper-efficient aggro cards: Rider, Geist, Delver, Bolt, and Helix.
I think the fact that a lot of the cards are good at all points in the game is sort of a moot point. That just means the deck is well designed, imo. That's the whole reason I personally switched to WUR Delver from UR; the late game Oomph that having 4 extra Bolts brings you.
I also think it's important to note that deck archetypes exist on a gradient; where some lists lean more on the aggro part of aggro-control others can be more control leaning.
arguing semantics of archetypes name is probably in the top 5 of least productive forms of conversation in a MTG forum. Especially when you both are talking about the same thing.
Awesome thread! I've been playing a lot of UR Delver lately(both the all in aggro version and the aggo-control version), and for what it's worth, I think DTT is definitely the way to go if you aren't going all in aggro with swiftspear and probe. Treasure cruise is amazing when I just need a quantity of cards to burn through, but dig is great in a deck like a lot of the WUR lists I've seen in here, that want to be able to change directions. It's quality over quantity.
I agree.
I like Dig more. It allows you to stay reactive with all of your mana. And in WUR where you have 8-12 burn spells (4 bolt, 4 helix + up to 4 others including Forked Bolt, Boros Charm, Burst Lightning, and Electrolyze) it provides an uncanny amount of reach. Casting it is generally worth 6 damage. And it finds the power-house SB cards that define the Modern format a lot easier than Treasure Cruise does.
Thanks guyterto and fargsby. These are the kind of lists I was interested in seeing results from. I'm going to try a more aggro version just to see how it feels. I love Geist and Boros Charm so I will have to squeeze a few in, but I love the 3 pierces.
Burst Lightning's issue is that it's highly resource inefficient.
It's unquestionably one of the good Shock variants put to print, but you're looking at 5 mana to kill things right outside of Bolt range. That is a lot of mana.
I'll give it that there's still a non-insignificant number of creatures that can be killed by a Shock's worth of damage, but using it as a sort of solution to the speed issues of a card like Flame Slash strikes me as a recipe for disaster.
But hey, if you can durdle around consistently enough to make it work, don't let lack of validation hold you back on it.
Oh, I would argue that WUR-Go doesn't like it so much because Bolt Snap-Bolt, while less efficient card-wise, is a more aggressive use of one's mana.
Makes sense for WUR, but since the number of creatures within Bolt range that are not in Burst range is almost insignificant, I just don't see why having a card that is the equivalent of a Bolt in most cases and can kills creatures that pass the Bolt test for 5 mana is bad.
Lol. "almost insignificant" and "most cases". Are you just ignoring reality? Have you ever played WUR control? Have you ever played Delver? Have you played Jund? Bolts tend to also go to the face. And when you tap 5 mana to deal 4 to the face that means you're not holding up Terminate/Cryptic or attacking with Colonnade/Treetop/Ravine. And if you happen to need to pay 5 mana to kill a Brimaz or a Resto Angel, you're probably losing the game.
Seriously, by all means play Burst Lightning. But, you're going to find out it's not nearly as good as Bolt.
Burst Lightning's issue is that it's highly resource inefficient.
It's unquestionably one of the good Shock variants put to print, but you're looking at 5 mana to kill things right outside of Bolt range. That is a lot of mana.
I'll give it that there's still a non-insignificant number of creatures that can be killed by a Shock's worth of damage, but using it as a sort of solution to the speed issues of a card like Flame Slash strikes me as a recipe for disaster.
But hey, if you can durdle around consistently enough to make it work, don't let lack of validation hold you back on it.
Oh, I would argue that WUR-Go doesn't like it so much because Bolt Snap-Bolt, while less efficient card-wise, is a more aggressive use of one's mana.
Makes sense for WUR, but since the number of creatures within Bolt range that are not in Burst range is almost insignificant, I just don't see why having a card that is the equivalent of a Bolt in most cases and can kills creatures that pass the Bolt test for 5 mana is bad.
Because 5 mana is an outrageous amount of mana, that's why!
It is, but I would rather spend 5 mana to kill a 4 toughness creature than not be able to kill it at all.
Or you can play good cards like Path to Exile, Terminate, Go for the Throat. Or pair Lightning Bolt with an Electrolyze or Forked Bolt.
Some guys in Spain have been doing T8s in +50 people torunaments recently with the GP Kobe list. Hands down, the list is probably one of the best atm, but I think it is a mistake not to play Treasure Cruise, so I gave the list a more aggro twist (influenced by Jeff Hooggland articles).
4 Delver
4 Pyro
2 Snaps (Only 2, we are running Cruise)
2 Vendilions (Or Geist, but I feel more confortable with Vendilion)
4 Helix
4 Bolt
2 Vapor Snag
4 Serum
3 Gitaxian
3 Cruise (Without Thought Scour, 3 is the right number)
2 Remand
2 Snare
3 Pierce
(Since I am not running Geist, I feel we need some sort of protection for Delver and Pyro, that's why I like Pierce and Snag in this more 'aggro' aproach)
2 Forked Bolt (Or Boros Charm, or Electrolyze...)
19 Lands (10 Fetch more or less)
Has someone tried something like this (besides Hoggland)? Any ideas?
That's really similar to my list (also inspired by the article 'An American Fire' by Hoogland). I really enjoy it. You can disrupt them early with Remands, and swing in with Delvers. And eventually switch gears to being a burn deck. A lot of decks just don't have the early game muscle to deal with that game plan, and eventually you just run them over with burn after they finally get Delver off the field. Or you drop a YP, and get so much value out of it they lose.
I run Swiftspear, though. No counterspell package (aside from 4 Remands). I keep the counter suite in the board, and bring it in over Swiftspear in the matches that I'd like the counter suite. I'm considering running Spell Snare MD, though. As a 2x. It's nice to hit Searing Blaze/Blood with it.
I won an FNM 4-0 with it, taking down Pod and Infect as the Tier 1 decks of note. Forked Bolt is a beating in both of those MUs, i really like the 2-of.
Boros Charm is pretty good protection early, too. If you want to run that MB. It's particularly amazing against Fallout/Decay
So, your point is that since you don't need the third damage of Lightning Bolt to kill creatures you should play burst lightning?
Since you don't need the efficiency of Lightning Bolt you should just play Burst Lightning instead?
Gas is cheap now, let's burn our Prii and bust out the Muscle Cars?
I read your post.
It's still rather stupid to play a less efficient card because you don't need the efficiency of Bolt.
Waiting two turns to maybe have the mana to kill Brimaz or waiting one turn to tap out and kill a Resto Angel is pretty silly, too. If your deck has problem with 4 toughness creatures you should be busting out Flame Slash or splash for Path.
Why does Lightning Bolt see more play than Burst Lightning in nonagressive decks such as Blue Moon and WUR Control? Bolt has pushed out almost every 3 toughness creature in the format (and BGx becoming less popular pushed out the 3 toughness manlands, leaving almost nothing with a base toughness of 3 (not counting Merfolk lord pumps or Monastery Swiftspear Prowess triggers) outside of Zoo), which means that if you are not trying to Burn out your opponent Burst is just pure upside. Thoughts?
What? Are you kidding?
Pod has a slew of 1-3 toughness creatures.
Jund has Ooze, Bob, Ravine, and Treetop
Junk has Ooze, Bob, and Treetop
Twin has Snapcaster, Pestermite, (Ooze/Huntmaster)
Burn has Guide, Eidolon, Vexing Devil, Keldon Marauders, and Grim Lavamancer
Zoo has Nacatl, Pridemate, Ooze, Early KotR, Ape, Lynx, and Lion
UWR Control has Snapcaster and Vendillion Clique
U/Rx Delver has Delver, Young Pyro, Clique, Snapcaster
Why on earth do you think that Bolt has pushed 3 toughness creatures out of the format when nearly every Tier 1 deck in the format runs a myriad of 3 and less toughness creatures?
Good luck ever hitting a Goyf with a Burst Lightning.
Bolt is better than Burst Lightning, and it's not just because it has more targets to hit. It is also more reach. And easier to Snapcaster back if you're planning on using the kicker cost. And if you do Snapcaster the Burst back for its kicker cost it does the exact same damage as Bolt-Snap-Bolt does, for significantly less mana.
because you still need efficiency in your cards. 95% of the time, its a worse bolt. you're not going to be paying 5 often when you cast burst lighting. decks that want efficient burn run it as bolts 5 and 6 usually.
slightly off topic, but this thread makes me want to start running disfigure again. zoo isn't a large player in the meta any more.
I think both versions (more proactive and Burn-oriented with Monastery Swiftspears or more "traditional" with more counterspells) have their merits but they're actually quite different decks in their approach, even if they use the same core of cards (for the most part).
I also don't think that Snapcaster Mage is "bad" just because you want to run a bunch (2, for example) of Treasure Cruises - at least if you're on the more "traditional" version.
I mean: How many Snapcasters do you expect to draw in your "average" game ? Let's say you draw and use 2 (running 4), that takes a whopping 2 (!) cards out of your 'yard in a deck that runs between 10 and 12 cantrips in addition to 8 Fetchlands. Even if you draw and use a third Snapcaster Mage (which isn't extremely likely), you're graveyard should easily still be "full" enough to support 2 Treasure Cruises.
Of course, this might be completely different if you're on the proactive Monastery Swiftspear plan that runs less cantrips and more burn spells. This version gets a lot less out of Snapcasters in general because it doesn't run (m)any counters and actually often wants to cast spells on its own turn, practically taking part of the advantage of Snapcaster's Flash ability out of the equasion.
In such a version, I could see why many Snapcaster Mages, in addition to Treasure Cruise might become problematic.
It felt clunky in that UWR flavor to me because with 19 lands, 4 Serum Visions, and 3 Probes I was staying at around 3 mana pretty consistently. And when I wasn't, I drew a snapcaster with the Treasure Cruise that exiled all 7 of my 'yard.
In UR (the version i have the most experience with running), he felt great. (I ran 2 Thought Scour, 4 Visions, 4 Gitaxian Probes there)
I agree that Snapcaster and Treasure Cruise have a home in the same deck. They're actually pretty wonderful together. Treasure Cruise, usually finds something for Tiago to flashback. I was just normally on the EoT Burn Spell plan most of the night or I only had 2 mana, either way Tiago was chilling in my hand an inordinate amount of time for a 2-of, and I'm considering just putting in 2 more Boros Charms instead; they play defense and they provide the reach I like with Snapcaster.
That's how i feel about the burny/swiftspear version anyways. I have zero experience with Geist. I'm sure it runs Snaps fine, even with Cruise.
I don't think you're going to lose the game from them 1-for-1'ing your threats when you can just refill with Cruise + burn them out.
I think YP is great in a deck where you're fighting to keep your threats alive (with your harm's way and such) so their absence confuses me. But, i mean you put up results with it, so i can't really argue.
I do think it's a little beyond the pale from what i'd consider a 'stock' UWR Delver. And i can't agree that your slots are optimal.
Mantis Rider is intriguing, though. But, playing the typical 12 creature package + 2 Snapcasters has never made me feel threat light; at no point in time have i felt i couldn't close out a game.
I'm not a huge fan of the 3 drop dudes in general, but i play 19 lands so there's that.
it sort of is, though. I think "mashed together pile" implies some sort of negative connotation, which is rather unfair. But Tempo decks usually are cheap control elements paired with hyper efficient aggro elements. Think Lorwyn Fairies with Cryptic Command.
You run plenty of cheap control cards: Bolt, Path, Helix, and your Counter suite.
And you run plenty of hyper-efficient aggro cards: Rider, Geist, Delver, Bolt, and Helix.
I think the fact that a lot of the cards are good at all points in the game is sort of a moot point. That just means the deck is well designed, imo. That's the whole reason I personally switched to WUR Delver from UR; the late game Oomph that having 4 extra Bolts brings you.
I also think it's important to note that deck archetypes exist on a gradient; where some lists lean more on the aggro part of aggro-control others can be more control leaning.
Aggro-control and Tempo are used interchangeably.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic:_The_Gathering_deck_types#Aggro-Control
arguing semantics of archetypes name is probably in the top 5 of least productive forms of conversation in a MTG forum. Especially when you both are talking about the same thing.
I agree.
I like Dig more. It allows you to stay reactive with all of your mana. And in WUR where you have 8-12 burn spells (4 bolt, 4 helix + up to 4 others including Forked Bolt, Boros Charm, Burst Lightning, and Electrolyze) it provides an uncanny amount of reach. Casting it is generally worth 6 damage. And it finds the power-house SB cards that define the Modern format a lot easier than Treasure Cruise does.
I would much prefer a Keranos, i think. And there isn't room for both.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/established-modern/220047-wur-delver?comment=1092
Here's the list I've been rocking. I think Sasky is brewing up something similar (swiftspear + remand with no other counter spells, being the basis)
Lol. "almost insignificant" and "most cases". Are you just ignoring reality? Have you ever played WUR control? Have you ever played Delver? Have you played Jund? Bolts tend to also go to the face. And when you tap 5 mana to deal 4 to the face that means you're not holding up Terminate/Cryptic or attacking with Colonnade/Treetop/Ravine. And if you happen to need to pay 5 mana to kill a Brimaz or a Resto Angel, you're probably losing the game.
Seriously, by all means play Burst Lightning. But, you're going to find out it's not nearly as good as Bolt.
Or you can play good cards like Path to Exile, Terminate, Go for the Throat. Or pair Lightning Bolt with an Electrolyze or Forked Bolt.
That's really similar to my list (also inspired by the article 'An American Fire' by Hoogland). I really enjoy it. You can disrupt them early with Remands, and swing in with Delvers. And eventually switch gears to being a burn deck. A lot of decks just don't have the early game muscle to deal with that game plan, and eventually you just run them over with burn after they finally get Delver off the field. Or you drop a YP, and get so much value out of it they lose.
I run Swiftspear, though. No counterspell package (aside from 4 Remands). I keep the counter suite in the board, and bring it in over Swiftspear in the matches that I'd like the counter suite. I'm considering running Spell Snare MD, though. As a 2x. It's nice to hit Searing Blaze/Blood with it.
I won an FNM 4-0 with it, taking down Pod and Infect as the Tier 1 decks of note. Forked Bolt is a beating in both of those MUs, i really like the 2-of.
Boros Charm is pretty good protection early, too. If you want to run that MB. It's particularly amazing against Fallout/Decay
Since you don't need the efficiency of Lightning Bolt you should just play Burst Lightning instead?
Gas is cheap now, let's burn our Prii and bust out the Muscle Cars?
I read your post.
It's still rather stupid to play a less efficient card because you don't need the efficiency of Bolt.
Waiting two turns to maybe have the mana to kill Brimaz or waiting one turn to tap out and kill a Resto Angel is pretty silly, too. If your deck has problem with 4 toughness creatures you should be busting out Flame Slash or splash for Path.
What? Are you kidding?
Pod has a slew of 1-3 toughness creatures.
Jund has Ooze, Bob, Ravine, and Treetop
Junk has Ooze, Bob, and Treetop
Twin has Snapcaster, Pestermite, (Ooze/Huntmaster)
Burn has Guide, Eidolon, Vexing Devil, Keldon Marauders, and Grim Lavamancer
Zoo has Nacatl, Pridemate, Ooze, Early KotR, Ape, Lynx, and Lion
UWR Control has Snapcaster and Vendillion Clique
U/Rx Delver has Delver, Young Pyro, Clique, Snapcaster
Why on earth do you think that Bolt has pushed 3 toughness creatures out of the format when nearly every Tier 1 deck in the format runs a myriad of 3 and less toughness creatures?
Good luck ever hitting a Goyf with a Burst Lightning.
Bolt is better than Burst Lightning, and it's not just because it has more targets to hit. It is also more reach. And easier to Snapcaster back if you're planning on using the kicker cost. And if you do Snapcaster the Burst back for its kicker cost it does the exact same damage as Bolt-Snap-Bolt does, for significantly less mana.
Interestingly enough...
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/deckshow.php?&t[C1]=28&start_date=10/19/2014&end_date=10/19/2014&start=1&finish=16&event_ID=45&city=Worcester
You should run 0.
It makes 1 land hands unkeepable.
When there is a lot of Pod and BGx.
It felt clunky in that UWR flavor to me because with 19 lands, 4 Serum Visions, and 3 Probes I was staying at around 3 mana pretty consistently. And when I wasn't, I drew a snapcaster with the Treasure Cruise that exiled all 7 of my 'yard.
In UR (the version i have the most experience with running), he felt great. (I ran 2 Thought Scour, 4 Visions, 4 Gitaxian Probes there)
I agree that Snapcaster and Treasure Cruise have a home in the same deck. They're actually pretty wonderful together. Treasure Cruise, usually finds something for Tiago to flashback. I was just normally on the EoT Burn Spell plan most of the night or I only had 2 mana, either way Tiago was chilling in my hand an inordinate amount of time for a 2-of, and I'm considering just putting in 2 more Boros Charms instead; they play defense and they provide the reach I like with Snapcaster.
That's how i feel about the burny/swiftspear version anyways. I have zero experience with Geist. I'm sure it runs Snaps fine, even with Cruise.