The deck thinning you get from fetches is not that relevant to be honest. You will want fetches if you play grim lavamancers in your 75. It is also useful to play fetches so you can get basics and run bloodmoon to screw your opponent. Some versions run a singleton breeding pool so they can flashback ancient grudge. That is what you will miss out if you don't have them
Like what the rest said, you can choose to run painlands and maybe 1-2 filterlands as alternative
In case your deck is not listed there then you might want to consider submitting a primer (someone has to start it.. right?) so the mods can approve it.
The problem is that no one pays attention to the Budget forums.
I am aware that the budget forums is a bit of a ghost town, but I think it is still worth trying. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of players playing budgeted top tier decks like Zoo without goyfs or X and Y decks without fetchlands looking for a thread where they could start their discussion but couldn't find one. This is why someone has to step up and create one.
In case your deck is not listed there then you might want to consider submitting a primer (someone has to start it.. right?) so the mods can approve it.
For some reason, I like keeping spell snares in the deck. It is probably bad vs zoo because there aren't a lot of targets, but against other decks and the mirror it is decent.
I think it is time for us to play a 2-3 pillar of flame from the side. I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot of Kitchen Finks (jund players might play this card), and it is pretty good vs Pod decks too.
The current standard might be boring at the moment and somewhat stale. But I don't think that is the reason why you are ranting. Correct me if i'm wrong, but I think it has something to do with the cost of top tier decks (it goes the same for other formats like Modern and Legacy). I think it would be best for you to play a more casual format like EDH where you can slowly build your collection without overspending. You can also play limited or draft if you think it gives everyone an equal chance of winning.
Sell them while you can. Reckoner sees play in standard because there are a lot of aggro decks. It won't be that good in Modern because it don't do much against combo decks. Not unless your meta is pretty underdeveloped and all you see are aggro decks. As for Chandra. I have a feeling it will get reprinted in the core set. There's no reason for you to keep them unless it becomes an automatic 2 of in all Jund decks and you want to build one yourself.
I personally think that the value of these cards will drop once they rotate out of standard.
I've check the link and the list looks more like MBC splashing blue rather than UB control.
I suggest that you add Jace AOT to your list, since it is one of the best cards available in blue. Also, I think you don't have enough lands in the deck. You might want to add 2 more.
If you don't have any plans of changing the concept of the deck, then you might want to consider changing the deck into a "Rock" style deck and drop blue completely. Maybe add a couple of Thoughtseizes, and possibly Corrupt.
You can build tier 2 decks with your budget, but you might have difficult times when you are paired with top tier decks. If you are fine with it, you can go with what these guys suggested. But if not, you might want to consider a tier 1 deck instead. You can always build an under-powered version and slowly upgrade it until it is complete.
Last I checked, people can play more than one deck. Even more when those two share around 45/60 cards and maybe more. Which I did say earlier, I'm thinking you don't read my posts as thorowly or I just explained myself utterly wrong. To clarify, you asked about my deck and I answered that, in no way did I ask for opinions on my control deck since I would (and have) do so in the corresponding topic. Here, talking about Geist, I'd play 3 cryptics because I'm me, but in a general term, 1-2 seems right, period. Do what you want with your own deck but don't say I'm forcing anything considering the arguments given.
First of all, nobody is stopping you from playing more than one deck. I only asked about your deck to check if we are on the same page, and if we are really playing with the same archetype. Apparently, we are not and this is why I tried to end the conversation by asking you that we end this argument because it is pointless. You kept coming back so I am under the impression that you want me to acknowledge your ideas first before we stop this nonsense.
I did reference the UW/x Control thread because you were asking things about if Sower would be good in your control deck, and I thought that if you are posting at the right thread since most of the guys there are very experienced with control version.
So now, for the 3rd time, let's stop this so we can move on. We can talk about something else if you are still interested.
How can you say I consider my deck midrange if not 2 sentences before you just quoted myself saying it was control...
And no, my process is playing control not midrange, the geist is there as a redundancy.
As per geist deck, from "not needing the full 4" (germanturkey) to "should play 0" (cahoots) there's quite a difference. You're not swinging for lethal with geist until t 6, that's 2 turns later than cryptic is viable. hence not having a reason not to play it 1-2 copies as I've been saying. (even with burn, it's at least t5, in a dream case burning them early a lot could be t4, cryptic still taps the blockers or bounces whatever problem).
As per new strategies: I'm growing more and more in love with Sower against non bolt decks, but as with anything I'd like outside feedback to tell me I'm crazy if so.
Let's make it easier for us. You play your cryptics, I will play with 0. Thank you for reminding me how good Cryptic is, but no thanks, I won't play it. You can stop forcing your ideas to me and let's move on. I'm tired of having this back and forth argument because I know this is getting nowhere. Maybe it was my mistake for assuming you are play Midrange when you are posting in the UWr Midrange thread.
There's an actual UW/x Control thread if that's the direction of your deck. Even if you have singleton Geist for redundancy, that falls under the control category.
the geist deck doesn't need the full 4 cryptics. it aims to win before getting to the late game, when cryptic really shines. its more, "swing twice with geist, throw all the burn at them." that being said, there are currently bigger things than geist being played. i moved away from the resto build a long time ago, and haven't revisited it simply because i stopped playing the deck for no reason.
Thank you for explaining it in detail. This is what I've been trying to tell Hammer-head The goal of the deck is to kill your opponent asap before we reach the long game. Colonades are just there as insurance in case things go wrong. This is the reason why I don't think Cryptic belongs in the deck.
well, the point of spellstutter sprite in the ur delver deck is to have a hard counter for 1 and 2cmc removal when leak and remand stop being effective.
Thanks for pointing that out. SSS is indeed a good card and will do a lot of work in the right deck.
PW's applied to UWR control, not Midrange. 4 snappies, 2 cliques, 2 restos, 1 geist, 3 pws, and the main core spells is my setup right now.
Tbh, your current build looks like an incomplete UWR Control build and you are trying to shift to Geist Midrange. I'm still clueless why you consider your version with 3 PWs and only 1 GoST as "midrange" when it is clearly a control variant. I find it very odd tbh. Not unless you are still in the process of getting 3 more geists and will eventually cut those PWs for it. Anyway, the bottom line is, as long as it works for you that's what matters most.
I was just saying a no cryptic build only makes sense to me playing aggrocontrol because you don't want to excede your curve so much. But then, switch collonades for mutavaults and spellstutters or something.
I'm not sure if I understood this correctly, but if you're saying that it is alright to cut your dual colored manlands for mutavaults in a 3 color deck... well, for the sake of testing, I will give it a shot, though I'm sure it will screw me up more than help me.
I'm just worried that with this type of configuration that you suggested... having 2 blue sources early game might even become a problem
Let's put an end to this. I don't see the point of continuing this argument. It is obvious that we see things differently and have our own style. I think we're better off talking about something else.
I'm the first advocate of the faeries deck trust me (in my sig as well), my suggestion wasn't to play UR faeries, which is an entirely different deck, but mutavaults + sss in a more aggrocontrol orientated build isn't that insane.
I'm still not convinced to run SSS because you need more fairies if you want to counter cards with CMC 2 and up. Most of the time, it's just counter target spell with CMC of 1. We have mutavaults to increase the count, but most of the deck that I play with has red. I just don't like the idea of getting 2 for 1'd when they play a 2 drop and my mutavault gets bolted and SSS just became a useless 1/1. If this format was legacy, it's probably alright to have SSS even if you don't have other fairies aside from Cliques since most of the decks play with a lot of 1 drops.
I do play UWR control...now. I started with the first incarnation of caw go, then the UW restoration deck with blade splicers and stuff. I got to play Cloudshift at one tourney to some success. Then I added red once my budget allowed it, 4 geists etc, i.e. geist of saint win. If i'm talking about this deck I am so, not talking about UWR Wafo or control variants. I don't even own Revelations yet anyway, and I don't use think twice in my build, I'm testing 1 isochron scepter, 1 gideon 1 elspeth 1 ajani, and the rest of the core.
PWs are great. But the deck doesn't have a lot of space for it. If you are playing with a lot of counters and the usual number of burn spells in the deck (bolt, helix, electrolyze), it sounds like you added those PWs in place of V Cliques. If that's the case, imo, that is no longer a midrange build but more of a control build since your game plan seems like you want to control the board as much as possible, which makes sense why you want Cryptics in your build. If I will run cryptic commands in my deck, I would max it out and take out GoST completely and play the deck Fairies style.
Already running mana leaks and spell snares depending on the version, you have protection to play geist + protect that same turn if you so need, but you don't most of the time. If you play geist and untap t4 you have cryptic mana which serves best than anything to tap, counter or bounce whatever interfers, and even cantrips or gets you a 2x1 tempo-wise (tap bounce if it's the best option). I don't think it needs cutting for the problem you're posing, at least not to 0 copies.
I play against a lot of Jund decks. The reason why I want all of my counters to cost 2 or less is because I want to increase the chance of countering a turn 2 or 3 liliana of the veil. I had a lot of matches where they drop lilly but couldn't cast cryptic because I only have 2-3 mana in play. Another reason is I want to increase my chances of playing geist on turn 5 with a 2 mana counter in hand. It is not that I don't respect the power of Cryptic. I know how good it is and saw how it wrecked standard with fairies. I could always add cryptics in addition to my counters, but I don't have a lot of space left and I prefer to run with more creatures so I can apply more pressure.
As per colorless sources, I run 2 tectonics only, just as you said, in a 25 lander.
As per delver, again, that's just another deck and yes, seachromes do fit as a nice substitution to shocks to have a better chance vs aggro but only if your curve stops at 3.
I've never thought of substituting Seachromes for shocks. You play seachromes with shocklands in a typical delver deck. I mentioned fast duals because you were suggesting that I replace Colonades with Mutavaults.. which I feel is not right for a 3 color deck.
Imo in that last sentence you should switch Geist for Cryptic, the rest seemed correct.
Just look at the World's decks, even if it's not a full metagame. Yes, there is a wide extent of gameplay timing (aggrocontrol to midrange to control) that the deck can encompass and depending on which you want to play you'll cut certain things. The unremovable core would be:
I was just saying a no cryptic build only makes sense to me playing aggrocontrol because you don't want to excede your curve so much. But then, switch collonades for mutavaults and spellstutters or something.
I chose to cut cryptics not because it is too high for the curve, but because it costs 4 which makes it harder to protect geist when you put him into play. You want to protect him as much as you can, because your opponent will try his best to find ways to kill Geist before you untap. The deck that you are talking about is a hybrid build that was played in Worlds. It plays the long game and has cards like Think Twice, Sphinx Rev and Cryptic Commands. Imo, that's a modified UWR Wafo Tapa Control list. I can see in your sig that you are playing UWR control. Just because the Geist deck and UWR control shares a lot of cards doesn't mean it has the same game plan, which is why I didn't mention Cryptic Command as one of it's core cards. Not all UWR midrange lists play with Cryptics.
I think we're not communicating properly here. When I said I want cheaper counters, it doesn't mean I have to drop Colonades entirely, since that is the deck's alternate finisher. And if ever I'll have a change of heart and start playing a real tempo list (which is not even good right now because we don't have good library manipulation cards like ponder) with delvers, I'd think of cards like Seachrome Coast and Moorland Haunt before playing Mutavaults. Having several colorless manlands in a 3 color decks means I will lose consistency. Which is why you only limit yourself to 2 colorless nonbasics in a 25 lander deck
Mutavault + Spellstutter - these are interesting cards, but I have no plans on switching to fairies. I've seen UR Fairies lists that runs delver, with a lot of counters and burn.
I'm sorry to say this, but without the deck's core card: Bitterblossom, I won't even consider running something like that. We don't have enough fairies to get value out of sprite, and activating a mutavault for the sake of countering a 2 mana spell in a meta filled with lightning bolts is something I don't want to do.
Like what the rest said, you can choose to run painlands and maybe 1-2 filterlands as alternative
I am aware that the budget forums is a bit of a ghost town, but I think it is still worth trying. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of players playing budgeted top tier decks like Zoo without goyfs or X and Y decks without fetchlands looking for a thread where they could start their discussion but couldn't find one. This is why someone has to step up and create one.
In case your deck is not listed there then you might want to consider submitting a primer (someone has to start it.. right?) so the mods can approve it.
I think it is time for us to play a 2-3 pillar of flame from the side. I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot of Kitchen Finks (jund players might play this card), and it is pretty good vs Pod decks too.
I personally think that the value of these cards will drop once they rotate out of standard.
I suggest that you add Jace AOT to your list, since it is one of the best cards available in blue. Also, I think you don't have enough lands in the deck. You might want to add 2 more.
If you don't have any plans of changing the concept of the deck, then you might want to consider changing the deck into a "Rock" style deck and drop blue completely. Maybe add a couple of Thoughtseizes, and possibly Corrupt.
You fight hexproof with Spellskite and EE.
First of all, nobody is stopping you from playing more than one deck. I only asked about your deck to check if we are on the same page, and if we are really playing with the same archetype. Apparently, we are not and this is why I tried to end the conversation by asking you that we end this argument because it is pointless. You kept coming back so I am under the impression that you want me to acknowledge your ideas first before we stop this nonsense.
I did reference the UW/x Control thread because you were asking things about if Sower would be good in your control deck, and I thought that if you are posting at the right thread since most of the guys there are very experienced with control version.
So now, for the 3rd time, let's stop this so we can move on. We can talk about something else if you are still interested.
Let's make it easier for us. You play your cryptics, I will play with 0. Thank you for reminding me how good Cryptic is, but no thanks, I won't play it. You can stop forcing your ideas to me and let's move on. I'm tired of having this back and forth argument because I know this is getting nowhere. Maybe it was my mistake for assuming you are play Midrange when you are posting in the UWr Midrange thread.
There's an actual UW/x Control thread if that's the direction of your deck. Even if you have singleton Geist for redundancy, that falls under the control category.
Thank you for explaining it in detail. This is what I've been trying to tell Hammer-head The goal of the deck is to kill your opponent asap before we reach the long game. Colonades are just there as insurance in case things go wrong. This is the reason why I don't think Cryptic belongs in the deck.
Thanks for pointing that out. SSS is indeed a good card and will do a lot of work in the right deck.
Tbh, your current build looks like an incomplete UWR Control build and you are trying to shift to Geist Midrange. I'm still clueless why you consider your version with 3 PWs and only 1 GoST as "midrange" when it is clearly a control variant. I find it very odd tbh. Not unless you are still in the process of getting 3 more geists and will eventually cut those PWs for it. Anyway, the bottom line is, as long as it works for you that's what matters most.
I only reacted that way because you said this:
I'm not sure if I understood this correctly, but if you're saying that it is alright to cut your dual colored manlands for mutavaults in a 3 color deck... well, for the sake of testing, I will give it a shot, though I'm sure it will screw me up more than help me.
I'm just worried that with this type of configuration that you suggested... having 2 blue sources early game might even become a problem
Let's put an end to this. I don't see the point of continuing this argument. It is obvious that we see things differently and have our own style. I think we're better off talking about something else.
I'm still not convinced to run SSS because you need more fairies if you want to counter cards with CMC 2 and up. Most of the time, it's just counter target spell with CMC of 1. We have mutavaults to increase the count, but most of the deck that I play with has red. I just don't like the idea of getting 2 for 1'd when they play a 2 drop and my mutavault gets bolted and SSS just became a useless 1/1. If this format was legacy, it's probably alright to have SSS even if you don't have other fairies aside from Cliques since most of the decks play with a lot of 1 drops.
PWs are great. But the deck doesn't have a lot of space for it. If you are playing with a lot of counters and the usual number of burn spells in the deck (bolt, helix, electrolyze), it sounds like you added those PWs in place of V Cliques. If that's the case, imo, that is no longer a midrange build but more of a control build since your game plan seems like you want to control the board as much as possible, which makes sense why you want Cryptics in your build. If I will run cryptic commands in my deck, I would max it out and take out GoST completely and play the deck Fairies style.
I play against a lot of Jund decks. The reason why I want all of my counters to cost 2 or less is because I want to increase the chance of countering a turn 2 or 3 liliana of the veil. I had a lot of matches where they drop lilly but couldn't cast cryptic because I only have 2-3 mana in play. Another reason is I want to increase my chances of playing geist on turn 5 with a 2 mana counter in hand. It is not that I don't respect the power of Cryptic. I know how good it is and saw how it wrecked standard with fairies. I could always add cryptics in addition to my counters, but I don't have a lot of space left and I prefer to run with more creatures so I can apply more pressure.
I've never thought of substituting Seachromes for shocks. You play seachromes with shocklands in a typical delver deck. I mentioned fast duals because you were suggesting that I replace Colonades with Mutavaults.. which I feel is not right for a 3 color deck.
I appreciate all of your advice and I know your intention is to help, but I just don't see GoST and Cryptic in the same deck.
I chose to cut cryptics not because it is too high for the curve, but because it costs 4 which makes it harder to protect geist when you put him into play. You want to protect him as much as you can, because your opponent will try his best to find ways to kill Geist before you untap. The deck that you are talking about is a hybrid build that was played in Worlds. It plays the long game and has cards like Think Twice, Sphinx Rev and Cryptic Commands. Imo, that's a modified UWR Wafo Tapa Control list. I can see in your sig that you are playing UWR control. Just because the Geist deck and UWR control shares a lot of cards doesn't mean it has the same game plan, which is why I didn't mention Cryptic Command as one of it's core cards. Not all UWR midrange lists play with Cryptics.
I think we're not communicating properly here. When I said I want cheaper counters, it doesn't mean I have to drop Colonades entirely, since that is the deck's alternate finisher. And if ever I'll have a change of heart and start playing a real tempo list (which is not even good right now because we don't have good library manipulation cards like ponder) with delvers, I'd think of cards like Seachrome Coast and Moorland Haunt before playing Mutavaults. Having several colorless manlands in a 3 color decks means I will lose consistency. Which is why you only limit yourself to 2 colorless nonbasics in a 25 lander deck
Mutavault + Spellstutter - these are interesting cards, but I have no plans on switching to fairies. I've seen UR Fairies lists that runs delver, with a lot of counters and burn.
I'm sorry to say this, but without the deck's core card: Bitterblossom, I won't even consider running something like that. We don't have enough fairies to get value out of sprite, and activating a mutavault for the sake of countering a 2 mana spell in a meta filled with lightning bolts is something I don't want to do.