and if the meta turned out to be mostly aggro decks? If anything his sideboard just wasn't tuned enough. you guys are really throwing a lot of shade towards a guy who probably doesn't deserve that type of hate. I mean, I don't like what he played, but I do play a lot of the same cards and I have had a lot of success with a similar list in midrange/control matchups. My sideboard is pretty different however but, oh well. Guess one more week to play these colors without the crazy bandwagon jumping on.
I'm on my iPhone right now so I can't post my list but I tested 20-25 matches with my list and did some tweaking. The deck seems really solid I'll try and get on my computer tonight to write up my list and problems I noticed. But one thing is I feel like the gods are very hard to deal with especially the red one. Has anyone else had problems with him? Also Elspeth is so good at stabalizing the board it's disgusting, also a turn three anger into a pyromaster is extremely strong against aggro-midrange. I feel like we need to utilize both of them as they are great against a wide portion of the field and any card advantage we can get is great since we are reactive playing the control route more than not we need to be able to squeeze advantage out of everything possible! Thoughts?
the only Color which is really good against gods is green imo with that new Exile spell, we Need to rely on our Hand destruction imo
The only god that represents much of a problem when it's not a creature is Purphoros, and keeping your opponent off 5 devotion is pretty easy. I don't anticipate the gods being much of an issue.
This deck needs more underworld cerberus against the sweepers. At the very least as a sideboard card. Although it getting sphered is a huge issue.
Also I don't think top 32 is terrible in a 400+ person event. These first results don't really mean much without a meta really created yet. BWR seems poised to attack really at any angle with the huge number of powerful cards it has, possibly the most in its colours.
I tried underworld cerberus, and it was quite powerful.
I'm not sure exactly what deck I would play the cerberus against though. How many creatures do you think it's going to be returning? Against aggro, I hope you got their team with Anger of The Gods, otherwise they're getting all their ghor clans and stuff back.
Against control, I'd rather have Blood Baron since it dodges Azorius Charm. I don't like having to draw my own creature again (just to have it countered next turn). And I think I'd rather have the whip for graveyard interactions. I think I'd rather play Angel of Serenity if that is the case, since it interacts more favorably with the whip than the dog.
I agree with Kamahl that the list is still being formed, that the list presented in the top 32 at the SCG Open does not necessarily bear out from testing, but that more of the core cards need to be identified.
Core:
1-2 Obzedat, Ghost Council
2-3 Blood Baron of Vizkopa
2-4 Thoughtseize
1-4 Read the Bones
2-4 Chained to the Rocks
2-3 Mizzium Mortars
2-3 Dreadbore/Hero's Downfall
In a control format:
2-3 Stormbreath Dragon
In an aggro format:
3-4 Anger of the Gods
We are debating:
-- Use of Magma Jet in certain metagames -- I don't like cutting this card, but it seems to be the way to go at the moment in certain metagames.
-- How to construct play sequences against both aggro and control to optimize the value of our threats, and ensure that the deck functions better in both matchups. This list is not exactly Jund from last season, since you can't just slam threat after threat until something sticks vs. control.
-- There seems to be a glut of 5cc creatures: Blood Baron of Vizkopa, Obzedat, Ghost Council, and Stormbreath Dragon are all competing for the same 5-6 slots. If the deck would like to run them all, then more Keyrunes might be a necessary evil.
I am not sure I understand how people think that by running 12-13 creatures is gona get the job done vs control. we already play the second slowest game in town which control decks love. I understand the disruption aspect but there are weaknesses to relying on it...such as not preventing a freshly drawn card from wrecking you or when you wreck their hand and draw nothing to close the game.
control decks have not been this powerful this early in rotation in a long time.
I am not sure I understand how people think that by running 12-13 creatures is gona get the job done vs control. we already play the second slowest game in town which control decks love. I understand the disruption aspect but there are weaknesses to relying on it...such as not preventing a freshly drawn card from wrecking you or when you wreck their hand and draw nothing to close the game.
control decks have not been this powerful this early in rotation in a long time.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
As a former U/W/R player I can say. Spamming the board with creatures is not how you deal with control. Heck, control is made for that. You play a single threat, force me to deal with it in an awkward way (say, forcing me to verdict a single blood baron) and punish me for doing so (rakdos return works, or obzedat, or a haste dragon). I often lose if didn't find the right answer to your complicated threat.
Thoughtseize and sin collector are great tools against control, since they take away the tools to respond to certain threats. WBR also has access to slaughter games, or pithing needle, which both shut down the wincons of the control decks right now. I'm honestly more worried about WBR viability against mono-red or G/R mid than against control.
I am not sure I understand how people think that by running 12-13 creatures is gona get the job done vs control. we already play the second slowest game in town which control decks love. I understand the disruption aspect but there are weaknesses to relying on it...such as not preventing a freshly drawn card from wrecking you or when you wreck their hand and draw nothing to close the game.
control decks have not been this powerful this early in rotation in a long time.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
I agree with this. I also don't understand the reasoning on this thread. That guy's deck in the SCG was very, very, very similar to what I've seen posted on here. What exactly makes his deck so much worse? The fact that he placed at a major tourney? He's a couple cards off what people have successfully played at the local FNM? That he was possibly more prepared for certain decks than others? Is this a competitive thread or a circle pat(on back or other terminology)?
As a former U/W/R player I can say. Spamming the board with creatures is not how you deal with control. Heck, control is made for that. You play a single threat, force me to deal with it in an awkward way (say, forcing me to verdict a single blood baron) and punish me for doing so (rakdos return works, or obzedat, or a haste dragon). I often lose if didn't find the right answer to your complicated threat.
Thoughtseize and sin collector are great tools against control, since they take away the tools to respond to certain threats. WBR also has access to slaughter games, or pithing needle, which both shut down the wincons of the control decks right now. I'm honestly more worried about WBR viability against mono-red or G/R mid than against control.
A mono red player made a play that seemed very intelligent last night that follows this philosophy. It's turn 3, the mono read player has some 2 drop and a firedrinker. Against U/W Control he pretty much goes, "okay, instead of dropping a creature here, I'm going to do this intelligently." Pumps up the satyr, swings in, gets his damage, passes turn. Next turn the U/W supremes, the mono red player now has an extra creature card because he recognizes this. You don't need to overextend, and for WBR midrange, the idea of extending is maddening.
"Hello U/W/X, here is blood baron, I'm sure you'll be fine against me right? Oh, while we're at it, I'm going to slaughter games in game 2 against Rev, the card that keeps you reloading. If I find a needle, aetherling is leaving town as well, or maybe your Jace." I don't even know HOW U/W/X can beat that right now. I just don't.
Our matchup against U/W/X is really good BECAUSE of the creature packages we have at our disposal. We can punish turn 4 Jace very well with a slew of creatures, removal, and spells. We play a variety of creatures that aren't good, but are a pain in the dick to deal with.
For this reason I have been contemplating very long and hard at a 4th blood baron. Once this thing sticks it is an allstar against BOTH aggro and control. When I first saw him, I assumed he was legendary because very rarely I saw lists with 4, but really, what exactly are we waiting for? What makes a fourth blood baron so taboo?
Also, with a control matchup where we have a minimal amount of threats that we HAVE to deal with, why haven't we started taking a closer look at Anger Mainboard? There's no shame in playing 4x Anger of the Gods mainboard, hell if you compare it to Slagstorm it happened ALL the time.
I think our deck can treat the meta like this, "we have to tool kits to completely hose aggro as well as provide reasonable disruption for control, once we move to game 2 we can really start grinding down on the matchup by fine-tuning the deck and removing 2-3 dead cards as well as sideboarding in 4-5 much more finely tuned cards for the matchup."
I think Dega is EASILY in the best spot, unlike U/W/X we can timely land creatures to clamp down on aggro, and for a midrange deck we certainly contain a hell of a lot of hand disruption and can pretty much dictate how control has to play, which feels like a rare gift.
As a former U/W/R player I can say. Spamming the board with creatures is not how you deal with control. Heck, control is made for that. You play a single threat, force me to deal with it in an awkward way (say, forcing me to verdict a single blood baron) and punish me for doing so (rakdos return works, or obzedat, or a haste dragon). I often lose if didn't find the right answer to your complicated threat.
Thoughtseize and sin collector are great tools against control, since they take away the tools to respond to certain threats. WBR also has access to slaughter games, or pithing needle, which both shut down the wincons of the control decks right now. I'm honestly more worried about WBR viability against mono-red or G/R mid than against control.
I agree with this. I also don't understand the reasoning on this thread. That guy's deck in the SCG was very, very, very similar to what I've seen posted on here. What exactly makes his deck so much worse? The fact that he placed at a major tourney? He's a couple cards off what people have successfully played at the local FNM? That he was possibly more prepared for certain decks than others? Is this a competitive thread or a circle pat(on back or other terminology)?
If you don't think the deck is good, then why are you here?
Just pointing that out...
The Deck's here are pretty different compared to the deck that placed 27th at SCG Open.
Almost all of his disruption was in the Side while most our lists have included about half of the disruption package in the mainboard as utility.
My guess he would probably change that up if he had known that Control was going to dominate the top 15.
Also we do run more creatures, it's not about running more or less IMO. Its the creatures that we chose to go with VS the ones he did.
Sure Blood Baron is definitely the same to our list and his, but we also run Obzedat in most of our lists, also extremely hard to deal with. VS Esper I also think that Stormbreath is a pain to deal with. Consider that Esper sees this matchup and sees that the only real tough card to deal with is just Blood Baron. Where as our matchup, not only do they deal with Baron, but Obzedat, and Stormbreath, really putting a lot of pressure on how they play and the tools they use for specific threats. I think something could be said to that point right there...
My list also mainboards a few Sin Collectors to not only pull removal from my opponents that can possibly target any of my hard to deal with creatures, but to also attack Esper or UW Control type decks that run Revelations and Verdicts.
I haven't talked badly about that list like some have here... I try really hard not to knock ideas or to knock peoples lists, unless they come at me first.
I feel his deck was a bit more control style then our aggressive midrange style. Just cuz I say aggressive, doesn't mean it means we're aggro. I say aggressive because we are proactively attacking our opponent from a lot of different angles. Hand Disruption, Threats, and great value removal spells.
To me this is the premise of the deck, and if you ask me - That is not the strategy that the SCG list really did well. Sure he has the Returns, he has 2 Thoughtseize in the main, but it's not one of the main strategies to his deck like it is with most of our lists.
And who knows, maybe our lists bomb too...
I sincerely believe though that BWR Midrange will be a top deck, it may have some growing pains to go through since there are still a lot of unknowns with how the Format fleshes out.
But I think it has all of the tools to get it there...
I could see underworld cerberus as a SB card I guess, but why not just play desecration demon at that point? If you're bringing him in against control, then the demon is pretty much the same card for a mana less except it doesn't return creature cards back to your hand if the demon is killed.
I don't like jamming more than 2 rakdos's return in these decks at any point of a match. Without any kind of ramp then they're really underwhelming until turn 7 or so. If you run rakdos keyrune then I could see a case for running more, but otherwise 1 main 1 side is as high as I would go on that number.
I agree with this. I also don't understand the reasoning on this thread. That guy's deck in the SCG was very, very, very similar to what I've seen posted on here. What exactly makes his deck so much worse? The fact that he placed at a major tourney? He's a couple cards off what people have successfully played at the local FNM? That he was possibly more prepared for certain decks than others? Is this a competitive thread or a circle pat(on back or other terminology)?
several of us have tested this deck in many different fasions with many different cards. In the field he was in, he was lucky to get as far as he did. He has at least 8 dead cards against mono red. He also has 5 dead cards against control (with desecration demon and boros reckoner not being that great against esper either). That's a lot of draws that are losing you the game in those matchups.
no rakdos's return I feel like elspeth is simply better and more versatile.
Sin collector has proven himself MDable IMO. Even against mono red he collects burn for me and is another early creature.
devour flesh over chained to the rocks. Devour flesh provides another answer to creatures like blood baron and obzedat, while also being a decent 2 mana removal spell against mono red, since the idea is simply to get rid of their creatures. They're all the same creatures for the most part.
Hero's downfall is just needed IMO. it provides another answer to stormbreath dragon and having 4 MD answers to walkers is a necessity against decks playing tons of jace, elspeth, and ashiok.
I think even with Keyrune (which I think I'm going to start trying the 1 of, but I feel like this deck could utilize two very well) you only run 2 rakdos return.
As a former U/W/R player I can say. Spamming the board with creatures is not how you deal with control. Heck, control is made for that. You play a single threat, force me to deal with it in an awkward way (say, forcing me to verdict a single blood baron) and punish me for doing so (rakdos return works, or obzedat, or a haste dragon). I often lose if didn't find the right answer to your complicated threat.
Thoughtseize and sin collector are great tools against control, since they take away the tools to respond to certain threats. WBR also has access to slaughter games, or pithing needle, which both shut down the wincons of the control decks right now. I'm honestly more worried about WBR viability against mono-red or G/R mid than against control.
I did not suggest that spamming control decks with creatures was an answer. I am well aware of the the disruption cards available and how they work. My point is that disruption only goes so far. It won't win you game and the longer the game goes the worse those cards become.
Blood Baron has a lot of targets on him in the control match up and every version of control has a cheap and easy way to deal with a resolved Baron, main decked answers.
Ex
Far/away
Turn/burn
Mizzium Mortors
Verdicts
Celestial Glare
Devour Flesh
And that is if he resolves. Any decent control player knows to keep counter magic mana up turn 4,5,6 vs this deck.
I could see underworld cerberus as a SB card I guess, but why not just play desecration demon at that point? If you're bringing him in against control, then the demon is pretty much the same card for a mana less except it doesn't return creature cards back to your hand if the demon is killed.
I think Cerberus is really bad in our deck... Most of our creatures require very specific limited removal, with our Disruption Package, they in theory shouldn't be dying a whole lot if they get played.
I feel Cerberus is counter productive to us, we're trying to keep the board clean, trying to kill creatures by the masses or making our opponent discard problem creatures.
Why would we run Cerberus; then all the work to kill/discard problem creatures and send them to the GY is now undone IMHO.
Also Cerberus is counter productive to the lists that are running Whips.
If you're not running Whips and you like it, by all means.
I like that card a lot, very cool card, just not a fit in my BWR Midrange.
I see Cerberus being great in a R/b Blitz Aggro deck... You put on an insane amount of pressure in the first 3 to 5 turns, only to get your opponent down to under 10 and see the board cleared.
Drop Cerberus after that, even if they drop a good creature to block, Cerberus can't be blocked unless they have 3 dudes.
They can't kill Cerberus, cuz then you get all your gas back.
It creatures a real pesky annoying situation...
Just don't think it belongs in our deck... But I could be wrong...
I don't like jamming more than 2 rakdos's return in these decks at any point of a match. Without any kind of ramp then they're really underwhelming until turn 7 or so. If you run rakdos keyrune then I could see a case for running more, but otherwise 1 main 1 side is as high as I would go on that number.
I agree, more then 2 is bad...
I would much rather pack just 2 Returns, and instead of a 3rd Return add another Thoughtseize to help us land a large Return or something.
I noticed the guy that placed 27th at the Open had 3... *shrug*
several of us have tested this deck in many different fasions with many different cards. In the field he was in, he was lucky to get as far as he did. He has at least 8 dead cards against mono red. He also has 5 dead cards against control (with desecration demon and boros reckoner not being that great against esper either). That's a lot of draws that are losing you the game in those matchups.
I absolutely agree with this... I think this is the case Kamahl was making against Desecration Demon.
VS Elspeth Decks or VS Decks that run creatures you don't mind sacing to play around Demon, Demon becomes a really bad liability and not the Tempo Dictator that people like to play him to be.
Not all of the Esper decks ran Elspeth, but some of them did.
And the RDW that won the Open, I could see Demon just being so bad in those Matchups.
Kamahl points this interaction out in his article...
I did not suggest that spamming control decks with creatures was an answer. I am well aware of the the disruption cards available and how they work. My point is that disruption only goes so far. It won't win you game and the longer the game goes the worse those cards become.
Blood Baron has a lot of targets on him in the control match up and every version of control has a cheap and easy way to deal with a resolved Baron, main decked answers.
Ex
Far/away
Turn/burn
Mizzium Mortors
Verdicts
Celestial Glare
Devour Flesh
And that is if he resolves. Any decent control player knows to keep counter magic mana up turn 4,5,6 vs this deck.
I agree with the idea that Disruption can only take you so far, the longer the game goes the less effective the Disruption option is...
However; with a pretty effective Disruption Package, you pull their Removal/Counters early, hit them with a resolved Return because you've widdled away their hand early, and now they are in Top Deck mode.
Sure, Top Decks can still beat us, but I'd rather my opponent be in Luck Mode then sitting back picking us off like Manning did VS my Eagles. (Silly NFL reference... sorry LOL)
With the onslaught of Thoughtseize + Sin Collector + Rakdos Return, the control player will have a hard time just sitting there letting us pick apart his hand. So the idea that he'll be sitting back, keeping counter magic mana up on turns 4, 5, and 6 seems a bit off to me.
Also, you're absolutely right. There are answers to Blood Baron, but it's limited.
The list you posted isn't played in Every Deck, splits and combinations of numbers are played in some of those decks.
Pick 1 off, their chances of hitting another one of those spells in some cases drops drastically.
The fact too that we run other hard creatures to deal with gives us an advantage I would think more often then not.
Sure they use Devour Flesh on Baron, but they can't answer our Obzedat or visa versa, just an example, don't crucify me on scenarios.
Scenarios exist sure, but don't underestimate the power of Magic and the percentages plus our power to disrupt that.
Regarding Dese Demon, there doesn't seem to be a ton of midrange in the current shakeup, which feels like it makes it even worse than worse. A 4 mana card that is going to turn sideways and sit there doesn't feel good when your opponent decides, "okay, well, I guess I'll just feed it this Dryad Militant I just drew on turn 5." Or, "I don't really care about this dese demon because my firefist striker just triggered on it." Plus, it doesn't have evasion, something that our deck can find plenty of elsewhere.
I agree with the idea that Disruption can only take you so far, the longer the game goes the less effective the Disruption option is...
However; with a pretty effective Disruption Package, you pull their Removal/Counters early, hit them with a resolved Return because you've widdled away their hand early, and now they are in Top Deck mode.
Sure, Top Decks can still beat us, but I'd rather my opponent be in Luck Mode then sitting back picking us off like Manning did VS my Eagles. (Silly NFL reference... sorry LOL)
With the onslaught of Thoughtseize + Sin Collector + Rakdos Return, the control player will have a hard time just sitting there letting us pick apart his hand. So the idea that he'll be sitting back, keeping counter magic mana up on turns 4, 5, and 6 seems a bit off to me.
Also, you're absolutely right. There are answers to Blood Baron, but it's limited.
The list you posted isn't played in Every Deck, splits and combinations of numbers are played in some of those decks.
Pick 1 off, their chances of hitting another one of those spells in some cases drops drastically.
The fact too that we run other hard creatures to deal with gives us an advantage I would think more often then not.
Sure they use Devour Flesh on Baron, but they can't answer our Obzedat or visa versa, just an example, don't crucify me on scenarios.
Scenarios exist sure, but don't underestimate the power of Magic and the percentages plus our power to disrupt that.
that game was great lol....Long Long time Broncos fan. Unfortunately that game also wrecked my chances in winning my fantasy match up. Have both Jackson and McCoy
I am not looking to crucify you, but I kinda feel like a lot of people are just saying...oh play TS then sin collector and you then can RR there hand problem solved, game won. I am not sure these percentages line up in our favor, especially since some of these numbers are in our sb.
As for the removal. You are right not one deck plays all of those spells but they play as many of the color appropriate ones as they can, with in reason. And this is equal to or more than the amount of Blood Baron's, Dragon's, and Obzedat we have.
that game was great lol....Long Long time Broncos fan. Unfortunately that game also wrecked my chances in winning my fantasy match up. Have both Jackson and McCoy
I am not looking to crucify you, but I kinda feel like a lot of people are just saying...oh play TS then sin collector and you then can RR there hand problem solved, game won. I am not sure these percentages line up in our favor, especially since some of these numbers are in our sb.
As for the removal. You are right not one deck plays all of those spells but they play as many of the color appropriate ones as they can, with in reason. And this is equal to or more than the amount of Blood Baron's, Dragon's, and Obzedat we have.
agreed about the disruption package not being our main saving grace, especially since esper control also has access to their own thoughtseizes and sin collectors.
the disruption package is better suited as a "machete". it hacks through your opponent's hand taking stuff like far/away if you're about to play obzedat/baron or doom blade if you're about to play stormbreath dragon. Or you can take hero's downfall if you're about to play elspeth. Though with a full suite of thoughtseize and sin collector, I'm leaning much harder on slaughter games than I am rakdos's return, since I'm almost assured to get a look at their hand before slaughtering it. Also, slaughter games can't be countered.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Big thanks to DarkNightCavalier from heroes of the planes studios for the sig!
Playing more creatures is most certainly not how you beat the control match. You beat the control match by systematically executing multiple angles of attack. Not more creatures.
I agree, this guy was lucky to have gotten as far as he did, and that is really all there is to actually take out of this. Trying to justify his list and say he would do better if he had known control was going to be big, is just wrong. Even after as SB configuration, the list was weak.
Trying to tune your deck like this player did the day after rotation sets in, is a terrible way to go headlong into an open meta with nothing but variance. There was no game plan, there was a baseless assumption.
There is such thing as over-tuning your lists and that is exactly what we saw this weekend with that list.
I don't see where his list is bad? I would prefer a second keyrune or a 26th land and I would definitely be running Obzedat over Blood Baron but I don't see how you could possibly consider that deck 'over tuned'
another direction I'm testing my list is without the magma jets. Personally I feel this deck needs some form of early set up spell to ensure we hit land drops and I think magma jet is the best way to do that, but at the same time, I can understand that it's a terrible top deck late game and doesn't have the power we want.
basically I dropped the magma jets for 2 rakdos keyrune and 1 rakdos's return. rakdos keyrune helps ramp into our 5 drops (assuming we hit all of our land drops and can act as an additional threat/blocker. I think fundamentally magma jet is the better way to go, but I'll post some thoughts on this configuration after some testing.
I don't see where his list is bad? I would prefer a second keyrune or a 26th land and I would definitely be running Obzedat over Blood Baron but I don't see how you could possibly consider that deck 'over tuned'
I wouldn't consider his deck "overtuned" either. I'd consider it under tuned. I feel like he just copied gerry t's deck list, made some changes off the top and ran it in the tournament with minimal testing. Anyone who plays this deck more than a few games should realize that you need a considerable threat density to combat sphinx revelation decks. He had a good number of answers but very minimal threat density. I'm guessing he was just building to beat aggro for the most part and managed to play that for most of the day and simply lost to sphinx's revelation decks.
Jets seem fine off the top to me. Even more so when you have Chandra to go nuts with. Really, paying 2 to scry to in the later stages is a big advantage that I would say is even worth the 2 mana at times.
another direction I'm testing my list is without the magma jets. Personally I feel this deck needs some form of early set up spell to ensure we hit land drops and I think magma jet is the best way to do that, but at the same time, I can understand that it's a terrible top deck late game and doesn't have the power we want.
I was skeptical at first removing Jet's too, I felt very strongly about them.
However; I cut mine it's been great.
I did up my Read to Bones to 3 and I upped my SCRY land count to 7 instead of 6 because I cut the 4 Magma Jet's that I ran.
The deck is flowing as good as ever...
However; its such a tough card to Cut now that I've seen RDW win the Open.
Jet kills a lot of their creatures...
But I think we're better off without Jet utilizing KILL cards instead of Damage Cards. When you got pump spells, Populate Spells, and a lot of combat tricks, doing 2 damage isn't nearly as effective as just out right killing the creature.
So yea, I don't know... I've been on the fence too, on paper it still looks amazing, and in theory it still works.
Jets seem fine off the top to me. Even more so when you have Chandra to go nuts with. Really, paying 2 to scry to in the later stages is a big advantage that I would say is even worth the 2 mana at times.
magma jet has it's advantages and disadvantages, but I think it's advantages in the early stages of the game far outweigh it's disadvantages later in the game. Having your opponent play a jace, -2 it and then you magma jet it is actually pretty big game. not to mention being able to kill an aggro creature and still be able to set up your land drops is very nice as well.
I've just been seeing a lot of negative feedback on magma jet. I'm not sure if people are using it wrong or there are simply better options, but I'm willing to test.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Big thanks to DarkNightCavalier from heroes of the planes studios for the sig!
Current standard deck:
Jeskai Tokens
Modern:
Twinning End
Commander:
Mayael the Anema
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The only god that represents much of a problem when it's not a creature is Purphoros, and keeping your opponent off 5 devotion is pretty easy. I don't anticipate the gods being much of an issue.
Also I don't think top 32 is terrible in a 400+ person event. These first results don't really mean much without a meta really created yet. BWR seems poised to attack really at any angle with the huge number of powerful cards it has, possibly the most in its colours.
I'm not sure exactly what deck I would play the cerberus against though. How many creatures do you think it's going to be returning? Against aggro, I hope you got their team with Anger of The Gods, otherwise they're getting all their ghor clans and stuff back.
Against control, I'd rather have Blood Baron since it dodges Azorius Charm. I don't like having to draw my own creature again (just to have it countered next turn). And I think I'd rather have the whip for graveyard interactions. I think I'd rather play Angel of Serenity if that is the case, since it interacts more favorably with the whip than the dog.
Core:
1-2 Obzedat, Ghost Council
2-3 Blood Baron of Vizkopa
2-4 Thoughtseize
1-4 Read the Bones
2-4 Chained to the Rocks
2-3 Mizzium Mortars
2-3 Dreadbore/Hero's Downfall
In a control format:
2-3 Stormbreath Dragon
In an aggro format:
3-4 Anger of the Gods
We are debating:
-- Use of Magma Jet in certain metagames -- I don't like cutting this card, but it seems to be the way to go at the moment in certain metagames.
-- How to construct play sequences against both aggro and control to optimize the value of our threats, and ensure that the deck functions better in both matchups. This list is not exactly Jund from last season, since you can't just slam threat after threat until something sticks vs. control.
-- There seems to be a glut of 5cc creatures: Blood Baron of Vizkopa, Obzedat, Ghost Council, and Stormbreath Dragon are all competing for the same 5-6 slots. If the deck would like to run them all, then more Keyrunes might be a necessary evil.
Taking all of these ideas into consideration:
3 Chained to the Rocks
2 Mizzium Mortars
3 Anger of the Gods
3 Dreadbore
2 Rakdos Keyrune
2 Read the Bones
1 Underworld Connections
1 Chandra, Pyromaster
2 Elspeth, Sun's Champion
1 Whip of Erebos
3 Boros Reckoner
2 Sin Collector
3 Blood Baron of Vizkopa
2 Obzedat, Ghost Council
2 Stormbreath Dragon
4 Godless Shrine
4 Sacred Foundry
3 Temple of Triumph
3 Temple of Silence
3 Swamp
3 Mountain
1 Plains
3 Wear/Tear
1 Stormbreath Dragon
1 Thoughtseize
2 Rakdos's Return
1 Sin Collector
3 Lifebane Zombie
1 Anger of the Gods
2 Devour Flesh
1 Doom Blade
control decks have not been this powerful this early in rotation in a long time.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
As a former U/W/R player I can say. Spamming the board with creatures is not how you deal with control. Heck, control is made for that. You play a single threat, force me to deal with it in an awkward way (say, forcing me to verdict a single blood baron) and punish me for doing so (rakdos return works, or obzedat, or a haste dragon). I often lose if didn't find the right answer to your complicated threat.
Thoughtseize and sin collector are great tools against control, since they take away the tools to respond to certain threats. WBR also has access to slaughter games, or pithing needle, which both shut down the wincons of the control decks right now. I'm honestly more worried about WBR viability against mono-red or G/R mid than against control.
I agree with this. I also don't understand the reasoning on this thread. That guy's deck in the SCG was very, very, very similar to what I've seen posted on here. What exactly makes his deck so much worse? The fact that he placed at a major tourney? He's a couple cards off what people have successfully played at the local FNM? That he was possibly more prepared for certain decks than others? Is this a competitive thread or a circle pat(on back or other terminology)?
A mono red player made a play that seemed very intelligent last night that follows this philosophy. It's turn 3, the mono read player has some 2 drop and a firedrinker. Against U/W Control he pretty much goes, "okay, instead of dropping a creature here, I'm going to do this intelligently." Pumps up the satyr, swings in, gets his damage, passes turn. Next turn the U/W supremes, the mono red player now has an extra creature card because he recognizes this. You don't need to overextend, and for WBR midrange, the idea of extending is maddening.
"Hello U/W/X, here is blood baron, I'm sure you'll be fine against me right? Oh, while we're at it, I'm going to slaughter games in game 2 against Rev, the card that keeps you reloading. If I find a needle, aetherling is leaving town as well, or maybe your Jace." I don't even know HOW U/W/X can beat that right now. I just don't.
Our matchup against U/W/X is really good BECAUSE of the creature packages we have at our disposal. We can punish turn 4 Jace very well with a slew of creatures, removal, and spells. We play a variety of creatures that aren't good, but are a pain in the dick to deal with.
For this reason I have been contemplating very long and hard at a 4th blood baron. Once this thing sticks it is an allstar against BOTH aggro and control. When I first saw him, I assumed he was legendary because very rarely I saw lists with 4, but really, what exactly are we waiting for? What makes a fourth blood baron so taboo?
Also, with a control matchup where we have a minimal amount of threats that we HAVE to deal with, why haven't we started taking a closer look at Anger Mainboard? There's no shame in playing 4x Anger of the Gods mainboard, hell if you compare it to Slagstorm it happened ALL the time.
I think our deck can treat the meta like this, "we have to tool kits to completely hose aggro as well as provide reasonable disruption for control, once we move to game 2 we can really start grinding down on the matchup by fine-tuning the deck and removing 2-3 dead cards as well as sideboarding in 4-5 much more finely tuned cards for the matchup."
I think Dega is EASILY in the best spot, unlike U/W/X we can timely land creatures to clamp down on aggro, and for a midrange deck we certainly contain a hell of a lot of hand disruption and can pretty much dictate how control has to play, which feels like a rare gift.
If you don't think the deck is good, then why are you here?
Just pointing that out...
The Deck's here are pretty different compared to the deck that placed 27th at SCG Open.
Almost all of his disruption was in the Side while most our lists have included about half of the disruption package in the mainboard as utility.
My guess he would probably change that up if he had known that Control was going to dominate the top 15.
Also we do run more creatures, it's not about running more or less IMO. Its the creatures that we chose to go with VS the ones he did.
Sure Blood Baron is definitely the same to our list and his, but we also run Obzedat in most of our lists, also extremely hard to deal with. VS Esper I also think that Stormbreath is a pain to deal with. Consider that Esper sees this matchup and sees that the only real tough card to deal with is just Blood Baron. Where as our matchup, not only do they deal with Baron, but Obzedat, and Stormbreath, really putting a lot of pressure on how they play and the tools they use for specific threats. I think something could be said to that point right there...
My list also mainboards a few Sin Collectors to not only pull removal from my opponents that can possibly target any of my hard to deal with creatures, but to also attack Esper or UW Control type decks that run Revelations and Verdicts.
I haven't talked badly about that list like some have here... I try really hard not to knock ideas or to knock peoples lists, unless they come at me first.
I feel his deck was a bit more control style then our aggressive midrange style. Just cuz I say aggressive, doesn't mean it means we're aggro. I say aggressive because we are proactively attacking our opponent from a lot of different angles. Hand Disruption, Threats, and great value removal spells.
To me this is the premise of the deck, and if you ask me - That is not the strategy that the SCG list really did well. Sure he has the Returns, he has 2 Thoughtseize in the main, but it's not one of the main strategies to his deck like it is with most of our lists.
And who knows, maybe our lists bomb too...
I sincerely believe though that BWR Midrange will be a top deck, it may have some growing pains to go through since there are still a lot of unknowns with how the Format fleshes out.
But I think it has all of the tools to get it there...
I don't like jamming more than 2 rakdos's return in these decks at any point of a match. Without any kind of ramp then they're really underwhelming until turn 7 or so. If you run rakdos keyrune then I could see a case for running more, but otherwise 1 main 1 side is as high as I would go on that number.
several of us have tested this deck in many different fasions with many different cards. In the field he was in, he was lucky to get as far as he did. He has at least 8 dead cards against mono red. He also has 5 dead cards against control (with desecration demon and boros reckoner not being that great against esper either). That's a lot of draws that are losing you the game in those matchups.
all that said, I've reworked my list:
4 blood crypt
4 godless shrine
3 temple of silence
3 temple of triumph
1 rakdos guildgate
3 mountain
2 swamp
1 plains
4 boros reckoner
2 sin collector
3 blood baron of vizkopa
2 obzedat, ghost council
1 aurelia, the warleader
2 anger of the gods
3 warleader's helix
3 dreadbore
1 hero's downfall
2 mizzium mortars
2 devour flesh
3 magma jet
3 thoughtseize
2 sin collector
1 thoughtseize
2 slaughter games
2 underworld connections
1 elspeth, sun's champion
2 glare of heresy
1 mizzium mortars
1 devour flesh
2 anger of the gods
1 doom blade
no rakdos's return I feel like elspeth is simply better and more versatile.
Sin collector has proven himself MDable IMO. Even against mono red he collects burn for me and is another early creature.
devour flesh over chained to the rocks. Devour flesh provides another answer to creatures like blood baron and obzedat, while also being a decent 2 mana removal spell against mono red, since the idea is simply to get rid of their creatures. They're all the same creatures for the most part.
Hero's downfall is just needed IMO. it provides another answer to stormbreath dragon and having 4 MD answers to walkers is a necessity against decks playing tons of jace, elspeth, and ashiok.
Modern:
Twinning End
Commander:
Mayael the Anema
I did not suggest that spamming control decks with creatures was an answer. I am well aware of the the disruption cards available and how they work. My point is that disruption only goes so far. It won't win you game and the longer the game goes the worse those cards become.
Blood Baron has a lot of targets on him in the control match up and every version of control has a cheap and easy way to deal with a resolved Baron, main decked answers.
Ex
Far/away
Turn/burn
Mizzium Mortors
Verdicts
Celestial Glare
Devour Flesh
And that is if he resolves. Any decent control player knows to keep counter magic mana up turn 4,5,6 vs this deck.
I think Cerberus is really bad in our deck... Most of our creatures require very specific limited removal, with our Disruption Package, they in theory shouldn't be dying a whole lot if they get played.
I feel Cerberus is counter productive to us, we're trying to keep the board clean, trying to kill creatures by the masses or making our opponent discard problem creatures.
Why would we run Cerberus; then all the work to kill/discard problem creatures and send them to the GY is now undone IMHO.
Also Cerberus is counter productive to the lists that are running Whips.
If you're not running Whips and you like it, by all means.
I like that card a lot, very cool card, just not a fit in my BWR Midrange.
I see Cerberus being great in a R/b Blitz Aggro deck... You put on an insane amount of pressure in the first 3 to 5 turns, only to get your opponent down to under 10 and see the board cleared.
Drop Cerberus after that, even if they drop a good creature to block, Cerberus can't be blocked unless they have 3 dudes.
They can't kill Cerberus, cuz then you get all your gas back.
It creatures a real pesky annoying situation...
Just don't think it belongs in our deck... But I could be wrong...
I agree, more then 2 is bad...
I would much rather pack just 2 Returns, and instead of a 3rd Return add another Thoughtseize to help us land a large Return or something.
I noticed the guy that placed 27th at the Open had 3... *shrug*
I absolutely agree with this... I think this is the case Kamahl was making against Desecration Demon.
VS Elspeth Decks or VS Decks that run creatures you don't mind sacing to play around Demon, Demon becomes a really bad liability and not the Tempo Dictator that people like to play him to be.
Not all of the Esper decks ran Elspeth, but some of them did.
And the RDW that won the Open, I could see Demon just being so bad in those Matchups.
Kamahl points this interaction out in his article...
Kamahl 1 - Demon 0
I agree with the idea that Disruption can only take you so far, the longer the game goes the less effective the Disruption option is...
However; with a pretty effective Disruption Package, you pull their Removal/Counters early, hit them with a resolved Return because you've widdled away their hand early, and now they are in Top Deck mode.
Sure, Top Decks can still beat us, but I'd rather my opponent be in Luck Mode then sitting back picking us off like Manning did VS my Eagles. (Silly NFL reference... sorry LOL)
With the onslaught of Thoughtseize + Sin Collector + Rakdos Return, the control player will have a hard time just sitting there letting us pick apart his hand. So the idea that he'll be sitting back, keeping counter magic mana up on turns 4, 5, and 6 seems a bit off to me.
Also, you're absolutely right. There are answers to Blood Baron, but it's limited.
The list you posted isn't played in Every Deck, splits and combinations of numbers are played in some of those decks.
Pick 1 off, their chances of hitting another one of those spells in some cases drops drastically.
The fact too that we run other hard creatures to deal with gives us an advantage I would think more often then not.
Sure they use Devour Flesh on Baron, but they can't answer our Obzedat or visa versa, just an example, don't crucify me on scenarios.
Scenarios exist sure, but don't underestimate the power of Magic and the percentages plus our power to disrupt that.
that game was great lol....Long Long time Broncos fan. Unfortunately that game also wrecked my chances in winning my fantasy match up. Have both Jackson and McCoy
I am not looking to crucify you, but I kinda feel like a lot of people are just saying...oh play TS then sin collector and you then can RR there hand problem solved, game won. I am not sure these percentages line up in our favor, especially since some of these numbers are in our sb.
As for the removal. You are right not one deck plays all of those spells but they play as many of the color appropriate ones as they can, with in reason. And this is equal to or more than the amount of Blood Baron's, Dragon's, and Obzedat we have.
agreed about the disruption package not being our main saving grace, especially since esper control also has access to their own thoughtseizes and sin collectors.
the disruption package is better suited as a "machete". it hacks through your opponent's hand taking stuff like far/away if you're about to play obzedat/baron or doom blade if you're about to play stormbreath dragon. Or you can take hero's downfall if you're about to play elspeth. Though with a full suite of thoughtseize and sin collector, I'm leaning much harder on slaughter games than I am rakdos's return, since I'm almost assured to get a look at their hand before slaughtering it. Also, slaughter games can't be countered.
Modern:
Twinning End
Commander:
Mayael the Anema
I agree, this guy was lucky to have gotten as far as he did, and that is really all there is to actually take out of this. Trying to justify his list and say he would do better if he had known control was going to be big, is just wrong. Even after as SB configuration, the list was weak.
Trying to tune your deck like this player did the day after rotation sets in, is a terrible way to go headlong into an open meta with nothing but variance. There was no game plan, there was a baseless assumption.
There is such thing as over-tuning your lists and that is exactly what we saw this weekend with that list.
4 blood crypt
4 godless shrine
3 temple of silence
3 temple of triumph
1 rakdos guildgate
3 mountain
2 swamp
1 plains
4 boros reckoner
2 sin collector
3 blood baron of vizkopa
2 obzedat, ghost council
1 aurelia, the warleader
2 rakdos keyrune
2 anger of the gods
3 warleader's helix
3 dreadbore
1 hero's downfall
2 mizzium mortars
2 devour flesh
3 thoughtseize
1 rakdos's return
2 sin collector
1 thoughtseize
2 slaughter games
2 underworld connections
1 elspeth, sun's champion
2 glare of heresy
1 mizzium mortars
1 devour flesh
2 anger of the gods
1 doom blade
I wouldn't consider his deck "overtuned" either. I'd consider it under tuned. I feel like he just copied gerry t's deck list, made some changes off the top and ran it in the tournament with minimal testing. Anyone who plays this deck more than a few games should realize that you need a considerable threat density to combat sphinx revelation decks. He had a good number of answers but very minimal threat density. I'm guessing he was just building to beat aggro for the most part and managed to play that for most of the day and simply lost to sphinx's revelation decks.
Modern:
Twinning End
Commander:
Mayael the Anema
I was skeptical at first removing Jet's too, I felt very strongly about them.
However; I cut mine it's been great.
I did up my Read to Bones to 3 and I upped my SCRY land count to 7 instead of 6 because I cut the 4 Magma Jet's that I ran.
The deck is flowing as good as ever...
However; its such a tough card to Cut now that I've seen RDW win the Open.
Jet kills a lot of their creatures...
But I think we're better off without Jet utilizing KILL cards instead of Damage Cards. When you got pump spells, Populate Spells, and a lot of combat tricks, doing 2 damage isn't nearly as effective as just out right killing the creature.
So yea, I don't know... I've been on the fence too, on paper it still looks amazing, and in theory it still works.
magma jet has it's advantages and disadvantages, but I think it's advantages in the early stages of the game far outweigh it's disadvantages later in the game. Having your opponent play a jace, -2 it and then you magma jet it is actually pretty big game. not to mention being able to kill an aggro creature and still be able to set up your land drops is very nice as well.
I've just been seeing a lot of negative feedback on magma jet. I'm not sure if people are using it wrong or there are simply better options, but I'm willing to test.
Modern:
Twinning End
Commander:
Mayael the Anema