I should be running a Halimar Depths but I just have gotten better results w/o it though treasure hunt is more useful with it I just end up using Jace 2.0's 0 ability for it more often than not. (not quite as effective but I don't always fate seal and shoot for the 12 point ability). Also I know not running it hurts my ability to use Treasure Hunt in a more solid manner but as it stands I will keep testing this and toss in one or two if need be.
i don't run depths either. i found that the CIPT land was hurting me more than the ability was helping. i run 3 jace2.0, so there's rarely a time that the depths would be more beneficial than an island.
edit: the above statement are my thoughts about the card's pros/cons, to me solely. some of you may run and like depths, and that's fine too. i just don't see anything from it that i can't do to some degree without it.
Sideboard is tuned to my meta so I won't bore you with it, just know that the 2 missing Terminates and 1 Dbl Neg are in there...
My question is: Is MD Dbl Neg worth it any more? I am starting to think of upping the Negate total and bringing up the Terminate count to 3. Dbl Neg hardly pays off, although when it does its golden.
Also, Snapper is very nice but is anyone else that runs them starting to think that 4 is one too many?
Halimar Depths is sweet, I've always been a big fan of arranging what I'll be drawing in the near future. The only thing that I've noticed is that I'm having a bit of trouble getting BBBRR by turn 7. I've been ending up with UUU a lot and all I've done is pull two Islands for the depths
Double negative is so worth it I run 3. It's never really a bad card to have against control, jund, and a random misplay like someone throwing 2 bolts at once. It's cancel with an advantage. My opinion on turtle is I don't like it at all I don't have any.
Also, Snapper is very nice but is anyone else that runs them starting to think that 4 is one too many?
My thoughts exactly.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from badjuju »
As the Last of the Control Players, we are all part of a sacred brotherhood; a band of brothers who would rather die on their knees tapping islands and giving permission than live on our feet cascading into Blightning.
Sideboard is tuned to my meta so I won't bore you with it, just know that the 2 missing Terminates and 1 Dbl Neg are in there...
My question is: Is MD Dbl Neg worth it any more? I am starting to think of upping the Negate total and bringing up the Terminate count to 3. Dbl Neg hardly pays off, although when it does its golden.
Also, Snapper is very nice but is anyone else that runs them starting to think that 4 is one too many?
Halimar Depths is sweet, I've always been a big fan of arranging what I'll be drawing in the near future. The only thing that I've noticed is that I'm having a bit of trouble getting BBBRR by turn 7. I've been ending up with UUU a lot and all I've done is pull two Islands for the depths
that's because your mana base looks suspect. outside of cruel, you have 4 spells that use red mana and each of them only require 1! change your basic count to: 4 swamp, 3 island, and 2 mountain. i promise you'll see improvements.
Double Negative maindeck is definitely work it. Forget the fact that it counters two spells - consider it a rare hard counter with a randomly awesome upside. RUU isn't significantly harder for us than 1UU, so I see no reason to run Cancel. (Contrast this with the Negate/Countersquall debate, where the upside to Countersquall is somewhat rarely relevant.) There are just too many situations that I'm stuck with the wrong counter in my hand in game 1 that prevent me from moving all the Double Negatives to the sideboard.
As for Snappers, I'm a huge fan, but I'm starting to agree with you on 4 maybe being overkill. I'm finding that they're slightly less necessary than I expected to protect Jace in most matchups - it's not absolutely critical that I have one in my opening hand. Even if I do, running 4 Snappers and 2 Jace means that I'm often stuck with a Snapper and no Jace - not the worst thing in the world, but in a lot of matchups the blocker just isn't that important. I love its ability to put pressure on other control decks - I'd argue that Turbofog becomes a very favorable matchup if you run them (Preventing them from siding out their fog effects? Amazing.), and it never hurts to put a little bit of early pressure on a Grixis/UWR player.
Halimar Depths is sweet, I've always been a big fan of arranging what I'll be drawing in the near future. The only thing that I've noticed is that I'm having a bit of trouble getting BBBRR by turn 7. I've been ending up with UUU a lot and all I've done is pull two Islands for the depths
I mostly run UWr control and depths has been awesome there because I dont have an extremely mana intense spell like cruel. I've playtested grixis a bit and I've found I dont like the depths here. The main problem is what you said, being blue flooded when its time for cruel. I think I'd rather play more tar pits over the depths. They are very nice for killing off walkers.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG Rules Advisor
Quote from thundyr »
Jacerator is an aggro deck - it just wins by attacking the library, it doesn't really control the board other than to play a few Fogs
So I've been looking into getting into Grixis control for a while now, and I've recently gotten all of the cards in, hoping to get in on the discussion. As I'm not horribly experienced with the archetype, I'm looking for a little deck critique and some sideboarding advice.
I'm torn on the Calcite Snapper/Treasure Hunt split, wanting 4/3 one way or another. The snapper seems redundant occasionally, but hunting into another hunt with one card is almost fail, but hey, you're still drawing cards I guess.
On Double Negative: Even if it is a bad Cancel most of the time, I don't really mind. Having a hard counter is key, especially if you have the "wrong" one (scatter/negate) when you don't need it. There are still quite a few Jund players at my locale, as well as other decks abusing cascade. It gets there when it needs to.
I'm still working on consolidating the Sideboard; I don't like that many varying cards filling up SB space, but I have a pretty diverse meta at the moment, and I'm trying to figure out how to have an answer for anything. Basically I see a lot of White Weenie, Vamps, a smattering of Jund, and UWr control on a regular basis. On top of that, most of the people I play with change up their decks often, as we all play with each other far to much to play the same deck every week. However, I'm trying to get this one together for larger tournaments, so I'm vesting all of my interests into that.
In SB, how good is Smother? It seems like a blank against Jund barring leech, but I haven't seen a leech in a while. Seems good against WW, with Kor Firewalker and such, as well as vamps. I don't know, in a more established meta, would you guys rather have that or Duress?
Basically, I'm looking for some more experienced players' SB strategies against some of the more established T1 decks.
I mostly run UWr control and depths has been awesome there because I dont have an extremely mana intense spell like cruel. I've playtested grixis a bit and I've found I dont like the depths here. The main problem is what you said, being blue flooded when its time for cruel. I think I'd rather play more tar pits over the depths. They are very nice for killing off walkers.
I agree with welly, while the treasure hunt combo'd off with jace and halimar is nice i still don't feel like it fits as well in here as well as it would in UWr or UW control. This is why, against all the odds - i still run divination
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from badjuju »
As the Last of the Control Players, we are all part of a sacred brotherhood; a band of brothers who would rather die on their knees tapping islands and giving permission than live on our feet cascading into Blightning.
In SB, how good is Smother? It seems like a blank against Jund barring leech, but I haven't seen a leech in a while. Seems good against WW, with Kor Firewalker and such, as well as vamps. I don't know, in a more established meta, would you guys rather have that or Duress?
I'd rather have Deathmark. It nails Kor Firewalker and every creature in Jund except the Stag/Goblins/Specter. 9 times out of 10 we would side in Smother where we would side Deathmark anyways...
I'd rather have Deathmark. It nails Kor Firewalker and every creature in Jund except the Stag/Goblins/Specter. 9 times out of 10 we would side in Smother where we would side Deathmark anyways...
I don't know that it's that easy of an argument. Granted, Smother might end up being sub-par, but against a deck, such as Bant, or Elves, tagging their 3-drop with smother lets you hold your terminates for later, a la BSA, and throw your bolts to the dome, against the right deck. It seems like it would be an earlier game card, but it could still be useful, specifically because of instant speed. (Joraga Warcaller?). You wouldn't bring in deathmark against RDW, Goblins, Boros (because of instant speed), Vamps et al, so I feel like it might have a place.
i don't run depths either. i found that the CIPT land was hurting me more than the ability was helping. i run 3 jace2.0, so there's rarely a time that the depths would be more beneficial than an island.
edit: the above statement are my thoughts about the card's pros/cons, to me solely. some of you may run and like depths, and that's fine too. i just don't see anything from it that i can't do to some degree without it.
That is exactly how I feel to be honest with Jace 2.0 it only really is worth it to me and how I play if I got it turn one with a treasure hunt in hand or something.
@Convertable Turtle Talk:
I run only 3 because I do agree that 4 is too much and more often then not you wont be swinging with him often; I generally use him for a defense for my planeswalkers while I use them to get the advantage or until I cruel/sphinx etc.
I'd rather have Deathmark. It nails Kor Firewalker and every creature in Jund except the Stag/Goblins/Specter. 9 times out of 10 we would side in Smother where we would side Deathmark anyways...
Why not Doom Blade? Sure it doesn't work on vampires, but it works on everything else and works a instant speed.
Why not Doom Blade? Sure it doesn't work on vampires, but it works on everything else and works a instant speed.
I'll start of by saying that I've never been a strong sideboard player. I have a terrible time figuring out what the best mix is and an even harder time subbing the right things in and out. With that disclaimer in place, I would think optimizing a sideboard is about finding a combination of cards that can either 1. Totally rape a deck that troubles you (i.e. Bloodwitch against WW) and/or 2. Has uses in multiple arenas (i.e. Spreading Seas against many 3 color decks). I think Doomblade is out because Vamps is probably the toughest matchup that will see a lot play and it doesn't do much against Jund. Deathmark helps against WW and BSA but doesn't do well against Vamps not to mention the sorcery speed. Smother works well against Vamps and WW but isn't useful against Jund or BSA. These thoughts in mind, I would think a nice 2/2, 3/2 split between Smother and Deathmark respectively could be good. It does also depend on the trends in your area as always.
I'll start of by saying that I've never been a strong sideboard player. I have a terrible time figuring out what the best mix is and an even harder time subbing the right things in and out. With that disclaimer in place, I would think optimizing a sideboard is about finding a combination of cards that can either 1. Totally rape a deck that troubles you (i.e. Bloodwitch against WW) and/or 2. Has uses in multiple arenas (i.e. Spreading Seas against many 3 color decks). I think Doomblade is out because Vamps is probably the toughest matchup that will see a lot play and it doesn't do much against Jund. Deathmark helps against WW and BSA but doesn't do well against Vamps not to mention the sorcery speed. Smother works well against Vamps and WW but isn't useful against Jund or BSA. These thoughts in mind, I would think a nice 2/2, 3/2 split between Smother and Deathmark respectively could be good. It does also depend on the trends in your area as always.
I think this is on the right track. As prevalent as removal is in this format right now, a lot of them are still situational, especially in B. The only problem I would have against the split in the SB is not seeing the right thing. A 2/2 split, especially with cards that are the same in functionality, may result in you not seeing the right one at the right time. I usually try to reserve the 2-of spot in SB with cards that A) Help me win, but I'm not relient, or B) I don't need until it is a late-game answer.
The biggest argument I can say for removal of the instant speed variety is that, with a deck like this, you want to have as many turns fully untapped as possible, especially early game. I had a situation testing against bant, where he on his turn 2, dropped a Rhox War Monk via BoP (I was on the play). At his EoT, I paid 2, smothered his RWM, then began my turn. This allowed me to play a Crumbling Necropolis on my T3, with mana open for the Essence Scatter/Terminate/Negate that were in my hand. With Deathmark, I would have paid a B, a tap land, and entered his T4, with the possibility of him dropping a BSA, and I am essentially tapped out. This is why I think instant speed is key, especially early game.
The biggest argument I can say for removal of the instant speed variety is that, with a deck like this, you want to have as many turns fully untapped as possible, especially early game. I had a situation testing against bant, where he on his turn 2, dropped a Rhox War Monk via BoP (I was on the play). At his EoT, I paid 2, smothered his RWM, then began my turn. This allowed me to play a Crumbling Necropolis on my T3, with mana open for the Essence Scatter/Terminate/Negate that were in my hand. With Deathmark, I would have paid a B, a tap land, and entered his T4, with the possibility of him dropping a BSA, and I am essentially tapped out. This is why I think instant speed is key, especially early game.
whoa whoa whoa... he goes from playing a Rhox War Monk on turn 2, tapping a BOP for mana... and then somehow you had to protect from him dropping a BSA on his next turn?! I'M PLAYING THE WRONG DECK TYPE! i would love to know how he get's a BSA down in this scenario with 4 total possible mana on T3...
that being said, what were you worried about protecting yourself from? you apparently had a Terminate in hand for his t3 drop, leaving you with scatter mana for t4.
don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating the use of Deathmark. i think it's equally as bad in this deck type as Smother. both are bad choices imo.
whoa whoa whoa... he goes from playing a Rhox War Monk on turn 2, tapping a BOP for mana... and then somehow you had to protect from him dropping a BSA on his next turn?! I'M PLAYING THE WRONG DECK TYPE! i would love to know how he get's a BSA down with 4 total possible mana on T3...
that being said, what were you worried about protecting yourself from? you apparently had a Terminate in hand for his t3 drop, leaving you with scatter mana for t4.
don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating the use of Deathmark. i think it's equally as bad in this deck type as Smother. both are bad choices imo.
I was just trying to make the point that, on his T4, he could have. With differing threats and differing removals, you need a variety ways to drop/counter things early game. It was an example, even if poorly written and I skipped a turn :-/. Substitute Rafiq of the Many in the analogy, it makes little difference. The point I was trying to make is that all three things RWM/Rafiq/BSA, need to be dealt with, and preferably without blowing up your entire counter/removal suite before the late game.
What would you advocate in that SB spot, different removal? Duress as mentioned? That's essentially what I'm trying to iron out.
I didn't realize our current removal spells weren't good enough that people needed to seek help from smother or doom blade? Most decks that are relevant in competitive where spot removal is valued have a lot of either G/W creatures. Doomblade isn't nearly as good because most creatures in jund are black, now it doesn't make most sense scale all cards to the jund matchup but that was the initial arguement, that...and kor firewalker. Deathmark is better suited to deal with both of those threats...and smother is just bad outside of draft. It is a sorcery but no G/W creatures have haste so i don't see the sorc speed being a problem. If you really can't spare B to deal with a threat you deem well.."a threat" then you really need to weigh your options.
But then again, against the whole arguement i see no need for deathmark or other means of spot removal. How about you play counters and don't let it land in the first place? This is a control deck afterall. In Grixis Burn, smother might be a good 2-of.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from badjuju »
As the Last of the Control Players, we are all part of a sacred brotherhood; a band of brothers who would rather die on their knees tapping islands and giving permission than live on our feet cascading into Blightning.
I was just trying to make the point that, on his T4, he could have. With differing threats and differing removals, you need a variety ways to drop/counter things early game. It was an example, even if poorly written and I skipped a turn :-/.
What would you advocate in that SB spot, different removal? Duress as mentioned? That's essentially what I'm trying to iron out.
sideboards can be difficult to figure out, and your sb should be a well-rounded response to the decks you see in your meta environment. if those extra instant-speed removals work for you, then that's all that matters. however, if it were me, i hate to use 1-for-1 removal early. instead of using smother/deathmark/etc i'd honestly just +1 terminate and +1 EQ (which would up the terminate total to 4-of and EQ total to 3-of in my current build). against most decks i'd let them get 2-4 dudes out on the field, hitting me for maybe 5-6 damage total before i EQ wipe, leaving me with spot removals for post-cruel gameplay. basically, the way i play is i set everything up for an easy post-cruel game. save the spot removal for when they are hurting for a rebound. that's just the way i play the deck. i've got no problems with letting my opponent get me down to 5ish life before i cruel if it means i have total control of the board after.
I didn't realize our current removal spells weren't good enough that people needed to seek help from smother or doom blade? Most decks that are relevant in competitive where spot removal is valued have a lot of either G/W creatures. Doomblade isn't nearly as good because most creatures in jund are black, now it doesn't make most sense scale all cards to the jund matchup but that was the initial arguement, that...and kor firewalker. Deathmark is better suited to deal with both of those threats...and smother is just bad outside of draft. It is a sorcery but no G/W creatures have haste so i don't see the sorc speed being a problem. If you really can't spare B to deal with a threat you deem well.."a threat" then you really need to weigh your options.
But then again, against the whole arguement i see no need for deathmark or other means of spot removal. How about you play counters and don't let it land in the first place? This is a control deck afterall. In Grixis Burn, smother might be a good 2-of.
I didn't realize our current removal spells weren't good enough that people needed to seek help from smother or doom blade? Most decks that are relevant in competitive where spot removal is valued have a lot of either G/W creatures. Doomblade isn't nearly as good because most creatures in jund are black, now it doesn't make most sense scale all cards to the jund matchup but that was the initial arguement, that...and kor firewalker. Deathmark is better suited to deal with both of those threats...and smother is just bad outside of draft. It is a sorcery but no G/W creatures have haste so i don't see the sorc speed being a problem. If you really can't spare B to deal with a threat you deem well.."a threat" then you really need to weigh your options.
But then again, against the whole arguement i see no need for deathmark or other means of spot removal. How about you play counters and don't let it land in the first place? This is a control deck afterall. In Grixis Burn, smother might be a good 2-of.
I guess my biggest problem, and this is lack of play experience with the archetype, is knowing when it is good to blow counters early game. I saw Smother as a possible early game removal that would allow me to retain some removal/counter for "later", all assuming I'm playing against a creature-intensive deck. This is strictly because I see a huge amount of bant/vamps/WW/Elves etc, where the extra removal helps that T3 spot.
I guess the biggest question I have about strategy is 1) Burn first, counter post-Cruel? or 2) Counter first, burn post Cruel. I realize it depends on the gamestate, MU, and opening hand, but it seems like a valid strategy to initially decide upon.
How about you play counters and don't let it land in the first place?
It's a nice theory, but how many counters do we have that can hit a creature? 6 maindeck is probably the most that people run (Double Negative + Essence Scatter)? Sure, if you have counters to blow, that's a great way to do things. And sometimes you do have plenty in your hand. But most of the time, I'm saving my counters for something that actually does something the moment it hits the table, or that's hard/impossible to remove later - things like Broodmate, Thornling, or Sphinx. Part of playing this deck well is not just having an answer for everything - it's having the correct answer for everything. Sure, it's an unattainable ideal, but why not play to it as much as possible?
That being said, I'm not running any alternate removal on my sideboard right now, mostly due to meta considerations. If I was in a meta infested with WW decks, I'd definitely give Smother a thought.
I agree with all who say 4 Snapper is too many. I never felt a need or want to have more than one out at a time, and it sat in my hand doing nothing when one was on the board already. I will be cutting one for a counter or something.
Also, a previous list had M10 duals and 3x Expanse...Expanse has no place in this deck IMO. Play the duals. I am upping my count to run at least 4. (3 tar pit, 1 b/r guy)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
i don't run depths either. i found that the CIPT land was hurting me more than the ability was helping. i run 3 jace2.0, so there's rarely a time that the depths would be more beneficial than an island.
edit: the above statement are my thoughts about the card's pros/cons, to me solely. some of you may run and like depths, and that's fine too. i just don't see anything from it that i can't do to some degree without it.
_____________________________________________
3 Sphinx of Jwar Isle
4 Calcite Snapper
Spells (26):
3 Cruel Ultimatum
2 Terminate
2 Earthquake
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Negate
3 Essence Scatter
2 Double Negative
4 Treasure Hunt
3 Spreading Seas
2 Jace, The Mind Sculptor
Lands (25):
4 Crumbling Necropolis
4 Scalding Tarn
3 Drowned Catacomb
3 Dragonskull Summit
2 Halimar Depths
3 Swamp
4 Mountain
2 Island
Sideboard is tuned to my meta so I won't bore you with it, just know that the 2 missing Terminates and 1 Dbl Neg are in there...
My question is: Is MD Dbl Neg worth it any more? I am starting to think of upping the Negate total and bringing up the Terminate count to 3. Dbl Neg hardly pays off, although when it does its golden.
Also, Snapper is very nice but is anyone else that runs them starting to think that 4 is one too many?
Halimar Depths is sweet, I've always been a big fan of arranging what I'll be drawing in the near future. The only thing that I've noticed is that I'm having a bit of trouble getting BBBRR by turn 7. I've been ending up with UUU a lot and all I've done is pull two Islands for the depths
My thoughts exactly.
Playing: Standard
UWGMythic ConscriptionUWG
47-4-2
UBR Grixis RBU (Retired) 23-17-2
Playing: EDH
Zur the Enchanter
Malfegor
that's because your mana base looks suspect. outside of cruel, you have 4 spells that use red mana and each of them only require 1! change your basic count to: 4 swamp, 3 island, and 2 mountain. i promise you'll see improvements.
_____________________________________________
As for Snappers, I'm a huge fan, but I'm starting to agree with you on 4 maybe being overkill. I'm finding that they're slightly less necessary than I expected to protect Jace in most matchups - it's not absolutely critical that I have one in my opening hand. Even if I do, running 4 Snappers and 2 Jace means that I'm often stuck with a Snapper and no Jace - not the worst thing in the world, but in a lot of matchups the blocker just isn't that important. I love its ability to put pressure on other control decks - I'd argue that Turbofog becomes a very favorable matchup if you run them (Preventing them from siding out their fog effects? Amazing.), and it never hurts to put a little bit of early pressure on a Grixis/UWR player.
I mostly run UWr control and depths has been awesome there because I dont have an extremely mana intense spell like cruel. I've playtested grixis a bit and I've found I dont like the depths here. The main problem is what you said, being blue flooded when its time for cruel. I think I'd rather play more tar pits over the depths. They are very nice for killing off walkers.
4x Crumbling Necropolis
4x Drowned Catacomb
4x Dragonskull Summit
3x Scalding Tarn
2x Creeping Tar Pit
4x Swamp
3x Mountain
2x Island
Creatures
2x Sphinx of Jwar Isle
4x Caclite Snapper
Spells
4x Terminate
4x Lightning Bolt
2x Earthquake
2x Into the Roil
3x Cruel Ultimatum
3x Essence Scatter
2x Negate
2x Double Negative
3x Treasure Hunt
2x Jace, the Mindsculptor
1x Sorin Markov
3x Flashfreeze
3x Malakir Bloodwitch
*3x Smother
2x Negate
2x Thought Hemorrhage
2x Pithing Needle
*Interchangeable until I can make a decision
I'm torn on the Calcite Snapper/Treasure Hunt split, wanting 4/3 one way or another. The snapper seems redundant occasionally, but hunting into another hunt with one card is almost fail, but hey, you're still drawing cards I guess.
On Double Negative: Even if it is a bad Cancel most of the time, I don't really mind. Having a hard counter is key, especially if you have the "wrong" one (scatter/negate) when you don't need it. There are still quite a few Jund players at my locale, as well as other decks abusing cascade. It gets there when it needs to.
I'm still working on consolidating the Sideboard; I don't like that many varying cards filling up SB space, but I have a pretty diverse meta at the moment, and I'm trying to figure out how to have an answer for anything. Basically I see a lot of White Weenie, Vamps, a smattering of Jund, and UWr control on a regular basis. On top of that, most of the people I play with change up their decks often, as we all play with each other far to much to play the same deck every week. However, I'm trying to get this one together for larger tournaments, so I'm vesting all of my interests into that.
In SB, how good is Smother? It seems like a blank against Jund barring leech, but I haven't seen a leech in a while. Seems good against WW, with Kor Firewalker and such, as well as vamps. I don't know, in a more established meta, would you guys rather have that or Duress?
Basically, I'm looking for some more experienced players' SB strategies against some of the more established T1 decks.
Thanks in advance for the advice!
Standard
Turboland
RDW
Extended-Come October
Faeries
BW Tokens
Legacy
Zoo
Dredge
I agree with welly, while the treasure hunt combo'd off with jace and halimar is nice i still don't feel like it fits as well in here as well as it would in UWr or UW control. This is why, against all the odds - i still run divination
Playing: Standard
UWGMythic ConscriptionUWG
47-4-2
UBR Grixis RBU (Retired) 23-17-2
Playing: EDH
Zur the Enchanter
Malfegor
I'd rather have Deathmark. It nails Kor Firewalker and every creature in Jund except the Stag/Goblins/Specter. 9 times out of 10 we would side in Smother where we would side Deathmark anyways...
I don't know that it's that easy of an argument. Granted, Smother might end up being sub-par, but against a deck, such as Bant, or Elves, tagging their 3-drop with smother lets you hold your terminates for later, a la BSA, and throw your bolts to the dome, against the right deck. It seems like it would be an earlier game card, but it could still be useful, specifically because of instant speed. (Joraga Warcaller?). You wouldn't bring in deathmark against RDW, Goblins, Boros (because of instant speed), Vamps et al, so I feel like it might have a place.
Standard
Turboland
RDW
Extended-Come October
Faeries
BW Tokens
Legacy
Zoo
Dredge
That is exactly how I feel to be honest with Jace 2.0 it only really is worth it to me and how I play if I got it turn one with a treasure hunt in hand or something.
@Convertable Turtle Talk:
I run only 3 because I do agree that 4 is too much and more often then not you wont be swinging with him often; I generally use him for a defense for my planeswalkers while I use them to get the advantage or until I cruel/sphinx etc.
:symb::symr::symg:
Jund
White Wienies
Why not Doom Blade? Sure it doesn't work on vampires, but it works on everything else and works a instant speed.
I'll start of by saying that I've never been a strong sideboard player. I have a terrible time figuring out what the best mix is and an even harder time subbing the right things in and out. With that disclaimer in place, I would think optimizing a sideboard is about finding a combination of cards that can either 1. Totally rape a deck that troubles you (i.e. Bloodwitch against WW) and/or 2. Has uses in multiple arenas (i.e. Spreading Seas against many 3 color decks). I think Doomblade is out because Vamps is probably the toughest matchup that will see a lot play and it doesn't do much against Jund. Deathmark helps against WW and BSA but doesn't do well against Vamps not to mention the sorcery speed. Smother works well against Vamps and WW but isn't useful against Jund or BSA. These thoughts in mind, I would think a nice 2/2, 3/2 split between Smother and Deathmark respectively could be good. It does also depend on the trends in your area as always.
I think this is on the right track. As prevalent as removal is in this format right now, a lot of them are still situational, especially in B. The only problem I would have against the split in the SB is not seeing the right thing. A 2/2 split, especially with cards that are the same in functionality, may result in you not seeing the right one at the right time. I usually try to reserve the 2-of spot in SB with cards that A) Help me win, but I'm not relient, or B) I don't need until it is a late-game answer.
The biggest argument I can say for removal of the instant speed variety is that, with a deck like this, you want to have as many turns fully untapped as possible, especially early game. I had a situation testing against bant, where he on his turn 2, dropped a Rhox War Monk via BoP (I was on the play). At his EoT, I paid 2, smothered his RWM, then began my turn. This allowed me to play a Crumbling Necropolis on my T3, with mana open for the Essence Scatter/Terminate/Negate that were in my hand. With Deathmark, I would have paid a B, a tap land, and entered his T4, with the possibility of him dropping a BSA, and I am essentially tapped out. This is why I think instant speed is key, especially early game.
Standard
Turboland
RDW
Extended-Come October
Faeries
BW Tokens
Legacy
Zoo
Dredge
My only suggestion is that you have to pick 2 Duress or 2 Smother. You have 16 cards in your sideboard.
*Facepalm 3x Flashfreeze, edited. Tired and in between classes = mistakes
Standard
Turboland
RDW
Extended-Come October
Faeries
BW Tokens
Legacy
Zoo
Dredge
whoa whoa whoa... he goes from playing a Rhox War Monk on turn 2, tapping a BOP for mana... and then somehow you had to protect from him dropping a BSA on his next turn?! I'M PLAYING THE WRONG DECK TYPE! i would love to know how he get's a BSA down in this scenario with 4 total possible mana on T3...
that being said, what were you worried about protecting yourself from? you apparently had a Terminate in hand for his t3 drop, leaving you with scatter mana for t4.
don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating the use of Deathmark. i think it's equally as bad in this deck type as Smother. both are bad choices imo.
_____________________________________________
I was just trying to make the point that, on his T4, he could have. With differing threats and differing removals, you need a variety ways to drop/counter things early game. It was an example, even if poorly written and I skipped a turn :-/. Substitute Rafiq of the Many in the analogy, it makes little difference. The point I was trying to make is that all three things RWM/Rafiq/BSA, need to be dealt with, and preferably without blowing up your entire counter/removal suite before the late game.
What would you advocate in that SB spot, different removal? Duress as mentioned? That's essentially what I'm trying to iron out.
Standard
Turboland
RDW
Extended-Come October
Faeries
BW Tokens
Legacy
Zoo
Dredge
But then again, against the whole arguement i see no need for deathmark or other means of spot removal. How about you play counters and don't let it land in the first place? This is a control deck afterall. In Grixis Burn, smother might be a good 2-of.
Playing: Standard
UWGMythic ConscriptionUWG
47-4-2
UBR Grixis RBU (Retired) 23-17-2
Playing: EDH
Zur the Enchanter
Malfegor
sideboards can be difficult to figure out, and your sb should be a well-rounded response to the decks you see in your meta environment. if those extra instant-speed removals work for you, then that's all that matters. however, if it were me, i hate to use 1-for-1 removal early. instead of using smother/deathmark/etc i'd honestly just +1 terminate and +1 EQ (which would up the terminate total to 4-of and EQ total to 3-of in my current build). against most decks i'd let them get 2-4 dudes out on the field, hitting me for maybe 5-6 damage total before i EQ wipe, leaving me with spot removals for post-cruel gameplay. basically, the way i play is i set everything up for an easy post-cruel game. save the spot removal for when they are hurting for a rebound. that's just the way i play the deck. i've got no problems with letting my opponent get me down to 5ish life before i cruel if it means i have total control of the board after.
_____________________________________________
+1
_____________________________________________
I guess my biggest problem, and this is lack of play experience with the archetype, is knowing when it is good to blow counters early game. I saw Smother as a possible early game removal that would allow me to retain some removal/counter for "later", all assuming I'm playing against a creature-intensive deck. This is strictly because I see a huge amount of bant/vamps/WW/Elves etc, where the extra removal helps that T3 spot.
I guess the biggest question I have about strategy is 1) Burn first, counter post-Cruel? or 2) Counter first, burn post Cruel. I realize it depends on the gamestate, MU, and opening hand, but it seems like a valid strategy to initially decide upon.
Standard
Turboland
RDW
Extended-Come October
Faeries
BW Tokens
Legacy
Zoo
Dredge
It's a nice theory, but how many counters do we have that can hit a creature? 6 maindeck is probably the most that people run (Double Negative + Essence Scatter)? Sure, if you have counters to blow, that's a great way to do things. And sometimes you do have plenty in your hand. But most of the time, I'm saving my counters for something that actually does something the moment it hits the table, or that's hard/impossible to remove later - things like Broodmate, Thornling, or Sphinx. Part of playing this deck well is not just having an answer for everything - it's having the correct answer for everything. Sure, it's an unattainable ideal, but why not play to it as much as possible?
That being said, I'm not running any alternate removal on my sideboard right now, mostly due to meta considerations. If I was in a meta infested with WW decks, I'd definitely give Smother a thought.
Also, a previous list had M10 duals and 3x Expanse...Expanse has no place in this deck IMO. Play the duals. I am upping my count to run at least 4. (3 tar pit, 1 b/r guy)
Twitter