Short answer: Yes. My impression is that latest incarnation of Grixis Shadow tries to mimic 4C Shadow too much. It may be a meta call, I get it, then let's hope that the meta will change again soon. Because Grixis Shadow is not that good at playing 4C Shadow's game.
I have won many games against the "new" version of Grixis Shadow in the last couple of weeks. Sometimes they cantrip like crazy and get me scared for a moment. But usually they only manage to play one measly creature after eating my IOKs and Thoughtseizes, only to find out that one open mana is not enough to protect it. Then everything falls apart and they sit on a hand full of dead cards. Like a frantic child they try to dig for a threat again, only to find out that my deck has even more ways of disrupting their one trick pony game plan. With a greedy manabase of 18 lands and often just 4 Opts to "fix" it, without Traverse the Ulvenwald for situational tutoring, with delve creatures and Snapcaster Mages getting into each others' ways like they always did to some degree with this deck, there are so many things that can go wrong that something will often go wrong if the opponent's deck packs some disruption.
To me, the "new" Grixis Shadow feels as if somebody has looked at what was already the most fragile of all shadow decks and decided to turn into a full fledged glass cannon. OK, I'm exaggerating, but "new" Grixis Shadow has so far been much easier to beat for me than 4C Shadow because the deck is much less resilient. IMHO, many players who prefer an all out aggressive play style would be better off if they switched to 4C Shadow instead of trying to mimic what it does with a threat-light deck.
The version with 18 lands and 2 TBRs feels like a cheap rip-off of what used to be a highly flexible deck. This deck could really use some innovation into a different direction.
So my line here would be:
-play fetch and pass, then play Thought Scour at the end of opponent's turn and then play Thoughtseize and Serum Visions on your turn
I'm not sure if this is correct. So what do you guys think about that?
Thoughtseize on turn 1 is so much better against an unknown opponent than Thoughtseize on turn 2. A turn 1 Expedition Map can often win them the game and if they have some discard of their own, you don't want to end up being the one who drives blindly.
Thoughtseize + 2 fetches means that, by turn 2, we know 7 out of the 8 cards our opponent has and can have a 1/1 Death's Shadow. With all this information, we can make more reasonable choices when casting Serum Visions or Opt than we can on turn 1.
Thought Scour would probably the last cantrip I cast in this situation, unless my turn 2 Death's Shadow dies quickly. In most cases, I would concentrate on getting the best cards to grow/protect my Shadow (Serum Visions/Opt). Thought Scour just gives me a random card. It's also noteworthy that I can mill my opponent with Thought Scour on turn 3 in case I really want the second card off my turn 2 Serum Visions. Or I can Opt then if I don't want to fill my opponent's graveyard with cards.
From my experience, Young Pyromancer and Pia and Kiran Nalaar can do just as much in most situations without being affected by Thalia and a smaller risk of getting locked out of the required colored mana. In addition, I don't think that Lingering Souls is well-positioned in the current metagame. Of the top decks, only Grixis Shadow and the weaker creature-based version of Jeskai Control are truly vulnerably to it. If you want to hate out those decks, you can just run extra spot removal or LotV, which are also good against a variety of other top decks in the format.
I have tested Mana Leak in place of IoK for a while and it's OK in a control-heavy metagame (they usually don't have 3 extra mana when they cast Cryptic Command). In Azzerith's list, I would play Lightning Bolt or a fourth Fatal Push over it, though. It's a common misconception that LotV can replace one of the 6 default creature removals. A turn two Dark Confidant or Young Pyromancer can become a nightmare if we miss our turn three land drop, which happens quite often with the 18-Land-4-Opt-Version.
So far, playing against the Mishra's Bauble variant of GDS feels like playing against a bad version of 5C Shadow. Without access to Traverse the Ulvenwald, the deck has a hard time establishing a threat against a disruption-heavy opponent. Typically, the game came to a point at which they were frantically digging for another threat, cycling Street Wraiths and cracking fetches. Funnily enough, they still ended up being land-flooded about half of the time.
Mishra's Bauble adds more air to the deck, which will inevitably result in more hands that look fine *if* we get a another land. I already have this problem with many hands that contain 2 Street Wraiths. I like that Mishra's Bauble can trigger revolt, but this comes at the cost of delaying a draw, which often makes it harder to plan ahead. My feeling is that Mishra's Bauble has better synergy with Serum Visions than with Opt.
Engineered Explosives feels so clunky in a deck that ideally wants to operate on three lands. I have been running a single copy for a while and have been underwhelmed by it more often than not. And that's coming from somebody who loved the card in Grixis Control. It's still OK-ish in GDS, but three copies seems over the top.
I used to be a huge fan of Kozilek's Return, but two damage on turn 3 or 4 often just doesn't seem to be enough anymore. Half of the board of the typical Humans deck usually survives it.
Rakdos Charm is another former pet card of mine. Kolaghan's Command seems so much better than Rakdos Charm against Affinity. It's nearly always a two for one trade and since Affinity is often hellbent after turn 2 and likes to cast its spells on sorcery speed, instant speed discard has been so good over and over again. Instant speed graveyard hate can be great, but most graveyard-centric decks are so low on interaction that it often doesn't seem to matter if they see it coming (Nihil Spellbomb) or not. Plus, about half of the graveyard decks actually run discard spells, so they can often see it coming.
A mix of Stubborn Denial and Inquisition of Kozilek seems better to me, because one of them tends to be a dead card in certain matchups.
One other thing I'd like to mention is that Temur Battle Rage is not particularly amazing in the mirror matchup after sideboarding.
Today on MTGO, I wondered why my opponent didn't put any pressure on me when I had a slow start. As it turned out, by turn six my opponent's hand consisted of a Stubborn Denial (which I took with IoK) and two TBRs. Next turn, my opponent drew and played a Death's Shadow only to have it killed by a Fatal Push (of which I had two in hand). My opponent also already knew that my third card in hand was a Dismember, which would also have been sufficient to shrink his Death's Shadow to a size at which TBR was not going to kill me. Still, my opponent called me a "bigg lucky a**hole" in the chat followed by "f y", which also didn't sound that polite. ;-)
After sideboarding, more than half of the nonland non-cantrip cards in the opponent's deck can get rid of a Death's Shadow in one way or another (discard, spot removal, LotV, Snapcaster Mage targetting removal spell etc.). Plus, opposing Death's Shadows can soak up a lot of damage and might not even die because of the trample.
TBR is fine against combo-ish decks with little interaction, but keeping multiple copies of it in the mirror doesn't seem that smart to me.
how do you guys feel about one or two copies of painful truths in the sideboard? i mean, the card can be very good in grind matchups
I have seen it in some lists in the past, but I'd rather have a Liliana planeswalker instead most of the time. I would also play Ancestral Visions over it, because mandatory lifeloss is not what I want in a grindy matchup. Grindy matchups are often against GB(x) decks that have numerous ways of dealing with Death's Shadow. A low life total is thus often more a liability than a boon in those matchups.
LoTV is good against other fair decks. If you don't face those you don't need her and even then you can still beat fair decks without her.
I'm not the biggest fan of LotV in Grixis Shadow. However, I'd like to point that in a metagame full of unfair decks, LotV is a pretty good maindeck choice. The big mana decks usually don't have any means of refilling their hands while we usually have a few Fatal Pushes to spare in game 1.
Classic Tron is not what I consider a rough matchup. It's slightly unfavorable in game 1 and slightly favorable in games 2 and 3. So I'd say it's about even.
My main issue with your posting was your claim that "good storm players" would do this. Just because one player (or even a handful of players) chooses to go down that road doesn't mean that this is the only good approach to the matchup. But this is what you claimed and apparently still claim. I'm still not worried about MAYBE having 5 or 6 dead cards against Storm after sideboarding, especially since I'm often going to need discard fodder for LotV and can avoid flooding with Opt.
Furthermore, Grixis Shadow has evolved since we last discussed the matter. Back then, Dredge was perhaps the biggest threat to the deck. Thus, many sideboards had 2 sweepers, an Izzet Staticcaster, 2 Surgical Extractions, sometimes even Rakdos Charm, and maindeck TBRs where not unheard of. Nowadays, these slots (except for the sweeper slots) are usually filled with cards that are much less effective against the Empty the Warrens gamble. Therefore it's not all that suprising if this strategy is becoming more popular.
But that still doesn't mean that you where right back then and nearly everybody else was wrong. Some of your postings have an arrogant undertone to them.
Serum Visions allows us to keep hands with just one land. It becomes more important with each mulligan, which means that it is most useful when we are in a rough spot in the early game. Serum Visions is perhaps the biggest enabler for the deck's low land count. If there is a land in the top 4 cards of our library, Serum Visions will ensure that we have hit it by the next turn.
Opt, on the other hand, shines in the mid to late game when we have mana to spare for a rather minor effect. At this point in the game, the one mana casting cost is not that relevant, except maybe in conjunction with Snapcaster Mage, as some here have pointed out. But even then, I can see myself looking for a more interesting target most of the time.
In the end, Opt is a bad Anticipate for one mana less or a bad Sleight of Hand at instant speed. I'm not overly excited.
I tried a similar build with Mana Leak instead of Deprive and 2 copies of Claim // Fame. The rest of the maindeck was almost identical. The performed OK-ish and I like the idea of going wide, but I fear that Pyromancer doesn't have enough impact in the current metagame.
darksteel88, are you on MTGO or do you just play the deck in paper? You seem to be so confident in your aggressive play style with the deck. I'd love to play a match or two against you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have won many games against the "new" version of Grixis Shadow in the last couple of weeks. Sometimes they cantrip like crazy and get me scared for a moment. But usually they only manage to play one measly creature after eating my IOKs and Thoughtseizes, only to find out that one open mana is not enough to protect it. Then everything falls apart and they sit on a hand full of dead cards. Like a frantic child they try to dig for a threat again, only to find out that my deck has even more ways of disrupting their one trick pony game plan. With a greedy manabase of 18 lands and often just 4 Opts to "fix" it, without Traverse the Ulvenwald for situational tutoring, with delve creatures and Snapcaster Mages getting into each others' ways like they always did to some degree with this deck, there are so many things that can go wrong that something will often go wrong if the opponent's deck packs some disruption.
To me, the "new" Grixis Shadow feels as if somebody has looked at what was already the most fragile of all shadow decks and decided to turn into a full fledged glass cannon. OK, I'm exaggerating, but "new" Grixis Shadow has so far been much easier to beat for me than 4C Shadow because the deck is much less resilient. IMHO, many players who prefer an all out aggressive play style would be better off if they switched to 4C Shadow instead of trying to mimic what it does with a threat-light deck.
Thoughtseize + 2 fetches means that, by turn 2, we know 7 out of the 8 cards our opponent has and can have a 1/1 Death's Shadow. With all this information, we can make more reasonable choices when casting Serum Visions or Opt than we can on turn 1.
Thought Scour would probably the last cantrip I cast in this situation, unless my turn 2 Death's Shadow dies quickly. In most cases, I would concentrate on getting the best cards to grow/protect my Shadow (Serum Visions/Opt). Thought Scour just gives me a random card. It's also noteworthy that I can mill my opponent with Thought Scour on turn 3 in case I really want the second card off my turn 2 Serum Visions. Or I can Opt then if I don't want to fill my opponent's graveyard with cards.
Mishra's Bauble adds more air to the deck, which will inevitably result in more hands that look fine *if* we get a another land. I already have this problem with many hands that contain 2 Street Wraiths. I like that Mishra's Bauble can trigger revolt, but this comes at the cost of delaying a draw, which often makes it harder to plan ahead. My feeling is that Mishra's Bauble has better synergy with Serum Visions than with Opt.
Engineered Explosives feels so clunky in a deck that ideally wants to operate on three lands. I have been running a single copy for a while and have been underwhelmed by it more often than not. And that's coming from somebody who loved the card in Grixis Control. It's still OK-ish in GDS, but three copies seems over the top.
I used to be a huge fan of Kozilek's Return, but two damage on turn 3 or 4 often just doesn't seem to be enough anymore. Half of the board of the typical Humans deck usually survives it.
Rakdos Charm is another former pet card of mine. Kolaghan's Command seems so much better than Rakdos Charm against Affinity. It's nearly always a two for one trade and since Affinity is often hellbent after turn 2 and likes to cast its spells on sorcery speed, instant speed discard has been so good over and over again. Instant speed graveyard hate can be great, but most graveyard-centric decks are so low on interaction that it often doesn't seem to matter if they see it coming (Nihil Spellbomb) or not. Plus, about half of the graveyard decks actually run discard spells, so they can often see it coming.
A mix of Stubborn Denial and Inquisition of Kozilek seems better to me, because one of them tends to be a dead card in certain matchups.
Today on MTGO, I wondered why my opponent didn't put any pressure on me when I had a slow start. As it turned out, by turn six my opponent's hand consisted of a Stubborn Denial (which I took with IoK) and two TBRs. Next turn, my opponent drew and played a Death's Shadow only to have it killed by a Fatal Push (of which I had two in hand). My opponent also already knew that my third card in hand was a Dismember, which would also have been sufficient to shrink his Death's Shadow to a size at which TBR was not going to kill me. Still, my opponent called me a "bigg lucky a**hole" in the chat followed by "f y", which also didn't sound that polite. ;-)
After sideboarding, more than half of the nonland non-cantrip cards in the opponent's deck can get rid of a Death's Shadow in one way or another (discard, spot removal, LotV, Snapcaster Mage targetting removal spell etc.). Plus, opposing Death's Shadows can soak up a lot of damage and might not even die because of the trample.
TBR is fine against combo-ish decks with little interaction, but keeping multiple copies of it in the mirror doesn't seem that smart to me.
Furthermore, Grixis Shadow has evolved since we last discussed the matter. Back then, Dredge was perhaps the biggest threat to the deck. Thus, many sideboards had 2 sweepers, an Izzet Staticcaster, 2 Surgical Extractions, sometimes even Rakdos Charm, and maindeck TBRs where not unheard of. Nowadays, these slots (except for the sweeper slots) are usually filled with cards that are much less effective against the Empty the Warrens gamble. Therefore it's not all that suprising if this strategy is becoming more popular.
But that still doesn't mean that you where right back then and nearly everybody else was wrong. Some of your postings have an arrogant undertone to them.
Opt, on the other hand, shines in the mid to late game when we have mana to spare for a rather minor effect. At this point in the game, the one mana casting cost is not that relevant, except maybe in conjunction with Snapcaster Mage, as some here have pointed out. But even then, I can see myself looking for a more interesting target most of the time.
In the end, Opt is a bad Anticipate for one mana less or a bad Sleight of Hand at instant speed. I'm not overly excited.
darksteel88, are you on MTGO or do you just play the deck in paper? You seem to be so confident in your aggressive play style with the deck. I'd love to play a match or two against you.