I tend to set micro goals for myself each week based on previous mistakes. One week it was to miss zero Delver or Bauble triggers, because I did that the week before. Another it was to keep better track of life total, since I had missed an opponent's fetch one time the week before and it meant all the difference in combat math. My goal this week is to beat Burn.
I just wanted to touch on this, although it's not specifically related to the deck, and kind of just my opinion. You should focus on the goals that are fully within your control. I believe these are often called "objectives" which are measurable and contribute to your overall "goal" which is the outcome you want.
I really like the approach you are taking, because when you make a mistake, you are specifically focusing on correcting that mistake to improve. Not missing those triggers and tracking life totals accurately are great objectives. They give you something specific and measurable to work on that contribute to an overall goal of winning more games/matches. Pretty recently, I decided to work on my combat math, especially when trying to play around different cards the opponent could have. Before that, I was working on mulliganing based on what the opponent was playing (not keeping playable but slow hands against decks like Tron, even if it meant mulliganing to four or five, because a slow hand is so unlikely to get a win in that matchup).
I don't think your goal this week should be to beat Burn. I guess that isn't really accurate because that's the outcome you want, but I don't think you should focus on that. I think you should focus on an objective like "I want to manage my life total better," or "I want to mulligan more aggressively against Burn (for postboard games, or when you know the local opponent is on Burn)." I think making sure you focus on things like this is better for you, because it gives you something more specific that you are trying to improve, which is a lot easier than trying to simultaneously improve on all aspects of magic involved in a game against Burn, and it also helps to prevent tilt. It's a lot harder to be upset about a loss when you know that you did what you could and made better decisions than you would have before. Good luck!
My Denial/Pierce split was inspired by one of Chaughey's lists. Denial is usually better, but Pierce is a lot better when you only threat is a Pyromancer, especially if you want to protect it. I could see going towards more Denials though.
I can see merit to not having Mana Leak. Topping off your curve with Snap/2-drop + 1cmc spell is kind of nice. I think I still want some Leak because it is so versatile. There are definitely matchups in which counters are bad (and when they are bad, Leak is usually the worst. Although, it is definitely the best one against Humans when they don't have Vial out), but they are still fantastic against plenty of decks.
I have liked the 19th land. It makes hitting your first 3 land drops easier, and that is roughly where our curve tops out. It makes more Snapcasters easier to handle because you are less likely to get stuck on 2 lands.
@Lemonbuster and Mikefon's Looting discussion: In my experience so far, pitching Looting to another Looting is good if you are worried about having too few cards left over. I'm actually trying going down to 3 Looting to reduce Looting flood. The worst scenario I've found is when you Loot and end up drawing another Looting after the first resolved (on your next turn for example). You can definitely end up with too many Lootings, but I have liked it a lot. I'm a little hesitant to cut any, but I'm willing to try trimming one. Sometimes I just wish a Looting in hand was a piece of interaction.
I moved the sideboard Snapcaster to the main. Snap has a similar place on curve to Looting, although it doesn't dig for lands in a pinch. It also is objectively powerful, and is a versatile piece of interaction. Snapcaster off the top is similar to Looting when you need one last Bolt or counter, so on that front, I think it'll do just fine. Having 19 lands has been great, and I imagine it'll be pretty easy to support both Snapcasters even when trying to be aggressive (against decks like Tron for example where I would board out the second Snapcaster when I had fewer lands. Being able to Loot away bad Snapcasters is definitely relevant as well).
Mana Leak took the sideboard slot left vacant because it comes in against Control and Combo, matchups in which I have Snags and Dismember to board out and need something to replace them. On that note, I could see switching the second Damping Sphere to a second Alpine Moon if I can handle enough cards to board in for Storm. Dismember is passable, so I might just board in 1 Sphere, Leak, and EE for the 3 Snags with that change.
I could also see dropping Scour to keep all 4 Looting if I miss it. Cutting the third Pyromancer is also on the table, but I am a fan of having threats.
Notably, I am down to 25 cards that transform Delver in the main. I honestly doubt it's an issue. I'd rather be a little less likely to come sprinting out of the gate if it means I am more likely to hit early land drops. The paradigm shift makes me appreciate Todd Anderson's more midrangey aggro-control looking lists, although I prefer a much lower curve.
@Ashton I should have been clearer. The part about having enough lands to cast Hazoret wasn't specifically directed at you. I was just agreeing that it was fine and explaining why I doubt casting Hazoret is going to be an issue.
@MikePemulis I didn't realize you were on 17 lands. I remember casting Huntmaster postboard with 17, but that was before Looting, and there were definitely times at which it was hard. With your build having fewer creatures and more counters, you might be best off just keeping the "protect the queen" plan going postboard. Blood Moon might be the best three mana haymaker.
Hazoret has always looked interesting to me, and seems like it could crush midrange, too.
So mnesci, what's your sideboard plan against Jund-style midrange? I used to be on Jordan's plan of remove all counters and jam 2 Huntmasters, 2 Moon, Collar, and even a Magus of the Moon for a while. But now that my board is totally reconfigured, my plan is way smaller. Cut both Stubborn Denials, a Leak, and a Spell Pierce, bringing in Collar, Snapcaster, and both Moons. The games play out so much differently with this configuration. Against Path decks, I can see bringing in a 4 drop, but I don't even have any in my board now anyway.
Luckily, most of the midrange I've been seeing lately is Pyromancer, which we've got sweepers for, and Traverse Shadow, which seems easier than traditional 23-25 land Jund or old school Junk, which I haven't seen since the Bloodbraid unban.
My current iteration is the leftmost tab "Looting 19 Lands."
On Jund specifically, I'm still partially on the "board counters out" plan, but with Looting, I don't mind keeping some. I really don't know what you board out with this build. I basically just trim the cards that get worse in the late game. It's tough because I like everything when we are ahead, but when we are behind I think I can live with having some counters/Snags because you can Loot them away if you don't have a board.
Alpine Moon comes in to name Raging Ravine. I don't know if that is just bad though. I haven't practiced much against Jund with this build.
@Ashton Thanks for the recommendation of Hazoret. I think I like it for the slot. UWx decks have some answers in Path, Terminus and Teferi, but those answer all our threats anyways, so I'd hope they are running out of relevant cards once Hazoret resolves. I tried it against Jeskai briefly, and it was a nice additional threat. I actually think that it is going to be a decent card against Control, while often crushing Midrange decks when it sticks, so it'll almost certainly serve my needs as a haymaker. Against Jund and Mardu, it seems nuts. Abzan has Path, but once again, we have a lot of things they want to Path.
Walling Shadow sounds fantastic as long as they don't resolve a Battlerage. I don't think finding the lands to cast Hazoret will be a huge deal unless it is in your opener. These Midrange decks want to prolong the game usually anyways (Mardu is especially bad at turning the corner, and, as mentioned, we interact with their clock so easily), so unless you are really aggressive in Looting away lands, you'll easily find four. I am on 19 lands right now though. And if you are Looting that much and discarding lands, your spells are probably really good. I've kept lands off of Looting and dumped lackluster spells if the land would make my plays better. You can also just hold onto a fourth land for as long as you like if you want to save it for a topdecked Hazoret/Looting, or to protect draws from Kommand. That gets a bit worse if they have an active Lili, but you aren't sandbagging cards for anything if Lili is picking apart your hand every turn.
It really depends on their draw I think. You almost always lose the "Arbiter into Ghost Quarters" games, especially when you are on the draw. They also have games in which they just find a bunch of Paths and you run out of stuff. Vial making counters worse can cause us to have extra dead cards as well. Outside of them having really good hands though, I think we are fine. You can still lose, but it's usually an ok matchup for me.
I've shelfed the Lavaman idea after tweaking my sideboard a bit. I dropped the second Grudge for an Abrade. I've heard great things about it, and want it for Humans and Burn (in addition to where artifact hate is good).
Stuff about the Burn matchup:
I've seen more Ensnaring Bridge out of Burn lately, and with Looting, I'm comfortable having one of each Grudge and Abrade postboard. I did some testing, and although I want to jam more games postboard on the draw, it felt great. Visions and Looting make it possible to find an answer to Bridge (if it resolved, which isn't unlikely) while also letting you dump them if you need to. So far, Feed the Clan has been nuts. If you find it and successfully play around Skullcrack, it's a pretty easy win. Collar wasn't as much of a swing (Snap-Feed is ridiculously), but I think it's still great.
What I found interesting is that I didn't miss Huntmaster at all when I didn't draw it. I think that Feed and Collar are enough lifegain that Huntmaster really isn't necessary. And Huntmaster can be very clunky depending on your draws. If you get Pathed, Huntmaster gets better, but I feel like the downside of your clunky hands outweighs the upside given that there are more efficient ways to come back from boardstates that Huntmaster really saves you from. Skullcrack is also way harder to play around with your sorcery-speed four drop, meaning if they have Crack, you are only making two bodies for your four mana, dealing with the board, but being vulnerable to their spells.
Notably, I'm not cutting Huntmaster from my board. It still comes in against a lot of decks. Namely Midrange/Control and creature-heavy decks. I could see cutting it for something that does a better job at being somewhat grindy while clogging up the board and/or kill creatures. I'm not boarding it in against Burn anymore though. I'd rather board in my second Snapcaster mage or keep my least worst maindeck card.
Due to having artifact hate in against Burn, I don't want Deprive in against them anymore. Unless I just swap it for Leak, I'm probably overboarding, and the UU is a very real cost against Burn.
I looked at matchups in which I board in Deprive. Basically, Control, some big mana, and some combo decks. I tweaked my postboard configuration, and am happy without Deprive against Storm and KCI, and don't really need it against Tron. That basically leaves UW, Jeskai, and Titanshift.
So, I want to drop Deprive for a card that can come in against UW, Jeskai, and Titanshift. My first thought was Disdainful Stroke or Blood Moon. Blood Moon gets points for being good against Midrange, but I kind of want to go narrower since I don't need the card for Tron. I could even live with having a worse Valakut matchup, and just keep an extra burn spell in there.
Basically, I want a narrow and powerful sideboard card. I want it to have some application against Control, either being absolutely amazing, or being decent against Control while being amazing in some other matchup. I want a Rest in Peace/Stony Silence esque card that doesn't come in often, but turns a matchup on it's head when you draw it.
Should I just go with Blood Moon? It's powerful, but also versatile enough that I think there are more narrow and powerful options available.
I've been watching a lot of Jeff Hoogland's streams lately, and he has been tuning a UR Delver build recently. Grim Lavamancer does ridiculous amounts of work, and I'm starting to wish we could play it, but I've always felt it would be too much strain on the graveyard. It's a one man army in a lot of our closer (or straight up bad) matchups though.
My first thought was we could run 1-2 out of the board. Anyone who played Reveler out of the board has experience with boarding out Mandrills to relieve graveyard strain. I could see trimming down to 1-2 Mandrills against decks like Humans (any Fish deck, really), Affinity, Infect, and just about any other creature-heavy deck.
While typing that though, it occurred to me that I'm already down to 3 Mandrills (and, really key here, 0 Traverse) in the main. Running a one-off Lavamancer in the main isn't exactly out of the question. I think I might want to add a second Scour (and I don't know where the space would come from) but I think it's possible.
I'll probably try out 1-2 in the board first, but if I could comfortably fit one into the main, that would be cool.
Personally, I think Pyromancer is the least impactful part of the Looting build that Chaughey is having success with (Chaughey, feel free to tell me how wrong I am!). Looting itself has been amazing for me thus far. It allows you to find the cards you need when you need them, and, late in the game, draws up to four cards. Once you know you just need more threats (or Bolts if they are low on life), you can just aggressively bin cards that aren't bad, but don't do the job. I had a match against Mardu Pyromancer the other day in which I out-Looted them (I found three copies, I think they found one) and just kept finding action.
Another big thing might just be how Chaughey plays the early turns. In Chaughey's report, I'm pretty sure they mentioned mulliganing hands that could function but were too slow (one land with Serum Visions). It might just be because this build uses more mana, but I feel like hands (at least, seven card hands) that need to cantrip to find a second land drops are traps. They just spend too much time looking for cards when they should be interacting or playing threats. Personally, I've kept tons of hands like that, and just been too slow to take the game. Modern might just be too fast for those kinds of hands.
On to the question of Peezy and Thing: I've recently started trying out Thing between Leagues, and I think it does a good job of being a threat/temporary boardwipe. The two cards definitely have advantages against different decks. Thing is much slower, but hits like a truck when it gets going. It is also more binary: it transforms or it doesn't. I haven't gotten to try it against Humans yet, but I agree that I like the idea of bouncing all the puny humans and slamming for seven damage. The big disadvantage of Thing in that matchup specifically that I can think of is that Humans can slow down our non-creature spells, and then Reflector Mage the Thing when it gets close to thawing.
I've been going out of my way to practice against Humans with the Looting build (Peezy version), and game one still sucks. I think postboard might actually be passable know that there is so much removal. My current list and boardplan for Humans for reference:
My new plan is to try ignoring Vials and just run them out of threats. Previously, I was boarding in a Grudge, but I think if we just kill enough humans, our threats run them over. I'm working on finding out how viable that is. Counting Snapcasters and Huntmaster, I have 17 ways to remove creatures. I could see cutting some cantrips (and probably a Mandrills due to churning through the deck less) for more if I had more options in the board.
Humans is one of the matchups in which I expect the 19th land to help. Having to Traverse to find a land while they build their board (especially if Thalia shows up) is awful. I started off with Spirebluff because it saves some life sometimes. I could see another fetch being better for the extra card in the graveyard, but I thought I'd start here. Not providing G isn't a big deal because I don't use much G. I really just wanted another land, and I've been using R and U much more.
I still like the idea of packing traverse with thought scours for some reason... Probably because it can get us a creature as a late top deck and helps with getting land drops with adding a mill element.
The sideboard is pretty straight forward match up to match up. The trickiest one might be feed the clan... If you think for any reason the extra life can get you there bring them in.
Snapcaster isn't going to beat a control or midrange deck. I personally would favour ChandraTOD. We still don't have an optimal answer to those decks so it's still up in the air.
I actually threw a Snapcaster in my sideboard for Midrange/Control! Ok, that isn't entirely fair. The second Snapcaster is in my 75 as a card to improve my Midrange/Control matchup somewhat while also being awesome against other decks. When I want more removal or counters and don't have to be as low to the ground, Snapcaster comes in to join the 1 off in the mainboard. Such matchups include Humans, Affinity, KCI, and Storm (for Storm, only on the play). That's in addition to the Midrange/Control decks.
Obnixilis is right about Snapcaster and Midrange though. It doesn't just bury them like an unanswered planeswlaker could. But it helps. If I can make Midrange a bit easier to face while also improving other matchups, I'm down.
On Traverse in the Looting build, I'm torn. I love Traverse, but I'm not sure it's really necessary. Looting is actually kind of insane in the late game. You just get to fix your topdecks so well. Cutting Traverse definitely hurts threat density, but I think it's mitigated enough thanks to Looting that I'd try it. The question is: What gets the slot? It probably should be something that can impact the board to improve matchups in which Traverse is more lackluster (Aggro and Combo). On the other hand, I've been considering a 19th land, so, if I want it, maybe I'd try that over Traverse to keep Scour in the deck.
I agree that three lands is where we want to be (at least preboard). I don't want to play another land just to discard more often to Looting. I was considering another land to more consistently hit my first three land drops. Looting just somewhat mitigates the downside by making flooding less bad.
I know we can turbo Xerox with the cantrips to hit land drops, but that's not always where we want to be. Realistically, I don't think I ever actually want to cantrip to hit early lands. I can't think of a matchup in which I don't want to stick a clock or interact early. I've definitely done some cantriping to find my second and third land, but if playing a 19th land means we can spend those early turns playing to the board and then use our cantrips to just smooth out our draws (and I'm grouping using cantrips to grow Goyf out of Bolt range or get a Mandrills down in the play to the board category), I think that might be worth it. I don't think I'm going to try 19 yet, but it's something I'm considering testing out.
@mnesci Regarding your statement on tempo loss because of looting. I have to disagree based on what we are playing around looting. It still powers out mandrills like shoal did plus it's supported by pierce and snag to even out the deficiency I think you are referring to. As you know the deck is extremely intricate and with that in mind, in our deck more so than others we leverage how ALL OF our spells make the deck come together and compliment the other spells we play. That's just my perspective anyway.
I actually agree with what you said here, so I'm going to try to rephrase my point on Looting having a cost in terms of tempo.
Basically, Looting costs Mana and doesn't directly affect the board. That means that you could fall behind Looting in the early turns if you are cantriping and your opponent is slamming creatures. I guess it's the same with any of our cantrips, but I wanted to not imply that Looting was 100% amazing all the time. Especially when you are operating on one red source, it can be better to save the Looting for later and Bolt their dude. Looting enabling things like Mandrills with interaction up is definitely still awesome tempo.
@Everybody: I'm curious for those playing the looting version of the deck, we know holding back land for looting is the correct line for us but are we supposed to be playing more land vs midrange and control or just stay the course? I wonder if tireless tracker would be a better card then huntmaster. Just brainstorming.
Knowing when to play a land and when to hold is going to be important going forward. I think playing the first three is safe (I've been favouring Vents, Ground, Island if anyone wants to compare preferred setup in this build). That can get you in trouble if you want to play a land and cantrip into Huntmaster against Midrange, so after that it gets iffy. I'm not sure, but I think it's fine to have just a land or two in hand if you don't actually have Looting since you can probably find some questionable cards, and might even Loot into them. I'd totally hold everything if I have four or five in play though. Even if you end up with five or more lands in hand, a single Looting dumps four of them.
On Tracker, I think Mikefon liked it. It could be a nice grind alternative to Huntmaster. I'd probably want the 19th land even more with it. If there is room, I wouldn't mind one of each creature in the board.
Some thoughts I have on Looting after my experience trying it out:
Card selection is really good (although, we probably already knew that). Being able to dig a couple extra cards deep to find your out has been relevant for me.
Dumping certain cards to feed Goyf (or just dumping cards to slam Mandrills) comes up.
It's nice with Traverse in that you can try to turn on Traverse with it, or dump Traverse when you don't want it.
Dead cards get new life. If you end up with something like Mana Leak in the late game, you are more likely to get a card out of it. Sometimes the opponent taps low enough for Leak to get value, but being able to Loot it away otherwise is nice.
Having RR available is especially important with this build. Looting into a Bolt is important. Especially when it's the Bolt that closes the game or the one that you need to interact. Young Pyromancer makes RR even more relevant.
On that note, hitting 3 lands is more important. Having Pyromancer makes me want to be able to play it on turn 3 and have a spell up. It's almost more important to be able to protect Peezy than my other threats because if I cast a couple spells after untapping, answering Peezy can cost the opponent extra cards. That specifically is most relevant against Midrange/Control, especially if they aren't packing sweepers. Having 3 lands also let's you flashback Looting. In fact, since you can dump unwanted lands with Looting, I might even try a 19th land over something. It makes Delver a bit worse, but stumbling feels a bit worse than flooding here I think.
Looting let's you pay R to take really good partial Paris mulligans. Looting is at it's best when it is drawing cards you need, and discarding ones that you don't. It's primarily a card selection tool that let's you "have it" more often than otherwise. Against Aggro you dig for interaction and dump cantrips or counters you don't have time for. Against Midrange you dig for threats. Against Combo you dig for the specific interaction you need. I don't like Looting T1 on the play because you don't really know what you want. But you can do a neat thing in games 2 and 3 in which you use Looting as a T1 mulligan.
This is probably at its best against Midrange because you want to mulligan as little as possible. If you have a decent but not great hand, you can Loot early to have a chance at finding the cards you need. If you don't like what you find, you just dump the cards. Your mulligan wasn't great, but you are guaranteed a floor of a functional hand (that's the important part: you are basically mulliganing with significantly less risk). If the cards you find are better than what you have, your "mull to six" made your hand better.
Of course, Looting on the draw is probably fine if you can afford the tempo loss and have a decent idea as to what the opponent is on.
The last thing off the top of my head is that Looting changes my play patterns, and I think it's for the better. Looting gives you incentive to hold onto cards. Holding lands to bluff is obviously a thing, but Looting gives even more reason to hold onto cards. This obviously makes Looting better because you discard cards you don't want and hopefully draw ones you do want. But this also helps against discard effects. Kolaghan's Command and Liliana of the Veil are less scary when they take cards you didn't want in the first place. You are still getting 2-for-1'd by Kommand, but I actually laughed at one recently because it just didn't bother me at all.
In terms of negatives, the card disadvantage hasn't really bothered me. I think it's offset by the virtual card advantage, and getting to Loot later with the spell having flashback. The tempo loss I think has been a little more real. Just like other cantrips, you can have too many. Fortunately, you can pitch Looting to itself if it's your worst card. Spending too much mana looking through cards instead of pressuring or interacting can bite you though. This becomes relevant when you need to Loot to find your interaction.
This was just going to be a quick edit to get another discussion going, but it's turned into a monster so I'm just going to post it seperately.
Running alternatives to Blood Moon (Damping Sphere) has me thinking: what do you all think of Alpine Moon (M19) as a Moon replacement?
We have a lot of ways to interact with Tron's lands now: Blood Moon, Spreading Seas, Damping Sphere, and Alpine Moon. All of which have advantages and disadvantages.
Edit: I forgot about Magus of the Moon, but it is a creature version of Blood Moon (ignores enchantment hate, dies to removal, can attack/block/be found off Traverse, etc.)
Costs 3 mana and needs to be played around in terms of land sequencing
Potentially cuts Tron off of G, making it the most thorough at shutting off their deck (Stirrings and Thragtusk get turned off until they find Forest or an egg). Turns off all Tron lands
Turns off manlands out of midrange/control, Valakut, and other notable non-basics
Can colour-screw opponents (most prominent against midrange/control, but notable against Humans, Ad Naus, Bogles, Eldrazi, Shadow, etc.).
Costs 2 mana
Hits only one land. Tron can get around it either by blowing it up or finding a replacement copy of the land
Targets the land at sorcery speed. Valakut doesn't care unless they are playing the long Valakut trigger game
Can turn basics into Islands to colour screw non-blue decks (most notable against burn)
Draws us a card
Costs 2 mana
Proactively answers lands that produce extra mana (including filter lands if I'm not mistaken). Hits Tron, Eldrazi, and similar decks
Proactively answers certain combo decks that cast many spells in one turn (Ad Naus, KCI, Storm)
Hinders our (and others') ability to cast multiple spells in a turn
Costs 1 mana
Only hits the named land. This turns off all copies of a given Tron land (turning off Tron while it's in play), all copies of a named manland, named Valakut, etc.
Allows the named land to tap for ANY colour of mana (notably, not colourless)
Only affects opponent's lands. This isn't really relevant except for really specific scenarios
They all hit Tron, they do so in varying degrees of effectiveness, and they all come with a bit of matchup overlap.
In terms of targeting Tron (and probably Eldrazi) specifically, I think it goes to Alpine Moon. Costing 1 mana and not affecting us means we can clock about as well as we could if we didn't want to cast it. Playing it and holding up other disruption sounds cool. I think Blood Moon deserves a nod for hurting Tron even more, but it costs us much more to play.
But we board Blood Moon in for a bunch of matchups! Let's look at others.
For Midrange/Control, I think it is a toss up among options not named Damping Sphere. Blood Moon can steal a game, turn off manlands, and act as a threat if they haven't fetched around it (eating a discard spell or Decay). Spreading Seas can hit their mana less effectively (but still slow them down), or hit a manland, and draws a card (especially big in these matchups). Alpine Moon might be the best if you want to get under them, as it turns off all of a given manland, while costing you little tempo (about as much as playing a tapped land cost them). Spreading Seas is kind of a compromise between being a big hit and efficient on mana, so it kind of works in a tempo way too. Blood Moon is bad tempo (unless of course it is great), so probably is better if you want to slam haymakers with them.
Combo/other is broader and harder to peg down. There are a lot of decks that these cards interact with. Blood Moon (and Seas to a small extent) can hurt Ad Naus, and Bogles. Damping Sphere hits Ad Naus, Storm, and KCI with its less land-related ability. The two Moons are fairly good at handling Valakut (Alpine probably being better due to coming down cheaper, but Moon can cut them off for a while and can slow down Rec Sage). Spreading Seas is alone in nearly stone raining Burn.
What's everybody think, and what did I miss? What non-Tron matchups do you want your Tron hate to hit? And how hard?
I have a feeling that playing a 1/2 or 1/1/1 split among these could be better than just picking 3 of one. Something like 1 Alpine/2 Sphere hits Tron harder than 3 Sphere (and can be used against manlands), while only giving up 1 Sphere against Combo. Or maybe you play a Seas to tag manlands and draw against Midrange. Or you could go 2 Alpine/1 Blood to get Tron efficiently while threatening manabases everywhere. There is a lot of customization available with this sideboard slot now.
You mean thanks to its haste? Since I don't think you can damage directly PW with its ability. Am I wrong?
I tried it but never managed to attack once. I even lose some matches against control because it was a 4 mana do nothing having many cards in hand. That said, I didn't use Looting in that list and didn't think of it when I post my last comment. That's surely a huge difference. I currently run 2 huntmaster in side: I may switch one and test it myself. Thanks for pointing it out .
I'd assume it's the haste (and hitting like a truck). You're right. Hazoret can't hit planeswalkers with the ability (it could before the Dominaria rules update like Chandra). I'm assuming Hazoret is only coming in against Midrange/Control, so against BGx specifically, I'd watch out for Liliana which is probably the main way it'll get answered. I've never played it though, so that very well may not be a big deal.
@Chaughey That newest list has only one sweeper in the board. Do you find you don't play against go-wide creature decks often online? I feel like I've been playing against Humans at least once every other league (not to mention Merfolk, Elves, Company etc. which aren't that common but show up enough that I always want a plan against them). What is your plan against Humans (and other creature decks, but mostly Humans)? It's a matchup I usually have trouble with preboard, and postboard is only so much better. Does Looting help you find the cards you need enough that you just don't dedicate space to creature decks? Or are you mostly ignoring them altogether and accepting that they'll be difficult matchups?