I wasn't watching the whole time, so you are probably right. Still think that the 4th Abrupt Decay would be better than Golgari Charm though.
That's the cool part though, Golgari Charm is still not bad against Twin (kills Pestermite, destroys Twin on Exarch), while also being useful against Lingering Souls, Affinity swarms, Bogles, Blood Moon and other random things you might run into like Jeskai Ascension.
It's a great use of a flex spot.
Abrupt Decay is also useful against Affinity (especially since it kills Cranial Plating), is even better against Splinter Twin, is better against Junk (I am not sure you can even afford to keep in Golgari Charm vs. Junk if it only answers Lingering Souls and nothing else), is just as good against Blood Moon and Jeskai Ascendancy, is better against Storm, is better against Infect, is better against Tron (probably still have to side it out but at least it kills Expedition Map if you are on the play), and is better against Blue Moon (kills Vedalken Shackles as well as Blood Moon).
I'm guessing they're a concession to Lingering Souls.
I'm personally not a fan of cards that are good against Lingering Souls but bad almost against everything else in Junk. Golgari Charm can kill some tokens, but against Goyf, Tasigur, Scavenging Ooze, and Siege Rhino it is near useless. Like Electrolyze, it is not something that I really think you would want to leave in against Junk because it only answers Lingering Souls. If he wanted an answer to Souls, Engineered Explosives would have been much better since it has many other useful applications.
Charm is good against Junk otherwise, not great but fine. Block a Tarmo with a Snap and a Tarpit, then regenerate. Swing for lethal with charm back up to keep stuff alive. Swing and apparently die on the crack back, use charm to reduce damage to less than lethal, ect. Not calling it great, but it's playable in that matchup.
It is playable, but it is significantly worse than the 4th Abrupt Decay or Engineered Explosives would have been.
I know that there is a point to running Ashiok, but I think Liliana is still generally better. Maybe there are just too many Lingering Souls in the format right now for her.
its more a deck of that type doesn't want to be whittling down its own hand.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
I actually really like Golgari Charm in the flex spot. It's got enough utility against a variety of decks to warrant one spot, if even only one. It can act as an answer to Night of Souls' Betrayal/Curse of Death's Hold/Blood Moon, is excellent value against Souls/Pestermite/Affinity (as long as they don't have an Overseer out, ofc).
I think that its power level is comparable to Abrupt Decay in certain matchups. Abrupt Decay is obviously a powerful card, but you don't lose too much having one Golgari Charm main over an Abrupt Decay, and it can really shine in the right matchups.
I actually really like Golgari Charm in the flex spot. It's got enough utility against a variety of decks to warrant one spot, if even only one. It can act as an answer to Night of Souls' Betrayal/Curse of Death's Hold/Blood Moon, is excellent value against Souls/Pestermite/Affinity (as long as they don't have an Overseer out, ofc).
I think that its power level is comparable to Abrupt Decay in certain matchups. Abrupt Decay is obviously a powerful card, but you don't lose too much having one Golgari Charm main over an Abrupt Decay, and it can really shine in the right matchups.
This deck doesn't really need to kill an opposing Night of Soul's Betrayal or Curse of Death's Hold and Abrupt Decay is able to kill Blood Moon just as easily. If he wanted a sweet one-of with many applications, then why not use Engineered Explosives instead?
I actually really like Golgari Charm in the flex spot. It's got enough utility against a variety of decks to warrant one spot, if even only one. It can act as an answer to Night of Souls' Betrayal/Curse of Death's Hold/Blood Moon, is excellent value against Souls/Pestermite/Affinity (as long as they don't have an Overseer out, ofc).
I think that its power level is comparable to Abrupt Decay in certain matchups. Abrupt Decay is obviously a powerful card, but you don't lose too much having one Golgari Charm main over an Abrupt Decay, and it can really shine in the right matchups.
This deck doesn't really need to kill an opposing Night of Soul's Betrayal or Curse of Death's Hold and Abrupt Decay is able to kill Blood Moon just as easily. If he wanted a sweet one-of with many applications, then why not use Engineered Explosives instead?
Charm is a bit harder to play around, because explosives dies to Decay/Qasali. But Charm is an instant, which helps it I think.
I actually really like Golgari Charm in the flex spot. It's got enough utility against a variety of decks to warrant one spot, if even only one. It can act as an answer to Night of Souls' Betrayal/Curse of Death's Hold/Blood Moon, is excellent value against Souls/Pestermite/Affinity (as long as they don't have an Overseer out, ofc).
I think that its power level is comparable to Abrupt Decay in certain matchups. Abrupt Decay is obviously a powerful card, but you don't lose too much having one Golgari Charm main over an Abrupt Decay, and it can really shine in the right matchups.
This deck doesn't really need to kill an opposing Night of Soul's Betrayal or Curse of Death's Hold and Abrupt Decay is able to kill Blood Moon just as easily. If he wanted a sweet one-of with many applications, then why not use Engineered Explosives instead?
Because as much as people blind themselves, explosives is a seriously bad card in Modern. It can barely do anything against Boggles, costs 4 mana of two different colors to even effectively 2-4-1 on goyfs (so damnation/pulse etc is better). I have never seen a deck successfully play more than 1 copy in their decks when they were just playing a bad "hedge" card.
I actually really like Golgari Charm in the flex spot. It's got enough utility against a variety of decks to warrant one spot, if even only one. It can act as an answer to Night of Souls' Betrayal/Curse of Death's Hold/Blood Moon, is excellent value against Souls/Pestermite/Affinity (as long as they don't have an Overseer out, ofc).
I think that its power level is comparable to Abrupt Decay in certain matchups. Abrupt Decay is obviously a powerful card, but you don't lose too much having one Golgari Charm main over an Abrupt Decay, and it can really shine in the right matchups.
This deck doesn't really need to kill an opposing Night of Soul's Betrayal or Curse of Death's Hold and Abrupt Decay is able to kill Blood Moon just as easily. If he wanted a sweet one-of with many applications, then why not use Engineered Explosives instead?
Because as much as people blind themselves, explosives is a seriously bad card in Modern. It can barely do anything against Boggles, costs 4 mana of two different colors to even effectively 2-4-1 on goyfs (so damnation/pulse etc is better). I have never seen a deck successfully play more than 1 copy in their decks when they were just playing a bad "hedge" card.
First, I was saying that he should have been running it as a 1-of. Second, Hoogland made top 8 with 2 in his sideboard, so you can obviously do well with more than 1 Engineered Explosives in your 75. Third, it does a lot more against Goyf than Golgari Charm does. In fact, it does a lot more against most things than Golgari Charm does.
I feel vindicated by that Sultai list. It has a bunch of cards I've supported and been admonished for it. It's also more evidence that a major issue with control deck is suppression of experimentation. If that list was posted here it'd be nitpicked to death.
Also it's hilarious that Sultai wins mere days after Badd B declares it unplayable.
I feel vindicated by that Sultai list. It has a bunch of cards I've supported and been admonished for it. It's also more evidence that a major issue with control deck is suppression of experimentation. If that list was posted here it'd be nitpicked to death.
Also it's hilarious that Sultai wins mere days after Badd B declares it unplayable.
Its a common bit of wisdom in magic that most of the good stuff that already exists has already been made. There's very, very little reason to experiment.
Gerard's case is a bit different. He's a legitimately good player, so obviously he can get away with making a rogue deck. Joe blow magic player? There's absolutely zero reason for him to do anything other than netdeck. If x average magic player tries to experiment, he's just going to be making an objectively worse deck than what already exists out there.
Just let the pros do their thing and just netdeck the best decks (best decks being, tier 1) if you want to be competitive.
I'm a pretty bad magic player (as I imagine most of this website is, let's be serious. There are a very small amount of legitimately good magic players that exist. If you're reading this post, you're probably on the same skill level as I am - ie not very good). I *can* go and make a crazy brew. Its fun, sure. But it doesn't actually do anything, because its going to get pounded by Junk, Twin, etc. It takes a serious understanding of metagames and the game as a whole to get away with making rogue deck or making a competitive brew. It doesn't happen very often. You're going to be more successful in just netdecking, so there's no point in not doing it unless you're already a pro yourself. And if you're a pro, why aren't you preparing for the next pro tour over posting on this website?
Gerard's case is a bit different. He's a legitimately good player, so obviously he can get away with making a rogue deck. Joe blow magic player? There's absolutely zero reason for him to do anything other than netdeck. If x average magic player tries to experiment, he's just going to be making an objectively worse deck than what already exists out there.
Actually, someone posted a very similar build in the deck creation forum well before the event.
You're not seeing the 10 other decks he likely tried and scrapped. It's unlikely your rogue brew is going to be good, but if there's only a 1% chance of being successful then it means you need to make 100 different brews.
Gerard's case is a bit different. He's a legitimately good player, so obviously he can get away with making a rogue deck. Joe blow magic player? There's absolutely zero reason for him to do anything other than netdeck. If x average magic player tries to experiment, he's just going to be making an objectively worse deck than what already exists out there.
Just let the pros do their thing and just netdeck the best decks (best decks being, tier 1) if you want to be competitive.
You don't have to be the best of the best to be a decent deckbuilder. While I'm certainly inspired by certain archetypes I always build my own 75 for the expected meta and often end up 5-10 cards off the established lists. Being an average Magic player at best I actually leverage deck building heavily to get my edges. I have pretty good results, better than average (I run about a 74% game win rate against the locals) and a lot of that comes from being a decent deck builder. There's nothing wrong with net decking, it will always give you a functional list. By the same token though it will never give you the best list for your tournament. Even the best deck builders for you to netdeck are writing their articles days after the event you needed the list for and their future predictions are generally for the next open or GP not for your next local event.
On the subject of Gerard's list it's quite good. I really like his numbers on everything, I very much utilize the 1, 2, and 3 of's so what he's doing makes a lot of sense to me. The 4C control list was very cool too, for those that haven't seen it
You guys know that any given bad deck can still win a tournament, right? It's just that it has less chances than the better decks.
Magic over a reduced number of games is about luck most of all.
You guys know that any given bad deck can still win a tournament, right? It's just that it has less chances than the better decks.
Magic over a reduced number of games is about luck most of all.
You are saying the winning deck is bad? How many rounds? How many players? and you think the deck is bad? It may be a meta call, but that doesnt make the deck bad.
It might be bad, maybe yes, maybe not.
Future will tell. If the deck performs as well as the other tier1 decks over an extended number of matches, the deck is good. If not, it's bad.
I plan on doing a more thorough write up of the tournament later on, but I will share this one highlight: I Blue-Screened Ben Friedman's brain in round 10 when he Cryptic Commanded my Nyx-Fleece Ram in game one. He had no idea Doran was in my deck, he had only seen a single maindeck Spellskite up to that point and had suspicions that I was sandbagging Abrupt Decays to his 2 Deceiver Exarchs.
I only got my list published because of the deck tech video on Saturday. I did get a chance to look through Kurt's UG Tron decklist. I don't remember too much about it, other than there were only 2x Ugin as the walkers in the entire 75 (no Karn), and it also had Mindslaver and Academy Ruins like a mono-U Tron deck. It also ran 4x Goyf in the board, IIRC.
Abrupt Decay is also useful against Affinity (especially since it kills Cranial Plating), is even better against Splinter Twin, is better against Junk (I am not sure you can even afford to keep in Golgari Charm vs. Junk if it only answers Lingering Souls and nothing else), is just as good against Blood Moon and Jeskai Ascendancy, is better against Storm, is better against Infect, is better against Tron (probably still have to side it out but at least it kills Expedition Map if you are on the play), and is better against Blue Moon (kills Vedalken Shackles as well as Blood Moon).
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
It is playable, but it is significantly worse than the 4th Abrupt Decay or Engineered Explosives would have been.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
its more a deck of that type doesn't want to be whittling down its own hand.
I think that its power level is comparable to Abrupt Decay in certain matchups. Abrupt Decay is obviously a powerful card, but you don't lose too much having one Golgari Charm main over an Abrupt Decay, and it can really shine in the right matchups.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
This deck doesn't really need to kill an opposing Night of Soul's Betrayal or Curse of Death's Hold and Abrupt Decay is able to kill Blood Moon just as easily. If he wanted a sweet one-of with many applications, then why not use Engineered Explosives instead?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Charm is a bit harder to play around, because explosives dies to Decay/Qasali. But Charm is an instant, which helps it I think.
Modern - GB Elves, UW Ojutai Control
Legacy - BWG Junk Stoneblade
Gay and Proud
#MakeAmericaGreatAgain
Because as much as people blind themselves, explosives is a seriously bad card in Modern. It can barely do anything against Boggles, costs 4 mana of two different colors to even effectively 2-4-1 on goyfs (so damnation/pulse etc is better). I have never seen a deck successfully play more than 1 copy in their decks when they were just playing a bad "hedge" card.
First, I was saying that he should have been running it as a 1-of. Second, Hoogland made top 8 with 2 in his sideboard, so you can obviously do well with more than 1 Engineered Explosives in your 75. Third, it does a lot more against Goyf than Golgari Charm does. In fact, it does a lot more against most things than Golgari Charm does.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Also it's hilarious that Sultai wins mere days after Badd B declares it unplayable.
Its a common bit of wisdom in magic that most of the good stuff that already exists has already been made. There's very, very little reason to experiment.
Gerard's case is a bit different. He's a legitimately good player, so obviously he can get away with making a rogue deck. Joe blow magic player? There's absolutely zero reason for him to do anything other than netdeck. If x average magic player tries to experiment, he's just going to be making an objectively worse deck than what already exists out there.
Just let the pros do their thing and just netdeck the best decks (best decks being, tier 1) if you want to be competitive.
I'm a pretty bad magic player (as I imagine most of this website is, let's be serious. There are a very small amount of legitimately good magic players that exist. If you're reading this post, you're probably on the same skill level as I am - ie not very good). I *can* go and make a crazy brew. Its fun, sure. But it doesn't actually do anything, because its going to get pounded by Junk, Twin, etc. It takes a serious understanding of metagames and the game as a whole to get away with making rogue deck or making a competitive brew. It doesn't happen very often. You're going to be more successful in just netdecking, so there's no point in not doing it unless you're already a pro yourself. And if you're a pro, why aren't you preparing for the next pro tour over posting on this website?
Games are not that hard.
Spirits
Actually, someone posted a very similar build in the deck creation forum well before the event.
You're not seeing the 10 other decks he likely tried and scrapped. It's unlikely your rogue brew is going to be good, but if there's only a 1% chance of being successful then it means you need to make 100 different brews.
You don't have to be the best of the best to be a decent deckbuilder. While I'm certainly inspired by certain archetypes I always build my own 75 for the expected meta and often end up 5-10 cards off the established lists. Being an average Magic player at best I actually leverage deck building heavily to get my edges. I have pretty good results, better than average (I run about a 74% game win rate against the locals) and a lot of that comes from being a decent deck builder. There's nothing wrong with net decking, it will always give you a functional list. By the same token though it will never give you the best list for your tournament. Even the best deck builders for you to netdeck are writing their articles days after the event you needed the list for and their future predictions are generally for the next open or GP not for your next local event.
On the subject of Gerard's list it's quite good. I really like his numbers on everything, I very much utilize the 1, 2, and 3 of's so what he's doing makes a lot of sense to me. The 4C control list was very cool too, for those that haven't seen it
3 Island
1 Plains
2 Arid Mesa
1 Blood Crypt
3 Celestial Colonnade
4 Flooded Strand
1 Glacial Fortress
1 Godless Shrine
2 Hallowed Fountain
1 Sacred Foundry
2 Scalding Tarn
2 Steam Vents
1 Sulfur Falls
1 Tectonic Edge
2 Electrolyze
4 Lightning Bolt
2 Lightning Helix
3 Mana Leak
1 Mystical Teachings
4 Path to Exile
2 Remand
2 Shadow of Doubt
2 Spell Snare
1 Sphinx's Revelation
4 Lingering Souls
2 Supreme Verdict
1 Crucible Of Worlds
1 Aven Mindcensor
1 Baneslayer Angel
1 Stony Silence
1 Celestial Purge
1 Counterflux
1 Dispel
1 Negate
1 Wear
1 Kataki, War's Wage
1 Gideon Jura
1 Jace, Architect of Thought
2 Timely Reinforcements
1 Ghost Quarter
I don't always play control, but when I do something like this is where I want to be.
Magic over a reduced number of games is about luck most of all.
You are saying the winning deck is bad? How many rounds? How many players? and you think the deck is bad? It may be a meta call, but that doesnt make the deck bad.
Future will tell. If the deck performs as well as the other tier1 decks over an extended number of matches, the deck is good. If not, it's bad.
I plan on doing a more thorough write up of the tournament later on, but I will share this one highlight: I Blue-Screened Ben Friedman's brain in round 10 when he Cryptic Commanded my Nyx-Fleece Ram in game one. He had no idea Doran was in my deck, he had only seen a single maindeck Spellskite up to that point and had suspicions that I was sandbagging Abrupt Decays to his 2 Deceiver Exarchs.
[EDIT]: And uploaded a brief writeup and tournament report here: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/deck-creation-modern/598192-baby-got-back-abzan-doran
My Custom Cards
My Twitch - Languishing in neglect under the vain hope of starting again
My Livestream Archive
My Haves/Wants Thread
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/deckshow.php?&start_date=2015-02-28&end_date=2015-03-01&event_ID=47&state=MD&limit=8&start_num=32&start_num=0&limit=8
My Custom Cards
My Twitch - Languishing in neglect under the vain hope of starting again
My Livestream Archive