If I were to consider changing this configuration, I could see cutting the 2 Stubs for 2 Faithless Looting to improve consistency and filter through air/lands as the game progresses. What's preventing me so far is the fear of losing the additional axis of interaction that Stub provides.
A change that I think is more in line with that you have indicated in your previous post is cutting 1 Push and 2 Denials for 2 Bolts and the Temur Battle Rage #3. Between the additional reach that Bolt provides (while also allowing for more explosive Shadows) and the absence of Stubborn Denial, I think the 3rd Battle Rage gives us back the relative "speed" we lose by being able to timewalk our opponent with Stub.
In the event that blue is cut entirely from the maindeck, we have the opportunity to reconsider what colour we would like to splash out of the sideboard. I still a huge fan of blue, but a white package of 3x Souls takes up less space than 3 Stub + 2 Delay, and it gives us more flexibility to play the grind game if appropriate for the matchup.
Finally, I think your musings about Surgical are really interesting. With 8 discard spells, coupled with it being a "free" spell that also grows our Shadows, I think there's a lot to be said for Surgical. Will definitely have to think about it some more.
Funny, we were thinking the same thing at the same time. I kind of chuckle when I hear people talk about their deck crushing Humans. Play some more matches and see if it holds true!
I agree and disagree about Jeskai just being a 'meta deck"; it is legitimately powerful and better at playing on the backfoot than any other deck I've known. On the
other hand, very reactive strategies are fundamentally at a disadvantage in Modern.
Jeskai Control does a lot of things well. Having ~8 burn spells and 4x Snapcaster Mage means you can cheese bad matchups out a non-zero amount of the time. You have one of the best sideboards in the format, though it could be argued that is a bare necessity for a deck that hopes to cover so many bases.
But really, the deck is full of good cards. Snapcaster Mage, Cryptic Command, Serum Visions, Lightning Bolt, Path to Exile, Search for Azcanta, Teferi, Supreme Verdict-- certainly an all-star cast. Not just that, but it's arguably the best deck for those cards to call home.
Without meaning to contradict everything I've just said, I don't think the Humans matchup is that great for Jeskai-- I'd peg it around 55/45 in favour of the control deck. Humans is really, really good, and their strong draws can make Jeskai look plain embarassing.
I'm still on 4x Manamorphose and I like it for the most part. It more or less works as advertised, even if it's a bit awkward at times (for example, when you're stuck on 1 land). Here are my current issues/concerns with the deck:
1. 12 free cantrips means you have to keep a lot of highly speculative 5s and 6s. I have lost many games due to hands just not panning out after cantripping a few times.
2. The deck is highly subject to variance. I find the perfect number of lands to draw in a game is 3, but it's not uncommon to be stuck on 1 for a while, or to flood out.
3. In line with the above consistency issues, I've found the "wrong half issue" to be the death knell for this deck. It's very easy to draw the wrong type of interaction in a given matchup.
4. I so far believe the deck could benefit from another threat (in addition to 4x Shadow/Goyf). While most would play Grim Flayer for this purpose, I wonder if a singleton Gurmag Angler could be justified.
All that being said, I think a tool like Faithless Looting could be a valuable addition to the deck, at least in theory. Unfortunately, there's just no room for such an effect in Spooly's 4x Manamorphose list, and the card disadvantage is a real problem without being able to effectively utilize the graveyard beyond Delirium. I also suspect that I would want to run 18 lands with Faithless Looting, since I both want to hit my second/third land more consistently, but also want to have something to pitch to Looting later in the game.
That's all I've got. The nut draws this deck produces sure are nutty though.
Edit: my tertiary points of uncertainty are the 2 basics, and my desire to pack a 3rd Stubborn Denial in the main.
I really don't think this deck wants to count on making 4 land drops in most matchups. It simply doesn't benefit enough from playing BBE due to the average cascade hit being much poorer on average than in Jund. You also lose a lot of what makes the deck appealing by excluding 4x IoK. All in all, I think it's possible that this build is even worse against control BECAUSE it is counting on playing the longer game, whereas non-BBE lists can just go under them with a reasonable level of consistency.
Thanks tronix and TheAller for taking the time to reply. What you have explained makes a lot of sense, and my biases probably come from playing Blue Moon and (back in the day) Jeskai Geist. I had tried 3x Knot and 2x Remand and liked it a lot for consistently having early interaction with the stack.
It's hard to argue with the success of Nikolich's list, but I personally hate playing less than 4x Bolt, and in this meta, 4x Helix as well. With a removal suite of 4 Bolt/Helix/Path and 2x Surpeme Verdict, and I have been a lot less impressed with Electrolyze. Now, don't get me wrong-- I love me some Electrolyze! But I did find it somewhat redundant (and clunky) with so much other cheap removal + sweepers. How has it been for you? Beyond that, how have you found Secure the Wastes and maindeck Negate? Thanks.
Loving the discussion on Opt vs Serum Visions. I agree that it's not clear cut, and my experience has dictated that the two cards serve slightly different roles.
I heard/read somewhere that Serum Visions is an investment, which sums it up very well IMO. It can be a pain to find the time to cast it in the early-midgame, but it allows us to keep a wider range of hands, as well as digging us into answers and action in future turns.
The best way I can describe Opt is as a card that smoothes out our draws. It helps us fill the gaps in our curve and make land drops. The immediate gratification it provides shouldn't be understated in a deck that is often looking for either lands or spells; the random draw off Visions with the promise of better future draws isn't always enough, especially when it can affect our curve negatively.
My main issue with Jeskai Control in it's current state is the lack of velocity. Coming from 8-cantrip, 4x Remand UR Moon decks, I notice I'm missing more land drops than I would expect for playing 24. I'm not hitting my colours as consistently as I like. And sometimes I feel like I'm forced into trading 1-for-1 all the time without having a good way to pull ahead.
I love Logic Knot, but I also love Search for Azcanta. I think we can all agree Azcanta (and more recently, Teferi) has done a lot to revitalize the archetype. Unfortunately, I often find myself with a Search in play that I can't flip because of having to cast one or more Logic Knots. So where am I going with this?
What about Remand?
Hold on, I know what the popular opinion is. Remand is bad when the format is so fast, and besides, we want REAL answers. And we don't have any real way to take advantage of the tempo gained.
Or do we?
Fundamentally, we want every game to go long. We can almost never kill our opponents quickly, even in a goldfish scenario. The vast majority of games we lose, we're either run out fast and brutally by the opponent, or we trade one-to-one until our opponent topdecks better (less common, but it still happens). Meanwhile, most of our powerful cards can't be deployed until much later in the game.
So how does Remand help alleviate these issues?
For starters, Logic Knot is not great at preventing us from getting run over in the early game. UU is also a somewhat punishing requirement to have early and often, especially when our life total is under pressure. Logic Knot is best in the early game when the opponent is curving out. So is Remand.
But that's not a real argument for Remand. The actual reason I'm drawn to Remand is because I think it does three very important things at the same time:
1. It disrupts our opponent's curve. Most threats are a lot less scary when they're played off-curve.
2. It smoothes out our draws and helps us hit land drops. I know I'm much happier with an opening hand of 2 lands and a Remand than 2 lands and a Logic Knot.
3. It bridges us to the midgame, where our more powerful spells come online. Opponent wants to dump a bunch of creatures into play after being Bolted and Remanded for the first few turns? Great, you played into my Wrath! Oh, you have Liliana of the Veil? Well, I have Cryptic Command. We often are just one turn behind in the games we lose, and Remand can make all the difference.
Bonus Round:
It doesn't mess with our Search flipping. Which is really big game! This deck can reliability flip a T2 Search on T4/T5.
Not sure I'll convince anyone, but Remand has impressed me so much in UR (even ignoring the synergy with Blood Moon) that I'd regret not exploring its applications in Jeskai.
I think you've done a great job of articulating the challenges of Jund in the current landscape of Modern. The best "solution" I've settled on to mitigate these issues is to play 6 discard spells, 4 Bolt/2 Push, 2x Maelstrom Pulse, 4x BBE, 4x Bob, and 3x Scooze (and of course 4x Goyf). This "package" confers the most well-rounded suite of threats and answers with a broad range of applicability, while also maxing out on some of the most powerful cards we have access to.
One of the key things I've learned from watching Reid play is to be patient and know when to pick your spots. He has many opportunities to play more aggressively to close out games, but instead he lets his advantage build. Scavenging Ooze in particular is the tool that lets us play the long game in many troublesome matchups.
Overall, I don't think Jund is in a bad spot. While it may not excel in an aggressive meta like Jeskai Control, we are capable of winning games in most matchups, even those where Jeskai struggles (Tron). Bloodbraid Elf is our best tool in both catching up and closing out games, and I am a very strong advocate for playing 4. In summary, my philosophy is to play the most versatile and powerful cards we have access to, and accept that we are simply not meant to win every match.
Thank you for the thoughtful response. I'm a long time Jund and Jeksai player who turned his nose up at GDS because I disliked anything that Junded better than Jund-- obviously things have changed since the unbannings. But it was in reading your posts about Traverse Shadow that I found a love for the archetype-- the idea of blitzing people down while shredding their hand was enticing, to say the least. Especially since Jund very seldom gets the aggro draw of T1 discard, T2 Goyf, T3 Discard + Goyf #2.
I'm sad to hear you've more or less taken a break from the deck, especially since your content is what got me hooked on it! But I understand what you're saying about the format being overly hostile at the present time. Modern is a cyclical format, and I expect Tron to pop up in large numbers to quell the Humans and Jeskai menace. In an open meta, I very much appreciate Traverse Shadow for its strong, proactive gameplan; it reminds me of Delver in Legacy where you can win even your worst matchups just through the sheer power of the nut draws.
I don't have a ton of experience with Traverse Shadow, but I do know that I am a big, big fan of Stubborn Denial. I don't think the deck is fast enough on average to get by without it, and the main thing I have been trying to reconcile with your most recent list is fitting a 3rd into the 60. While it's a liability against Humans, I find it absolutely essential in going under fair decks and Big Mana.
In conclusion, I accept that the deck has limitations. I find discussions in the traditional Jund thread frustrating and tedious at times, because I too often see people trying to "fix" the shortcomings of the deck at the expense of what makes it good (like trimming down on BBE). I feel like a BGru build of Shadow has a lot of good tools, and I'd love to squeeze in a 3rd Denial into the mainboard if possible, but I really don't want to cut anything. One other thing worth mentioning is that I find it very difficult to know what my opening hand is going to look like with 12 free cantrips in the deck. I find I have to keep a lot of speculative 6s that have an equal chance of becoming non-functional as they are to be nutty. So in that sense, the deck reminds me a lot of Affinity, with perhaps a higher failure rate.
Hey Spooly, good to see you post again! I've been playing with your 4x Manamorphose build, and I was wondering what your current list is. Thanks in advance
I think Jund is the best fair deck in Modern. If you look at the history of the format, the best performing decks had an unfair/broken component that allowed them to go over the the top in some way (Twin, combo Pod, DRS into T2 Liliana, pre-ban Eldrazi, Shadow with TBR, Cruise/DTT decks). For the most part, the linear decks of the format have the advantage of redundancy, whereas Jund-type decks can always draw the wrong half, or not have the right 75 for the meta.
I think Jund is an excellent deck, and there's no real way to hate it out. The format is hostile towards it, but I don't think any one particular matchup is that bad; it's just difficult to be favoured against decks that have unbeatable nut draws while the Jund player is obligated to be able to fight on every conceivable axis. The deck is fine-- great even-- but what you are observing isn't an issue with Jund, but rather a symptom of the inherent nature of Modern.
The reason I like to attack their ability to assemble Tron postboard is because it forces them to waste more time cantripping/finding ways to produce green to cast their Scryings/Stirrings, which takes their entire turn when they're on only 2-3 mana. While you are right that they generally have more tutors than threats, once they have Tron+ online it's very easy for them to cast multiple spells a turn until they find a threat they can play. In conjunction with the 4 Fulminator Mage plan I'm trying now, it's felt very important to take their tutors because they can easily recover from having just one land blown up. I suppose a good summary is to say that I think taking their tutors buys more turns on average than taking a threat-- but again, it is always context dependent!
I'm currently conflicted between a Duress or third Thoughtseize in the sideboard (4 IoK /2 Thoughtseize split main). On one hand, Duress helps against Burn, and in a good amount of matchups does the same thing Thoughtseize would for no life penalty. However, now that 4 Fulminators seems to be the norm and very strong with BBE, I'm tempted to use the 3rd Thoughtseize to have even more game against Tron (Wurmcoil Engine/Eldrazi) and Titan which are two weaker matchups. Also, it helps against decks with meaty threats like Eldrazi and Delve Creatures.
I'd love to hear any thoughts anyone has on either.
I'd advise against playing the 3rd Seize over Duress in the board. As you mentioned, Duress is better against decks like Burn, though it still does a nice job taking Karns. In my testing, the most reliable way to beat Tron postboard is to disrupt their tutor effects and blow up their lands while you clock them. It's usually better to use your discard spells to disrupt their ability to assemble/reassemble Tron than to take their threats in my experience, though there are obviously situations where the inverse is true.
1 Blood Crypt
4 Bloodstained Mire
1 Forest
2 Overgrown Tomb
1 Polluted Delta
1 Stomping Ground
1 Swamp
4 Verdant Catacombs
1 Watery Grave
1 Wooded Foothills
Creatures
4 Death's Shadow
4 Street Wraith
4 Tarmogoyf
2 Abrupt Decay
2 Dismember
3 Fatal Push
4 Inquisition of Kozilek
4 Manamorphose
4 Mishra's Bauble
2 Stubborn Denial
2 Temur Battle Rage
4 Thoughtseize
4 Traverse the Ulvenwald
2 Abrade
2 Collective Brutality
2 Delay
2 Fulminator Mage
2 Grim Lavamancer
1 Hazoret the Fervent
1 Liliana, the Last Hope
2 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Stubborn Denial
If I were to consider changing this configuration, I could see cutting the 2 Stubs for 2 Faithless Looting to improve consistency and filter through air/lands as the game progresses. What's preventing me so far is the fear of losing the additional axis of interaction that Stub provides.
A change that I think is more in line with that you have indicated in your previous post is cutting 1 Push and 2 Denials for 2 Bolts and the Temur Battle Rage #3. Between the additional reach that Bolt provides (while also allowing for more explosive Shadows) and the absence of Stubborn Denial, I think the 3rd Battle Rage gives us back the relative "speed" we lose by being able to timewalk our opponent with Stub.
In the event that blue is cut entirely from the maindeck, we have the opportunity to reconsider what colour we would like to splash out of the sideboard. I still a huge fan of blue, but a white package of 3x Souls takes up less space than 3 Stub + 2 Delay, and it gives us more flexibility to play the grind game if appropriate for the matchup.
Finally, I think your musings about Surgical are really interesting. With 8 discard spells, coupled with it being a "free" spell that also grows our Shadows, I think there's a lot to be said for Surgical. Will definitely have to think about it some more.
other hand, very reactive strategies are fundamentally at a disadvantage in Modern.
Jeskai Control does a lot of things well. Having ~8 burn spells and 4x Snapcaster Mage means you can cheese bad matchups out a non-zero amount of the time. You have one of the best sideboards in the format, though it could be argued that is a bare necessity for a deck that hopes to cover so many bases.
But really, the deck is full of good cards. Snapcaster Mage, Cryptic Command, Serum Visions, Lightning Bolt, Path to Exile, Search for Azcanta, Teferi, Supreme Verdict-- certainly an all-star cast. Not just that, but it's arguably the best deck for those cards to call home.
Without meaning to contradict everything I've just said, I don't think the Humans matchup is that great for Jeskai-- I'd peg it around 55/45 in favour of the control deck. Humans is really, really good, and their strong draws can make Jeskai look plain embarassing.
1. 12 free cantrips means you have to keep a lot of highly speculative 5s and 6s. I have lost many games due to hands just not panning out after cantripping a few times.
2. The deck is highly subject to variance. I find the perfect number of lands to draw in a game is 3, but it's not uncommon to be stuck on 1 for a while, or to flood out.
3. In line with the above consistency issues, I've found the "wrong half issue" to be the death knell for this deck. It's very easy to draw the wrong type of interaction in a given matchup.
4. I so far believe the deck could benefit from another threat (in addition to 4x Shadow/Goyf). While most would play Grim Flayer for this purpose, I wonder if a singleton Gurmag Angler could be justified.
All that being said, I think a tool like Faithless Looting could be a valuable addition to the deck, at least in theory. Unfortunately, there's just no room for such an effect in Spooly's 4x Manamorphose list, and the card disadvantage is a real problem without being able to effectively utilize the graveyard beyond Delirium. I also suspect that I would want to run 18 lands with Faithless Looting, since I both want to hit my second/third land more consistently, but also want to have something to pitch to Looting later in the game.
That's all I've got. The nut draws this deck produces sure are nutty though.
Edit: my tertiary points of uncertainty are the 2 basics, and my desire to pack a 3rd Stubborn Denial in the main.
It's hard to argue with the success of Nikolich's list, but I personally hate playing less than 4x Bolt, and in this meta, 4x Helix as well. With a removal suite of 4 Bolt/Helix/Path and 2x Surpeme Verdict, and I have been a lot less impressed with Electrolyze. Now, don't get me wrong-- I love me some Electrolyze! But I did find it somewhat redundant (and clunky) with so much other cheap removal + sweepers. How has it been for you? Beyond that, how have you found Secure the Wastes and maindeck Negate? Thanks.
I heard/read somewhere that Serum Visions is an investment, which sums it up very well IMO. It can be a pain to find the time to cast it in the early-midgame, but it allows us to keep a wider range of hands, as well as digging us into answers and action in future turns.
The best way I can describe Opt is as a card that smoothes out our draws. It helps us fill the gaps in our curve and make land drops. The immediate gratification it provides shouldn't be understated in a deck that is often looking for either lands or spells; the random draw off Visions with the promise of better future draws isn't always enough, especially when it can affect our curve negatively.
My main issue with Jeskai Control in it's current state is the lack of velocity. Coming from 8-cantrip, 4x Remand UR Moon decks, I notice I'm missing more land drops than I would expect for playing 24. I'm not hitting my colours as consistently as I like. And sometimes I feel like I'm forced into trading 1-for-1 all the time without having a good way to pull ahead.
I love Logic Knot, but I also love Search for Azcanta. I think we can all agree Azcanta (and more recently, Teferi) has done a lot to revitalize the archetype. Unfortunately, I often find myself with a Search in play that I can't flip because of having to cast one or more Logic Knots. So where am I going with this?
What about Remand?
Hold on, I know what the popular opinion is. Remand is bad when the format is so fast, and besides, we want REAL answers. And we don't have any real way to take advantage of the tempo gained.
Or do we?
Fundamentally, we want every game to go long. We can almost never kill our opponents quickly, even in a goldfish scenario. The vast majority of games we lose, we're either run out fast and brutally by the opponent, or we trade one-to-one until our opponent topdecks better (less common, but it still happens). Meanwhile, most of our powerful cards can't be deployed until much later in the game.
So how does Remand help alleviate these issues?
For starters, Logic Knot is not great at preventing us from getting run over in the early game. UU is also a somewhat punishing requirement to have early and often, especially when our life total is under pressure. Logic Knot is best in the early game when the opponent is curving out. So is Remand.
But that's not a real argument for Remand. The actual reason I'm drawn to Remand is because I think it does three very important things at the same time:
1. It disrupts our opponent's curve. Most threats are a lot less scary when they're played off-curve.
2. It smoothes out our draws and helps us hit land drops. I know I'm much happier with an opening hand of 2 lands and a Remand than 2 lands and a Logic Knot.
3. It bridges us to the midgame, where our more powerful spells come online. Opponent wants to dump a bunch of creatures into play after being Bolted and Remanded for the first few turns? Great, you played into my Wrath! Oh, you have Liliana of the Veil? Well, I have Cryptic Command. We often are just one turn behind in the games we lose, and Remand can make all the difference.
Bonus Round:
It doesn't mess with our Search flipping. Which is really big game! This deck can reliability flip a T2 Search on T4/T5.
Not sure I'll convince anyone, but Remand has impressed me so much in UR (even ignoring the synergy with Blood Moon) that I'd regret not exploring its applications in Jeskai.
One of the key things I've learned from watching Reid play is to be patient and know when to pick your spots. He has many opportunities to play more aggressively to close out games, but instead he lets his advantage build. Scavenging Ooze in particular is the tool that lets us play the long game in many troublesome matchups.
Overall, I don't think Jund is in a bad spot. While it may not excel in an aggressive meta like Jeskai Control, we are capable of winning games in most matchups, even those where Jeskai struggles (Tron). Bloodbraid Elf is our best tool in both catching up and closing out games, and I am a very strong advocate for playing 4. In summary, my philosophy is to play the most versatile and powerful cards we have access to, and accept that we are simply not meant to win every match.
I'm sad to hear you've more or less taken a break from the deck, especially since your content is what got me hooked on it! But I understand what you're saying about the format being overly hostile at the present time. Modern is a cyclical format, and I expect Tron to pop up in large numbers to quell the Humans and Jeskai menace. In an open meta, I very much appreciate Traverse Shadow for its strong, proactive gameplan; it reminds me of Delver in Legacy where you can win even your worst matchups just through the sheer power of the nut draws.
I don't have a ton of experience with Traverse Shadow, but I do know that I am a big, big fan of Stubborn Denial. I don't think the deck is fast enough on average to get by without it, and the main thing I have been trying to reconcile with your most recent list is fitting a 3rd into the 60. While it's a liability against Humans, I find it absolutely essential in going under fair decks and Big Mana.
In conclusion, I accept that the deck has limitations. I find discussions in the traditional Jund thread frustrating and tedious at times, because I too often see people trying to "fix" the shortcomings of the deck at the expense of what makes it good (like trimming down on BBE). I feel like a BGru build of Shadow has a lot of good tools, and I'd love to squeeze in a 3rd Denial into the mainboard if possible, but I really don't want to cut anything. One other thing worth mentioning is that I find it very difficult to know what my opening hand is going to look like with 12 free cantrips in the deck. I find I have to keep a lot of speculative 6s that have an equal chance of becoming non-functional as they are to be nutty. So in that sense, the deck reminds me a lot of Affinity, with perhaps a higher failure rate.
I think Jund is an excellent deck, and there's no real way to hate it out. The format is hostile towards it, but I don't think any one particular matchup is that bad; it's just difficult to be favoured against decks that have unbeatable nut draws while the Jund player is obligated to be able to fight on every conceivable axis. The deck is fine-- great even-- but what you are observing isn't an issue with Jund, but rather a symptom of the inherent nature of Modern.
I'd advise against playing the 3rd Seize over Duress in the board. As you mentioned, Duress is better against decks like Burn, though it still does a nice job taking Karns. In my testing, the most reliable way to beat Tron postboard is to disrupt their tutor effects and blow up their lands while you clock them. It's usually better to use your discard spells to disrupt their ability to assemble/reassemble Tron than to take their threats in my experience, though there are obviously situations where the inverse is true.