Vendilion Clique is the best answer against these MU's. It's also OK to just say that you're a huge dog to some MU's that see very little play (Bogles, Amulet, etc.) because you're worse off if you start including SB cards just for them. Geist is also good against Scapeshift just because he's the fastest uninteractive clock we can have (out of SB).
I agree that Vendilion is pretty amazing and I support a couple somewhere in the 75, but I am currently playing Young Pyromancer MD so Vendilion will typically get hit by splash hate for him. Geist puts you in a position of either tapping out early (which is a bad idea) or waiting until he is less relevant to cast him with counter backup and is vulnerable to Snapcaster, Vendilion, and Obstinate baloth coming in from Scapeshift.
Boggles is a strong counter to the metagame currently, and Amulet is an explosive combo deck with inevitability. Both of these decks are cheap to build and easy to learn; they are and will continue to increase in popularity. Scapeshift and Pod are the 4th and 5th most played decks respectively.
Been having good results from Shadow of Doubt. Playing a few MD in place of Remand as I find the decks where remand is good SoD is good also. Really covers the bases Between Scapeshift, Pod, Amulet, Tron, and other rogue-ish stratagies while at worst being a color-intensive think twice.
Tapping out early is fine, in fact, it's the only safe time. Scapeshift needs 7-8 lands to kill you. You should be countering their early ramp plays, and trying to tempo them out. You do not ever win the long-game. It's really like Tron in that sense. Clique + Geist is your best answer to these types of decks imho. Also...YP...in a reactive deck that wants the game to go to turn 15? Seems like an odd choice. Why would they increase when Burn is as cheap and a much better deck? They're niche at best. Well, it's not TT because TT is CA+ (cast + flashback), whereas you might have to just cycle SoD, instead of 'countering' a pod activation or what not.
I agree with definitely trying to tempo them out and I think the movement towards running a full 4 lightning helix because of burn and delver that is easier than it was with other threats. Also out of the SB I would suggest counterflux because it is hard for them to answer and then all you have to worry about out of their SB is boseiju, who shelters all. Dispel is also a good option in a counter war
His only innovation is removing all the tec edges from the main deck to play more fetches and sulfur falls. He has 1 wrath, 3 DTT and 1 revelation at the bottom. I guess his sideboard is also cut off. EDIT he has a spellskite and 2 counter flux hidden
I don't like these lists without hardly any card draw. He is also dealing himself a lot of damage for marginal gain to make his Digs a bit better (playing 9 fetches). Having less card draw also makes Dig a bit worse. Not sure I like that. I also was never a fan of Mana Leak in a deck with Path to Exile...it's so bad. SB is also kind of wonky, but that's his choice. I like boarding into a more pro-active gameplan. Here's my list:
I might try cerebral vortex I think it's certainly an interesting card but I think it might be too risky against decks like burn and delver. I agree that think twice is just bad and desperate ravings is quite bad depending on the number of cards you have in hand of course. 3 sulfur falls is also too many 2 is max for most people on those I suggest adding a 4th flooded strand or adding an arid mesa.
It lumps all urzatron decks into one category, but that would only increase the percentage of control decks meaning that it would support my hypothesis further that control is under appreciated.
I'm not going to get into all the reasons as to why MTG Top 8 is a crap source. But I will just say this.
Since 10/22, they have added 3 paper events to their dataset.
Since 10/22, we have added 19 to our dataset (and I didn't even update it today).
That alone should be more than enough information to assess the comprehensiveness of their "metagame" stats.
Ok so I just used the MTGO and paper data here and I calculated the percent for each category - aggro 37.84%, control 10.81%, combo 30.16% - they don't add up to 100 because I only looked at decks with over 1% total share because those are the decks that you are likely to see in a real meta at any given time the others are questionable. P.S. I included jund in control even though I'm not sure I would really call it a control deck sometimes.
that because pure combo doesn't exist anymore (in large part). In a rock paper scissor system if scissor (combo) doesn't exist, rock (control) never wins, instead we have now rocks with pointy edge (control deck with combo finisher, like shift).
- L
I don't really know if there are that many control decks that have combo finishes - twin is a combo deck, scapeshift is a combo decks with control elements but it is very much a combo, ascendancy storm is combo, the only combo/control decks I can think of off the top of my head that are any good are kiki-jiki UWR and UW tron/Mono U tron and they represent a very small portion of the meta.
While the format being dominated by burn and delver isn't great, I am happy that some different decks are getting the spotlight instead of pod, jund, junk, or twins. Personally I am fine with this meta because Patriot (my favorite) seems to have decent match ups against both.
I play UWR control and I also do very well against the popular decks right now I just think it would be better to have a stronger representation of different archetypes
It lumps all urzatron decks into one category, but that would only increase the percentage of control decks meaning that it would support my hypothesis further that control is under appreciated.
I'm not going to get into all the reasons as to why MTG Top 8 is a crap source. But I will just say this.
Since 10/22, they have added 3 paper events to their dataset.
Since 10/22, we have added 19 to our dataset (and I didn't even update it today).
That alone should be more than enough information to assess the comprehensiveness of their "metagame" stats.
Ok so I just used the MTGO and paper data here and I calculated the percent for each category - aggro 37.84%, control 10.81%, combo 30.16% - they don't add up to 100 because I only looked at decks with over 1% total share because those are the decks that you are likely to see in a real meta at any given time the others are questionable. P.S. I included jund in control even though I'm not sure I would really call it a control deck sometimes.
Alright so I haven't been on mtgtop8 in a while because we have been out of modern season for a while and I am in university and things are picking up, but when I went there today what I saw bothered me slightly. The current breakdown has aggro at 50% that, IMO, is way to high for any of the one categories. When you look at it Burn, Delver, and Affinity are all hyper aggressive strategies that generally do the same types of things. When you look at control and see that it makes up 17% of the meta I get the feeling that it is really being neglected by WOTC. When is the last time that wizards really printed a card (besides snapcaster) that is a 4 of in any modern control deck? I think that there needs to be a push by wizards to support a more balanced meta in modern. I think they can do that by simply reprinting a card like counterspell. Albeit counterspell would probably see play in scapeshift, twin, and delver it would certainly give control more appeal to players. It seems like every time wizards releases new cards that could see play in control they purposely attempt to decrease the power level just enough to make it unplayable. If you look at a format like legacy there is a much more even balance between the archetypes 38% aggro, 37% control, 24% combo. I think such a breakdown would be healthy for any format especially modern. Hopefully wizards can do something to fix this because I think it is unhealthy for a format to be so skewed to one type of play-style/archetype
MTG Top 8 is not a reliable source for archetype classification. I remember them counting RG Tron as a Control deck.
It lumps all urzatron decks into one category, but that would only increase the percentage of control decks meaning that it would support my hypothesis further that control is under appreciated.
Alright so I haven't been on mtgtop8 in a while because we have been out of modern season for a while and I am in university and things are picking up, but when I went there today what I saw bothered me slightly. The current breakdown has aggro at 50% that, IMO, is way to high for any of the one categories. When you look at it Burn, Delver, and Affinity are all hyper aggressive strategies that generally do the same types of things. When you look at control and see that it makes up 17% of the meta I get the feeling that it is really being neglected by WOTC. When is the last time that wizards really printed a card (besides snapcaster) that is a 4 of in any modern control deck? I think that there needs to be a push by wizards to support a more balanced meta in modern. I think they can do that by simply reprinting a card like counterspell. Albeit counterspell would probably see play in scapeshift, twin, and delver it would certainly give control more appeal to players. It seems like every time wizards releases new cards that could see play in control they purposely attempt to decrease the power level just enough to make it unplayable. If you look at a format like legacy there is a much more even balance between the archetypes 38% aggro, 37% control, 24% combo. I think such a breakdown would be healthy for any format especially modern. Hopefully wizards can do something to fix this because I think it is unhealthy for a format to be so skewed to one type of play-style/archetype
Tried your list on multiple occasions I had dead treasure cruises sitting in my hand because I didn't have enough in my graveyard to fuel them. Therefore I am still in camp snapcaster.
I am thinking 4x Bolt, 4x Helix, and 3x Electrolyze. Seems pretty good right now...
You can show my decklist in my signature.
4x bolt 4x helix and 3x electrolyze are pretty good.
And then, -3 snapcaster mage +3 treasure cruise. I love this card and I test this change.
In the first local tournment I arrived 1th without snapcaster mage.
My deck works very well now. I draw as an Rg Tron deck and I am never in topdeck.
You can try my decklist....and you can explain me your opinions, after your testing.
On the topic of helix I think 4 is definitely a justifiable number personally I'll stick to 3, but I really don't think cutting 3 snapcasters is a good idea at all. 3 delve spells IMO is almost to many in any list and I don't even know if treasure cruise is the best delve spell for this type of.
Nice value in these two foil planeswalkers will definitely be buying at least one of these if not more once I see the list of other goodies in this treat box.
I pretty assume much everyone who says that a control deck is dead and needs to be "more proactive" and then lists off a bunch of mediocre, midrangey nonsense either does not know what control is about in the first place, doesn't know what proactive even means, or is simply trolling. And personally, I would prefer to play against delver every round of a modern event than against an assortment of twin, pod, and the rock. I've never had even a small problem beating the new delver decks with my current list even when they resolve cruise several times in a game. Awesome card draw spells are only as good as the cards you have to draw into, and the cards they have rarely matter. Literally the only card they can have that I'm actually worried about is blood moon from the side which is easily beatable.
Thank you finally a voice of reason on here oh my, all the people screaming the sky is falling because of delver are really starting to tick me off. We have no problem with delver and I play USA control too and people are the same over there with no real rational at all. The meta is relatively slow besides burn and delver burn is an easier matchup with my USA deck but delver is easy for both my decks to deal with. With the absence of tron and scapeshift lately in the meta with control being less expected we seem to have the upper hand more often than not. Reactive decks only struggle when there are threats that they can't deal with aka thrun and I haven't seen thrun in a while so my life has become a lot easier as a control player.
This deck is dead. It's designed to beat obsolete strategies, and cannot compete against the new breed of Delver, Burn, and other decks that abuse Treasure Cruse.
Simply stated, against Cruse decks we don't have strong enough answers, our discard spells are weak, we can't draw cards fast enough to keep up with the threats and our win conditions are too slow.
If this deck is going to survive, the fundamental game plan has to change. Being reactive means we get run over for the reasons stated above. Being more proactive with more main deck life gain, faster card draw, and threats of our own that disrupt their strategy are probably the way forward.
Cards like Kitchen Finks and Traft that don't care about Vapour Snag, Bolts or Spell Pierce. Planewalkers that demand attention, like Elspeth or Gidean, that likewise ignore Snags and Bolts or happily eat them to buy cards and time.
The deck is not dead being reactive is a legit strategy against both delver and burn. We can easily bring in rest in peace out of the sideboard to say no to treasure cruise if you really think it's that big of a deal. We have so many ways to deal with the threats that delver decks play they really don't bother us that much plus we have access to lots of wraths for when things get out of control. Burn is probably one of our worst matchups if we don't manage to counter enough of their threats and keep their hand size low, but we still have a chance with batterskull and sphinx's revelation and leyline out of the sb or even timely reinforcements. Planeswalkers are to slow to really help us in either the delver or burn matchups.
Containment Priest isn't a bad option. Personally, I try not to rely too heavily on creatures as part of the the prison-building regime, since even the least developed metas have creature-removal. That, and I'm in a highly developed meta myself, so I tend to stick to artifacts/enchantments for my prison pieces. There are far fewer good artifact/enchantment removal spells, and the likelihood that an opponent has one or draws into one isn't as high. (If they waste a tutor to find removal, that's fine. They lost card advantage and the removal spell can still be countered, depending on what is in my hand.) After that, spell power keeps the prison pieces on the board.
The new decks are a little light on removal spells, so nothing is popping out at me at the moment.
I do really like the new decks, but I'm not sure if any of the cards are at the caliber that I feel GAA4 requires as a bloody nasty control deck.
I agree I think that the white and the blue decks are probably the worst I might try the new teferi just because he's cool, but besides that I don't see anything else in our colors that fits the deck. I definitely think that red got spoiled this year.
I don't have any damnations and I don't really feel like dishing out 45 dollar wrath that will probably see a reprint in MM2 and the price will drop like crazy when it does; therefore, I was wondering if just running some volcanic fallouts and anger of the gods would be ok? I don't know if there are any other options. Personally I don't see too many decks that play a lot of creature with T greater than 3 and we can just spot kill the ones that do. Thanks.
My favourite magic card has to be Black Lotus. This card is the symbol of magic the gathering. It embodies the sheer power that one card can have. It's value and prestige is unmatched by any other card. It is the card that I strive to one day own a play-set of and to hang on my wall.
I agree with definitely trying to tempo them out and I think the movement towards running a full 4 lightning helix because of burn and delver that is easier than it was with other threats. Also out of the SB I would suggest counterflux because it is hard for them to answer and then all you have to worry about out of their SB is boseiju, who shelters all. Dispel is also a good option in a counter war
I might try cerebral vortex I think it's certainly an interesting card but I think it might be too risky against decks like burn and delver. I agree that think twice is just bad and desperate ravings is quite bad depending on the number of cards you have in hand of course. 3 sulfur falls is also too many 2 is max for most people on those I suggest adding a 4th flooded strand or adding an arid mesa.
I don't really know if there are that many control decks that have combo finishes - twin is a combo deck, scapeshift is a combo decks with control elements but it is very much a combo, ascendancy storm is combo, the only combo/control decks I can think of off the top of my head that are any good are kiki-jiki UWR and UW tron/Mono U tron and they represent a very small portion of the meta.
I play UWR control and I also do very well against the popular decks right now I just think it would be better to have a stronger representation of different archetypes
Ok so I just used the MTGO and paper data here and I calculated the percent for each category - aggro 37.84%, control 10.81%, combo 30.16% - they don't add up to 100 because I only looked at decks with over 1% total share because those are the decks that you are likely to see in a real meta at any given time the others are questionable. P.S. I included jund in control even though I'm not sure I would really call it a control deck sometimes.
It lumps all urzatron decks into one category, but that would only increase the percentage of control decks meaning that it would support my hypothesis further that control is under appreciated.
Tried your list on multiple occasions I had dead treasure cruises sitting in my hand because I didn't have enough in my graveyard to fuel them. Therefore I am still in camp snapcaster.
On the topic of helix I think 4 is definitely a justifiable number personally I'll stick to 3, but I really don't think cutting 3 snapcasters is a good idea at all. 3 delve spells IMO is almost to many in any list and I don't even know if treasure cruise is the best delve spell for this type of.
I don't like either in the deck they don't win the game on the spot are fragile to removal, and are sorcery speed.
Thank you finally a voice of reason on here oh my, all the people screaming the sky is falling because of delver are really starting to tick me off. We have no problem with delver and I play USA control too and people are the same over there with no real rational at all. The meta is relatively slow besides burn and delver burn is an easier matchup with my USA deck but delver is easy for both my decks to deal with. With the absence of tron and scapeshift lately in the meta with control being less expected we seem to have the upper hand more often than not. Reactive decks only struggle when there are threats that they can't deal with aka thrun and I haven't seen thrun in a while so my life has become a lot easier as a control player.
The deck is not dead being reactive is a legit strategy against both delver and burn. We can easily bring in rest in peace out of the sideboard to say no to treasure cruise if you really think it's that big of a deal. We have so many ways to deal with the threats that delver decks play they really don't bother us that much plus we have access to lots of wraths for when things get out of control. Burn is probably one of our worst matchups if we don't manage to counter enough of their threats and keep their hand size low, but we still have a chance with batterskull and sphinx's revelation and leyline out of the sb or even timely reinforcements. Planeswalkers are to slow to really help us in either the delver or burn matchups.
I agree I think that the white and the blue decks are probably the worst I might try the new teferi just because he's cool, but besides that I don't see anything else in our colors that fits the deck. I definitely think that red got spoiled this year.