Gifts as a package is bad in modern. So why do you think throwing it into a deck that already fights itself on mana is a good idea, when it makes the deck more inconsistent AND adds to you killing yourself from lifeloss?
I can't wrap my head around how people can still think that line is in any way, shape, or form competitive. A deck BUILT around Gifts doesn't work in this meta, what makes you think jamming it in a deck suddenly fixes everything?
Finished GP Boston at 11-3-1, drawing final round for prize split and ending 47th. With a win (matchup was in my favor), would've been top 25. Played against U Tron, Burn, Scapeshift, 2 UWR Control, 1 UR Twin, 2 Affinity, 2 RG Tron, 1 Melira Pod, 2 Kiki Pod. Losses came against Burn, Scapeshift, and 1 RG Tron.
I don't really post on here anymore (too much arguing around the time I stopped for me to want to keep posting) but I will say the deck will not reward you unless YOU put time into building it YOUR way. One of the major advantages of Faeries is that you only have ~40 cards that are musts in the entire deck, and some of those are just generalized. Build YOUR style. The guy who just went 12-3 at Minneapolis? He and I compared decks at the end of the tournament. We were off by over 25 cards between main and side, and neither of us disliked each others decks. Play YOUR way instead of thinking that there is one "good" way to build/play it.
If you're having issues with pod, look towards sweepers. I play Drown In Sorrow, have played BSZ. I've noted some people dismissing BSZ because of Melira, but the fact is that Melira really only hits the table if they're comboing off that turn. It's an insane card if they don't have melira out.
I don't want to be down on this deck, as it's something I really want to see succeed. Having said that, in all of my testing with various lists, it just feels like a worse version of other tempo and/or tempo-control decks already available in the format. Is there a major incentive to playing this list over, say, a UWR Flash, UWR Geist, or even the UR Delver/Pyromancer lists we've seen? The deck just feels like you're giving up so many tools for the sake of playing Bitterblossom.
cool. don't let the door hit you on the way out.
rather tired of you coming in every two pages saying "oh, i wish this would work. but it's just so terrible. " either actually contribute something useful or kindly click the back button if you enter the thread.
Guys stop saying Serum Visions helps us finding bitterblossom, it's a good card ideed but even Ponder wasn't good at it during Lorwyn block, why Serum would be Modern material for us... If you have only 2 in the deck you are thinking at it as late draw not as turn1... Now that a decklist did top16 everybody are good on SOFAF while I said always it's the best sword for us if you want to run any sword...
The manabase is good vs Blood Moon but quite hard to cast a turn 1 discard spell, that's why he's playing spell snare and even more from sideboard. This setup is exposed to affinity even in postboarded games... Spellskite is a target for the same spells coming in for bitterblossom, at least remember it...
On a different note, something about the idea of toying around with an Esper list is growing with me. Path, Resto, and Rev are all nice. But all I can think about is the dream of Bitterblossom+Ephara.
I'll just say this on the swords discussion: protection has never been relevant for them. It is INCREDIBLY situational, and should be looked at as a bonus. You play a sword for the two additional abilities it gives you. Discussions shouldn't hinge on pro-colors, they should hinge on "what kind of value do I want to get from this."
Apparently you haven't seen that three of the six Faeries players are 5-2 or better, with the second best game-win percentage of any archetype? I agree with most of what you said other than that point.
Aside from my own selfish desire to see the price of Bitterblossom drop a bit so it's easier for me to get my playset, I'd love to see Faeries do well here. Faeries is my favorite deck in Modern, possibly my favorite deck ever. I just don't think it's arrived at the level of potential it's going to reach yet. I also think it's a largely misunderstood deck that isn't being piloted to 100% efficiency by most who play it.
It be a fearsome beastie to tame.
I don't expect it to Top 8. I want it to, but I don't expect it to happen. Especially not with the other action we're seeing.
As a lifelong Chicago Bears fan, it's a feeling I'm quite familiar with.
I'm a Fae player who is an Eagles fan. You do not know real pain
1) Why are half the decks here? Most have never top 16'd a GP, or even been relevant meta-game decks. You want to tell me Assault Loam, Balance Combo, or Esper Zur are currently meta players? The point of the Established deck section is decks that have the power level to compete with the best decks in modern, but isn't good enough to be considered the top of the meta. Faeries was THE dominant deck in both its Standard iteration and its Extended iteration. That alone gives it enough of a pedigree to warrant being here for the time being.
2) I like how you say it's "not working" one week after the banlist. Clearly you must have some obscene amounts of testing versus proven meta decks? Verifiable data? No? Then how do you think you coming in here and saying "its not working" is either a relevant comment or one that is even true? You seems to have literally NO playtesting experience with it, so it is mind-numbing to have you pull something like that out. At the LEAST you could read the 8 pages that have been contributed to in the past week in this very thread. You want data? We have dozens of decklists, at least 2 tournament reports at GPTs, and a fairly large discourse on matchups. Yet you seem to be above looking at all that.
3) Again with the arrogance. I'm not really going to waste a time dignifying this with a response, beyond that Grixis Fae has been/is being discussed in this forum, and many, myself included, have actually put the hours in with both variants and have already said in this very thread that it is more than likely inferior to UB Fae.
Either contribute something in a positive light or leave the thread. I don't like being rude to people, but I'm also not going to sugarcoat that I think people who do posts like this are a waste of time and energy for anyone who even looks at it. If you want to contribute relevant discussion, I'm all for it.
1) The subtext under the Established forum title says "Tournament decks with results". Care to link some UB Fae tournament results for us to look at?
2) Well no I dont have some obscene amount of play testing against UB Fae, but lets compare it to Zoo. I think any reasonable person would define Zoo as "working at or near Tier 1 level". That deck has had the same amount of time to test as Fae, yet no one is questioning its viability. If zoo and ub fae were race cars that started at the same time, Zoo is like a supercharged Mustang against a ford focus hybrid. I have quite a few videos of my deck fighting UB Fae and Zoo. UB Fae is...not working. I don't know how else to say it. Unless a major break though happens, the deck is to be considered fringe viability AT BEST. Again I am speaking of UB Fae specifically, not referring to UR fae which actually has some legs in this format.
3) I'm not trying to be arrogant I just don't like wasting time. The old cliche "Don't throw good money after bad" seems to apply here. I believe UB Fae does not work. If you think I am wrong please link me a list that I can test with. I think the only way Fae works is in a UR shell or a Light Fae grixis shell that does not attempt to make use of the Tribal, only yses the Fae cards that are good on their own.
Zoo as people are testing it has not existed in Modern for three years. It has no tournament results. It is EXACTLY like UB Faeries in this instance if we are speaking in a vacuum, irregardless of what people think/what its past modern accomplishments are. And even if we take into account past achievements in modern, you're yet again doing a bad comparison, because Zoo HAS existed in this format, and people have (three years ago) gotten to play the deck in this format. Compared to Fae, which is a new variable to the format. But no, let's use the comparison that paints it in a worse picture for the argument.
Just because you tested UB Faeries against Zoo (arguably the hardest matchup) and won doesn't mean the deck is a waste of time with fringe viability. By that logic, Tron must be trash because Affinity spanks it, right?
Whether or not you believe the archetype/deck works, I really could care less. This thread is littered with decklists. If you can't look through it for decent ones, I'm not going to waste my time linking them for you.
1) How is the UB Fae primer in the Established section when it hasn't even proven itself to be viable, let alone tournament verified?
2) The UB Fae strat is really not working. It just gets smoked by to many decks on the field, and it doesn't have enough matches that it dominates. Agree or Disagree?
3) When people start admitting to themselves that UB Fae is not viable, will this thread return to discussion of the much more viable UR Fae? Will Grixis miniFae be looked at?
1) Why are half the decks here? Most have never top 16'd a GP, or even been relevant meta-game decks. You want to tell me Assault Loam, Balance Combo, or Esper Zur are currently meta players? The point of the Established deck section is decks that have the power level to compete with the best decks in modern, but isn't good enough to be considered the top of the meta. Faeries was THE dominant deck in both its Standard iteration and its Extended iteration. That alone gives it enough of a pedigree to warrant being here for the time being.
2) I like how you say it's "not working" one week after the banlist. Clearly you must have some obscene amounts of testing versus proven meta decks? Verifiable data? No? Then how do you think you coming in here and saying "its not working" is either a relevant comment or one that is even true? You seems to have literally NO playtesting experience with it, so it is mind-numbing to have you pull something like that out. At the LEAST you could read the 8 pages that have been contributed to in the past week in this very thread. You want data? We have dozens of decklists, at least 2 tournament reports at GPTs, and a fairly large discourse on matchups. Yet you seem to be above looking at all that.
3) Again with the arrogance. I'm not really going to waste a time dignifying this with a response, beyond that Grixis Fae has been/is being discussed in this forum, and many, myself included, have actually put the hours in with both variants and have already said in this very thread that it is more than likely inferior to UB Fae.
Either contribute something in a positive light or leave the thread. I don't like being rude to people, but I'm also not going to sugarcoat that I think people who do posts like this are a waste of time and energy for anyone who even looks at it. If you want to contribute relevant discussion, I'm all for it.
2
I can't wrap my head around how people can still think that line is in any way, shape, or form competitive. A deck BUILT around Gifts doesn't work in this meta, what makes you think jamming it in a deck suddenly fixes everything?
2
1
If you're having issues with pod, look towards sweepers. I play Drown In Sorrow, have played BSZ. I've noted some people dismissing BSZ because of Melira, but the fact is that Melira really only hits the table if they're comboing off that turn. It's an insane card if they don't have melira out.
1
cool. don't let the door hit you on the way out.
rather tired of you coming in every two pages saying "oh, i wish this would work. but it's just so terrible. " either actually contribute something useful or kindly click the back button if you enter the thread.
2
You....really make my brain hurt.
1
1
1
I'm a Fae player who is an Eagles fan. You do not know real pain
1
Zoo as people are testing it has not existed in Modern for three years. It has no tournament results. It is EXACTLY like UB Faeries in this instance if we are speaking in a vacuum, irregardless of what people think/what its past modern accomplishments are. And even if we take into account past achievements in modern, you're yet again doing a bad comparison, because Zoo HAS existed in this format, and people have (three years ago) gotten to play the deck in this format. Compared to Fae, which is a new variable to the format. But no, let's use the comparison that paints it in a worse picture for the argument.
Just because you tested UB Faeries against Zoo (arguably the hardest matchup) and won doesn't mean the deck is a waste of time with fringe viability. By that logic, Tron must be trash because Affinity spanks it, right?
Whether or not you believe the archetype/deck works, I really could care less. This thread is littered with decklists. If you can't look through it for decent ones, I'm not going to waste my time linking them for you.
1
1) Why are half the decks here? Most have never top 16'd a GP, or even been relevant meta-game decks. You want to tell me Assault Loam, Balance Combo, or Esper Zur are currently meta players? The point of the Established deck section is decks that have the power level to compete with the best decks in modern, but isn't good enough to be considered the top of the meta. Faeries was THE dominant deck in both its Standard iteration and its Extended iteration. That alone gives it enough of a pedigree to warrant being here for the time being.
2) I like how you say it's "not working" one week after the banlist. Clearly you must have some obscene amounts of testing versus proven meta decks? Verifiable data? No? Then how do you think you coming in here and saying "its not working" is either a relevant comment or one that is even true? You seems to have literally NO playtesting experience with it, so it is mind-numbing to have you pull something like that out. At the LEAST you could read the 8 pages that have been contributed to in the past week in this very thread. You want data? We have dozens of decklists, at least 2 tournament reports at GPTs, and a fairly large discourse on matchups. Yet you seem to be above looking at all that.
3) Again with the arrogance. I'm not really going to waste a time dignifying this with a response, beyond that Grixis Fae has been/is being discussed in this forum, and many, myself included, have actually put the hours in with both variants and have already said in this very thread that it is more than likely inferior to UB Fae.
Either contribute something in a positive light or leave the thread. I don't like being rude to people, but I'm also not going to sugarcoat that I think people who do posts like this are a waste of time and energy for anyone who even looks at it. If you want to contribute relevant discussion, I'm all for it.