Since the discussion came up again I will throw in my 2 cents as well.
First of all be aware that it is mostly some of the regulars in this thread that are unhappy with it (the new thread). While some of the newer players have more of a hard time to grasp what's going on here and repeatedly mentioned a splitting. With all it's different playstyles and color combinations Death and Taxes is not an easy deck to start with. For the long-time players it is no problem to have it all in one thread because they get all the concepts of the deck, have played with all the different color combinations etc. They can look through it. But for a newer one this thread can be much more confusing.
That's also one of the reasons why the same questions are getting brought up a lot - the previous questions and answers are hard to find in this thread. That's one of the downsides of having it all in one thread. There are multiple ways to help in this regard, like an extensive FAQ could be very helpful (for example "how do I sideboard against Jund?" - a question that gets brought up like every five pages). Or to make one big "hatebears" thread with all its different substyles and color combinations in own subthreads.
You mentioned the upside of having it all together is that the different versions can learn and profit from each other. This is clearly true but this also works as good if it's splitted up in different threads. For example when Grim Flayer came up: If you play Jund and are interested in additional opinions you could just go to the Abzan thread and read there. It's two clicks away. I think newer players learn quicker and profit more if it is clearly organized and structured, while older players who might want to innovate more can make the effort to click on a second thread. There is much to be gained in having specific threads as it allows for more focussed discussion.
You might agree with this or not - up to you. I definitely did not think that it would create this much of a discussion especially not with so many very negative comments. I think it is profitable to have different threads (like BGx does) you seem to disagree. One way or the other there is no need go get offensive.
It's true that D&T primer threads have so much discussion they look more like Discord servers than other mtgSalvation threads, but that doesn't mean this deck's thread(s) will improve by following other decks' examples.
Granted, the following conversation may happen a lot:
(1) "Hi everyone, I've been playing D&T for a month and keep losing to Jund. How should I tune my deck, and what do I sideboard in/out?"
(2) "What version are you running? Post a decklist so we can offer more tailored advice."
(3) "I'm on the default BW Eldrazi deck." *posts a random decklist off mtgGoldfish from any time in the past 2-9 months*
(4) "Okay, here's a couple things you can do..."
And it may seem like having sub-threads for the different variants would eliminate the repetition of (2) and (3) happening again and again, but that's really not true. The nature of a meta-deck with ~4-10 flex slots means that 'default decklists' don't solidify (even within a single variant) to nearly the same extent that they do for '3-color-efficient-goodstuff.deck' or 'optimized-goldfish-speed-combo.deck'. A customizable meta-deck is just inherently less newb friendly than a pre-constructed pre-tuned deck (in much the same way that fixing up a muscle car in your garage is inherently less newb friendly than buying one off a lot).
Plus, bad matchups are always going to get people asking for SB advice no matter how variant-specific the thread becomes. The new Modern Jund primer is only 142 comments long and mentions Tron in 28 of those comments.
The only real way to stop (some/most?) the new-player-same-old-questions would be to post a bogus the-one-true-d&t-list.deck on the front page and lie by saying "This list is optimized for all metas; ignore all the 'D&T is a metadeck' comments in the primer introduction and thread discussions". But that's not really what this deck or this community is about, though. (IMHO)
It is the same number of moving pieces as the Lark+Mogg finisher (so maybe testing it isn't worth the effort) but I'm pretty sure the ping-loop will require far fewer clicks in MTGO.
I agree with all of Jendo's points above, but here are a few more details to think about.
1. Eldrazi Displacer is a 3cmc creature which is where you'll park your Aether Vial a lot of the time for maximum value, and don't forget that 4x Eldrazi Temple helps quite a bit with Eldrazi casting costs and activation (making it effectively a 2.5cmc creature when hardcast/activated). You'll get quite a bit of use out of Displacer by Vial'ing it in and then paying 2C to flicker something on demand (often to blank a removal spell, but also to tap-down something in an opponent's endstep so you can flicker more blockers next turn with your untapped mana and attack).
2. Copter is definitely worth testing out, and now that the price has tanked there are probably a lot more people willing to experiment. However, there are two reasons why it isn't as low on curve here as it is in other decks: Thalia and Vial. The fact that it isn't a creature means it might/will get Thalia taxed, and it also can't be Vialed in. It's basically another kind of Sword/equipment in D&T which are typically only 1-ofs or 2-ofs (when they show up at all). However, it does look good in that it's 1cmc less than a Sword and Crew cost is pretty low-resource compared to Equip costs (though you'll have to continually re-Crew); but the fact that it's a Sword that dies to Bolt/Push is a notable drawback as well.
3. Thoughtseize/Inquisition of Kozilek like Jendo said can be good when you really want more hand disruption; but they also have no synergy with Wasteland Strangler and for max value you really want to feed the Stranglers (a number of lists run a couple Relic of Progenitus for this reason). Brain Maggot is more similar to Tidehollow Sculler (in terms of synergy with Strangler) but is a 1/1 and with slightly different text formatting. The 1/1 isn't a huge issue right now since Electrolyze isn't running rampant at the moment, but the text formatting is notable. Tidehollow Sculler, has two separated paragraphs which defining the ETB and LTB triggers and allows for more flicker shenanigans than Brain Maggot's single paragraph ETB/LTB wording. (e.g. If you flicker Sculler while the first ETB effect is on the stack you get to exile two cards, one being permanently exiled; but if you flicker Maggot while the first ETB is on the stack you only exile a single card.)
4. Bearer of Silence doesn't play nicely with Vial because it must be cast for 2CB for full value. That actually makes it a lot less flexible than TKS (also at 4cmc) because of the additional color requirement and because TKS can be Vial'ed in (or flickered) for full effect.
Skip to the End step; two triggers to go on the stack, my flickerwisp returning his Opal and his Glimmervoid sac trigger. Since endstep triggers happen in APNAP (Active Player - Nonactive Player) order his trigger will be put on the stack last and therefore would resolve first and he would be forced to sac his glimmervoid.
Had I done this line of play on his turn, his Opal would have returned before glimmervoids trigger and wouldn't have been forced to sacrifice it, is this correct?
Doing it in your opponent's turn:
It gets ordered backwards, so if your flickerwisp entered the battlefield prior to the End Step of your opponent's turn, glimmervoid isn't sacrified cause wisp's ability resolves first and puts back the Opal into play. Now, if you play wisp EoT the void WILL be sacrified because the opal doesn't come back until the NEXT end step, which will happen in your turn.
603.4. A triggered ability may read “When/Whenever/At [trigger event], if [condition], [effect].” When the trigger event occurs, the ability checks whether the stated condition is true. The ability triggers only if it is; otherwise it does nothing.
Hooray for teamwork! I think it's all sorted from the above info. The trickiest bit to worry about is probably that "intervening if clause" and just how exactly every thing does/doesn't trigger/stack.
Here's three scenarios:
(1). The last artifact (Opal) is Wisp'ed away some time during any of the End/Untap/Upkeep/Draw/Main/Combat/Main phases before we're moving into the Wisp player's End step. At the beginning of the End step, because there are no artifacts out, the Glimmervoid trigger event returns true, putting the ability (the *Glimmervoid artifact check*) on the stack. The beginning of the end step also puts Wisp's "beginning of the next end step" ability on the stack. The APNAP order means the *Glimmervoid artifact check* is on the stack above the end-of-turn *Wisp return*. That means the Opal is still in exile when Glimmervoid goes to resolve the artifact check. Glimmervoid is sacrificed.
(2). The last artifact (Opal) is Wisp'ed away some time during any of the End/Untap/Upkeep/Draw/Main/Combat/Main phases before we're moving into the Glimmervoid player's End step. At the beginning of the End step, because there are no artifacts out, the Glimmervoid trigger event returns true, putting the ability (the *Glimmervoid artifact check*) on the stack. The beginning of the end step also puts Wisp's "beginning of the next end step" ability on the stack. The APNAP order means the *Glimmervoid artifact check* is on the stack below the end-of-turn *Wisp return*. That means the Opal is on the field when Glimmervoid goes to resolve the artifact check. Glimmervoid is safe.
(3). Knowing the Glimmervoid is safe in situation #2, the Wisp player tries to leave Opal on the battlefield as we're moving into the Glimmervoid player's End step. At the beginning of the End step, because there are artifacts out, the Glimmervoid trigger event returns false, doing nothing (i.e. no *Glimmervoid artifact check* on the stack). With no *Glimmervoid artifact check* ability on the stack Wisp'ing away Opal would do nothing this turn. Glimmervoid is currently safe. (Note, however, that using Wisp now would lead to situation #1 on the Wisp player's next turn.)
The tricky thing is that thanks to the "intervening if" during the Glimmervoid player's turn, their Glimmervoid is safe for their entire turn no matter when the Wisp player decides to Wisp away Opal. The only way to kill that Glimmervoid during the Glimmer player's turn is to Wisp the artifact away before EoT (so the Glimmervoid trigger event puts the ability on the stack), let the *Wisp return* resolve putting Opal back on the field, then use a second Wisp to juggle the Opal back out before the *Glimmervoid artifact check* goes to resolve.
Well... all that or just give them the ol' razzle-dazzle.
At first glance, it looks super slow without any acceleration from Vial and has a lot of symmetric taxes. And how do you deal with a Goyf, or basically any other bigger-than-a-bear threat?
This thread (D&T) is just a a lot more lively, as evidenced by all three sequential D&T Primer threads' 301+495+114=910 total pages' worth of contentdiscussionargument fun!
To everyone who was excited about testing a Smuggler's Copter or two in your D&T lists but never pulled the trigger when they were $10 or so each copy... Good news everyone!
I like that it can get really big if left unchecked, but Mirran Crusader is probably still better since it dodges black removal (which is going to be pretty popular coming up).
Warrior actually reminds me a lot of Blade Splicer in a flicker-for-3/3-boardstate-change sort of way. Not sure if that 3/2 body is worth the first ETB being conditional, though.
No exile/process requirements means this will be easier to flicker for value (lower variance) but will mean the Wisp/Sculler bonus removal is off the table (lower power ceiling). It'll be a fun one to playest.
Eldrazi Displacer approves. Get back so many good stuff. This might even push GW DnT further ahead and can make the LD package really strong
Yeah, there's a lot of neat 3-drops this set.
That Renegade Rallier you posted definitely looks the best so far; like a conditional E.Wit when Revolt is online but with a to-the-battlefield (free cast) upside.
I think Rishkar, Peema Renegade looks pretty good for GW lists too; the ETB pump doesn't need Revolt and it acts like a mini Cryptolith Rite on-a-stick. Looks good for green ramp into CoCo or Gavony activations.
In black, Yahenni, Undying Partisan looks like it will play well with Vial combat tricks, but it probably needs more sac fodder (than we typically have available) to be a good beater.
There's also a 3/2 Rogue that gives decent ETB value; but Bant is a tough sell when draw-a-card plus two energy isn't what we typically want/need.
Does this Deck get worse now that Fatal Push has been made?
The card itself doesn't (reliably) kill as much in our deck as Bolt does so Fatal Push isn't necessarily anti-D&T tech.
Good black removal will definitely improve other decks but it's tough to say if that strengthens enough other decks in the meta to the point where D&T becomes a worse deck.
Heck, if we're lucky it could make greedy manabase tricolor decks even more popular to the point where our GQs cancel out the improved black removal. Dust off your Mindcensors, boys!
Granted, the following conversation may happen a lot:
And it may seem like having sub-threads for the different variants would eliminate the repetition of (2) and (3) happening again and again, but that's really not true. The nature of a meta-deck with ~4-10 flex slots means that 'default decklists' don't solidify (even within a single variant) to nearly the same extent that they do for '3-color-efficient-goodstuff.deck' or 'optimized-goldfish-speed-combo.deck'. A customizable meta-deck is just inherently less newb friendly than a pre-constructed pre-tuned deck (in much the same way that fixing up a muscle car in your garage is inherently less newb friendly than buying one off a lot).
Plus, bad matchups are always going to get people asking for SB advice no matter how variant-specific the thread becomes. The new Modern Jund primer is only 142 comments long and mentions Tron in 28 of those comments.
The only real way to stop (some/most?) the new-player-same-old-questions would be to post a bogus the-one-true-d&t-list.deck on the front page and lie by saying "This list is optimized for all metas; ignore all the 'D&T is a metadeck' comments in the primer introduction and thread discussions". But that's not really what this deck or this community is about, though. (IMHO)
There doesn't seem to be much love for the "one fell swoop" Disciple of the Vault+Walking Ballista gameplan because it takes so many slots to present lethal, but would the two-card combination of Mikaeus, the Unhallowed+Walking Ballista be a small enough package to be more viable?
Hulk-->(Double(as Hulk)+Seer)-->(Mikaeus+Ballista(s))
It is the same number of moving pieces as the Lark+Mogg finisher (so maybe testing it isn't worth the effort) but I'm pretty sure the ping-loop will require far fewer clicks in MTGO.
I agree with all of Jendo's points above, but here are a few more details to think about.
1. Eldrazi Displacer is a 3cmc creature which is where you'll park your Aether Vial a lot of the time for maximum value, and don't forget that 4x Eldrazi Temple helps quite a bit with Eldrazi casting costs and activation (making it effectively a 2.5cmc creature when hardcast/activated). You'll get quite a bit of use out of Displacer by Vial'ing it in and then paying 2C to flicker something on demand (often to blank a removal spell, but also to tap-down something in an opponent's endstep so you can flicker more blockers next turn with your untapped mana and attack).
2. Copter is definitely worth testing out, and now that the price has tanked there are probably a lot more people willing to experiment. However, there are two reasons why it isn't as low on curve here as it is in other decks: Thalia and Vial. The fact that it isn't a creature means it might/will get Thalia taxed, and it also can't be Vialed in. It's basically another kind of Sword/equipment in D&T which are typically only 1-ofs or 2-ofs (when they show up at all). However, it does look good in that it's 1cmc less than a Sword and Crew cost is pretty low-resource compared to Equip costs (though you'll have to continually re-Crew); but the fact that it's a Sword that dies to Bolt/Push is a notable drawback as well.
3. Thoughtseize/Inquisition of Kozilek like Jendo said can be good when you really want more hand disruption; but they also have no synergy with Wasteland Strangler and for max value you really want to feed the Stranglers (a number of lists run a couple Relic of Progenitus for this reason). Brain Maggot is more similar to Tidehollow Sculler (in terms of synergy with Strangler) but is a 1/1 and with slightly different text formatting. The 1/1 isn't a huge issue right now since Electrolyze isn't running rampant at the moment, but the text formatting is notable. Tidehollow Sculler, has two separated paragraphs which defining the ETB and LTB triggers and allows for more flicker shenanigans than Brain Maggot's single paragraph ETB/LTB wording. (e.g. If you flicker Sculler while the first ETB effect is on the stack you get to exile two cards, one being permanently exiled; but if you flicker Maggot while the first ETB is on the stack you only exile a single card.)
4. Bearer of Silence doesn't play nicely with Vial because it must be cast for 2CB for full value. That actually makes it a lot less flexible than TKS (also at 4cmc) because of the additional color requirement and because TKS can be Vial'ed in (or flickered) for full effect.
Is it #ThanksObama or #DonaldTrumpsAmerica that we use to sarcastically tweet about the tier demotion at this point?
Your Sky Hussars confuse and amaze me, friend. I am curiously awaiting the vid release.
(Also, no snark here, I'm always glad to read up on Lantern/Crucible, so keep fighting the good fight in underappreciated decks everywhere.)
Here's three scenarios:
(1). The last artifact (Opal) is Wisp'ed away some time during any of the End/Untap/Upkeep/Draw/Main/Combat/Main phases before we're moving into the Wisp player's End step. At the beginning of the End step, because there are no artifacts out, the Glimmervoid trigger event returns true, putting the ability (the *Glimmervoid artifact check*) on the stack. The beginning of the end step also puts Wisp's "beginning of the next end step" ability on the stack. The APNAP order means the *Glimmervoid artifact check* is on the stack above the end-of-turn *Wisp return*. That means the Opal is still in exile when Glimmervoid goes to resolve the artifact check. Glimmervoid is sacrificed.
(2). The last artifact (Opal) is Wisp'ed away some time during any of the End/Untap/Upkeep/Draw/Main/Combat/Main phases before we're moving into the Glimmervoid player's End step. At the beginning of the End step, because there are no artifacts out, the Glimmervoid trigger event returns true, putting the ability (the *Glimmervoid artifact check*) on the stack. The beginning of the end step also puts Wisp's "beginning of the next end step" ability on the stack. The APNAP order means the *Glimmervoid artifact check* is on the stack below the end-of-turn *Wisp return*. That means the Opal is on the field when Glimmervoid goes to resolve the artifact check. Glimmervoid is safe.
(3). Knowing the Glimmervoid is safe in situation #2, the Wisp player tries to leave Opal on the battlefield as we're moving into the Glimmervoid player's End step. At the beginning of the End step, because there are artifacts out, the Glimmervoid trigger event returns false, doing nothing (i.e. no *Glimmervoid artifact check* on the stack). With no *Glimmervoid artifact check* ability on the stack Wisp'ing away Opal would do nothing this turn. Glimmervoid is currently safe. (Note, however, that using Wisp now would lead to situation #1 on the Wisp player's next turn.)
The tricky thing is that thanks to the "intervening if" during the Glimmervoid player's turn, their Glimmervoid is safe for their entire turn no matter when the Wisp player decides to Wisp away Opal. The only way to kill that Glimmervoid during the Glimmer player's turn is to Wisp the artifact away before EoT (so the Glimmervoid trigger event puts the ability on the stack), let the *Wisp return* resolve putting Opal back on the field, then use a second Wisp to juggle the Opal back out before the *Glimmervoid artifact check* goes to resolve.
Well... all that or just give them the ol' razzle-dazzle.
At first glance, it looks super slow without any acceleration from Vial and has a lot of symmetric taxes. And how do you deal with a Goyf, or basically any other bigger-than-a-bear threat?
This thread (D&T) is just a a lot more lively, as evidenced by all three sequential D&T Primer threads' 301+495+114=910 total pages' worth of
contentdiscussionargumentfun!Flying 4/4 Geist. Mmm, mm, mmmm that's spicey.
Warrior actually reminds me a lot of Blade Splicer in a flicker-for-3/3-boardstate-change sort of way. Not sure if that 3/2 body is worth the first ETB being conditional, though.
No exile/process requirements means this will be easier to flicker for value (lower variance) but will mean the Wisp/Sculler bonus removal is off the table (lower power ceiling). It'll be a fun one to playest.
The new Expertise cards (Yahenni's Expertise,Sram's Expertise,Rishkar's Expertise, red and blue to complete the cycle?) offer a new non-Cascade way to play those 0cmc suspend cards (Restore Balance, Ancestral Vision, Living End, Wheel of Fate,
Hypergenesis, Lotus Bloom). Not having to cascade removes a huge constraint on deck construction, so this is quite a boon to players wanting to brew/play Restore Balance control decks for example.Yeah, there's a lot of neat 3-drops this set.
That Renegade Rallier you posted definitely looks the best so far; like a conditional E.Wit when Revolt is online but with a to-the-battlefield (free cast) upside.
I think Rishkar, Peema Renegade looks pretty good for GW lists too; the ETB pump doesn't need Revolt and it acts like a mini Cryptolith Rite on-a-stick. Looks good for green ramp into CoCo or Gavony activations.
In black, Yahenni, Undying Partisan looks like it will play well with Vial combat tricks, but it probably needs more sac fodder (than we typically have available) to be a good beater.
There's also a 3/2 Rogue that gives decent ETB value; but Bant is a tough sell when draw-a-card plus two energy isn't what we typically want/need.
Good black removal will definitely improve other decks but it's tough to say if that strengthens enough other decks in the meta to the point where D&T becomes a worse deck.
Heck, if we're lucky it could make greedy manabase tricolor decks even more popular to the point where our GQs cancel out the improved black removal. Dust off your Mindcensors, boys!