How about crumble to dust from bfz? It's easy to cast in terms of colour requirements but cmc could be an issue. The ability to exile a whole set of land as opposed to 1 (stone rain) and the added bonus of looking at your opponents hand and library makes this card strictly better I think.
Great against tron but could also be useful for celestial colonnade, mutavault, inkmoth shenanigans.
Its basically an upgraded Sowing Salt. Easier color requirements, and Devoid means dodging things that care about color, such as Flashfreeze. Definitely a competitive sideboard option if you expect to meet Scapeshift. Can also hit Tron pretty hard if they're not fast enough.
Thanks for the link Ashton. A very interesting breakdown of the synergistic elements of the deck. I can see why the deck works and every card in the deck has a reason for being there. That's the sign of a good deck. I'm looking forward to trying it out. If I run across any insights or tech I will post it here in the future. I have a feeling this deck has a Tier One configuration and I think it's worth finding out what it is.
I feel that way too! Looking forward to hearing about your testing. Good luck 8)
Have you tested your deck against Burn yet? The struggle for Grixis Delver against burn is real. If you've got it beat, do let us know the details. I'm definitely interested in any iteration that shores up this terrible MU.
I believe the anti-Abbot peeps are feeling the same hate/dislike for him as I did in early testing.
What many Delver pilots, who are conditioned by T1 Delvers and T2 Tasigurs need to understand is that Abbot is basically someone who comes down around the time your snapcaster is also live, and not before. But this is counter-intuitive when you look at your hand and see a red prowess guy who looks like he wants to come down early and start beating.
He tempts you to play him early, which will almost always be a farce and an exiled Kolaghan's command/snapcaster. So we can't treat him like an Elvish Visionary, and anyone who's thinking of him as the red snapcaster has to lower their bar for him.
I've personally stopped trying to run him simply because my other creatures do better than become cantrips. Delver is my T1 threat, which outweighs his being a weak topdeck, because we're a deck that wants to be able to play explosively if the game allows it. Young P is our mid-late game threat, that can potentially start running away from T2 with Probe. Snapcaster needs no explanation. Tasigur is our late-game grinder and also a potential T2 start.
The pattern is that everyone listed has the potential to hit the board T2 (or earlier) and start making waves. Abbot will never do that, and that's why I don't run him (although I still visit this thread because I just love Grixis in all its forms).
TLDR: Cast Abbot when you have 5 mana beyond T5, or 4 mana + land in hand on T5, and he'll never disappoint.
I've been playing with Abbots and Young Pyromancers and I realised this is not a good wincon for me. Even if they help to stabilise, they don't win games. I've changed my approach to this deck and now I'm playing 3 delve creatures and Olivia MD, no Abbots, no YP, and it has been working better for me. It could be my playstyle and personal preference, but not running Abbots allowed me to stick 4 counterspells in MD too. Surprisingly having Lilianas and a few counters is not as bad as it seems, and it's much easier to close games with a fatty on the board.
well, this just means you are better used to a traditional control shell with counterspells. Different strokes for different folks.
I don't really like YP even though I'm running the Delver variant with tonnes of cantrips and counterspells. He just feels clunky to me, like Abbot. I feel weird having a creature in my hand that only goes live after t3-4.
It seems like you have a chip on your shoulder. If I did something to offend you personally, I apologize and invite you to PM me about it, but I hardly think the public forum is the place to voice your grievances.
I believe its just the way you wave off our concerns, which we back up with real situations, with a dismissive "I've tested this and its not the case". Examples would be like when people talk about Shoal's high probability of only countering 1 CMC, or not having blue cards in hand to pitch. Instead of using examples of why this isn't an issue or how the deck would make up for such issues, you brickwall us with "I've tested it", and the slightly infuriating "your theories mean notthing". They're not theories, they're situations that can, and will present themselves frequently. Shoal is a dual condition card - you need another blue card in hand, and that blue card MUST match the CMC of the spell you need countered. It doesn't answer anything new that we already have issues with in Delver - Abrupt Decay, for instance. You haven't really presented anything so far that isn't tackled by Dispel, for example.
I'm not "selling" a deck here. Just putting out an idea that shows initial promise. Some people don't like midrange decks, myself included. I don't feel like I'm playing Magic with those decks. They don't throw me enough decisions to make. The Bob deck is an option for Grixis players who want to play a streamlined tempo deck in their colors. If you don't like this deck, I will certainly not force you to play it or even to engage in a discourse with me about it.
Well, let's not read too much into what I'm saying you're doing. You're debating for the idea you've brought, and I'm playing devil's advocate/opposition. Isn't it perfectly normal to discuss probable improvements to Grixis Delver in a Grixis Delver thread?
I know testing and tweaking has led players (you? It seems like you take the credit, anyway) to the established Grixis Delver list, because it's the one I see people play. I just don't think that deck is very good. I think it gets much better without Delver of Secrets, which has no business in a midrange shell.
Excuse me. When did I take credit for leading a fraction of 12 million players to this established archetype? Is this character assassination?
With regards to the established deck. It's gotten itself plenty of top 8s in PTQ, WMCQs, the most recent (that I've seen) being the ManaDeprived finish by Sammy. If you don't think this deck is very good, you have to be aware you're committing, or at least proposing, an idea that will take this deck beyond 5/8 standing to the finals. Which, don't get me wrong, is great. I don't want to discourage brewing or be seen to be against new ideas, but you'll have to deal with our "theories" based on what we actually meet in real tournaments.
Testing and tweaking has also led me to certain conclusions about Delver tempo decks in Modern, and if you really doubt the relevance of the non-Grixis lists I've linked to, I'll ask you to look back at these lists again. The decks are extremely similar and they operate in nearly identical ways. The work I've done on RUG translates very well to my Grixis deck.
I respect that you've played a tonne of Tempo decks and are definitely better versed in the art of Tempo than I. I've played against RUG Delver and iGrow decks and beat both soundly with Grixis, so I can't say so far that I am impressed by either deck. Of course, my 2-3 matches against RUG can't possibly account for a "fact" that one deck is better than the other, but my impression is that RUG sacrifices a lot of control element for on-curve-Goyf and Mandrills. Things that get soundly beat by Terminate and Murderous cut without fear of Shoal.
To answer your specific questions (all according to my admittedly limited testing):
- I played against a friend's gauntlet for two days. I trust him more than FNMs.
- This deck does beat Soul Sisters and Burn.
- It's easy to out-tempo the Finks decks, especially with Undoing post-board.
Could you elaborate more on the burn match up? I am really interested in this match up. As we already know, the established Grixis Delver is bad against burn and resorts to vampiric links and dragon's claws. If your iteration can beat 12bolts, you've got my full attention.
Also, I don't know why you used the word "theorycrafting" so much? I definitely didn't say it. It's for sure not a word. I think you mean "theorizing?" Been looking for some insight on this actually.
Eh, don't worry too much about that. I picked it up from gaming forums, most typically video game forums. they use "theorycraft" to describe how they think something will work well in lieu of a content update with new equipment etc. Eg "I think the new Marauder set for demon hunter will work very well with the Pride helm because you can spam cluster arrows" would be a person theorycrafting. You're right in that "theorizing" is the proper english word. If the word annoys you, I'll stick to the proper word =p
I don't get the point of being so reluctant with Disrupting Shoal. Delver is meant to be a tempo deck, and using DS in a shell with lots of card draw (thanks Bob) can be efficient. In any case your remark is out of subject, no matter what deceitful courtesy you add to it. This thread is meant to discuss Grixis delver strategies, and as far as I know, BRU tempo deck using Delver of Secrets fits this denomination. Furthermore, with a shift of meta going to grindier and more controlish strategies, the idea to transform the traditionnal Grixis delver into a faster tempo deck, which it used to follow before TC's ban, is anything but wrong. Grixis delver has no chance of winning the attrition war against GBx and Grixis/Jeskai/Esper control can be a pain. The Temur version is doing this move at the cost of losing Terminate and, in a less critical way, Kolaghan's Command. Staying on the Grixis spectrum allows you to keep good removal and is open to various strategies, with the addition of discard and/or efficient card draw. If you're interessted in results with THIS very list of Grixis delver, then please refer to any good netdecking website.
If you haven't gotten the point you must not be reading our posts at all. Might want to double back and see the concerns raised by theAller and myself, from playing Grixis Delver against the meta at events.
You've misread what I meant regarding "THIS" delver deck. THIS delver deck simply means HIS Grixis delver. You know, the one he's selling? Let me lay out the sequence of events for you, simplified:
1. Ashton comes into the GRIXIS DELVER thread and tells us: Grixis Delver tuned for tempo and sacrificing midrange, dropping Tasi, Angler, Cut for Bob, Swiftie and Shoal is the BOMB.
2. theAller, myself and a 1 other poster voice our concerns. Mostly over Delver flip and Shoal CA.
3. Ashton: None of your theorycrafting means ANYTHING, because I've tested it and it plays well.
4. Myself: You haven't posted any results with this deck, and you're doing plenty of theorycrafting yourself.
5. Ashton: HAH! You've obviously not seen my links to TEMUR DELVER AND COUNTERCAT.
6. Myself: I'm only interested in THIS deck (HIS deck, the one he's singing about)
In any case, we're just presenting legitimate concerns. You see, UR Delver before the Cruise banning was a great tempo deck. All the testing, tweaking by players has led us to this iteration of Delver in grixis colors. Those who wanted more tempo went to RUG. Splashing black gave access to more solid removals etc etc I think we all know the story, I won't regurgitate what's already on the first page of this primer.
When Ashton tries to go tempo in this Grixis shell, its basically challenging the whole point of going URb, but thats not the issue I've found and I think brewing is great and awesome. (I've brewed my own crazy Grixis burn/delver myself) But its one thing to bring up your radical change for discussion, its another to swipe away any and all criticism with "your theorycrafting means nothing. i've tested this". tested against WHAT? A goldfish? All tier 1 decks? FNM? How did it fare against Soul Sisters? How does it deal with Kitchen Finks/E.Witness/Restoration angels? Can it race burn?
Anything we bring up is swept aside by "I've tested this", and when I call it out, he quotes OTHER Decks that aren't even Grixis colors.
*18 creatures - According to my testing, the minimum count for flipping Delver is 23 Instants and Sorceries. I try to fit 25 when I can, and run 24 in this list.
*Shoal - Delver Tempo decks cannot exist in Modern without this card. The non-Shoal Delver decks I've seen running around - mainly, most iterations of Grixis Delver - are firmly midrange for this reason. I have zero interest in playing a midrange deck, and if I did want to, I'd play a better midrange deck (Jund or Abzan).
Shoal sometimes nabs a two-drop with this list, but often, Mental Misstep mode is good enough. If we can protect Pyromancer or Confidant for that crucial tap-out turn, the game is ours.
*Undoing, Pierce, Remand - All of these cards do work against higher-curve decks. This list is built to abuse Day's Undoing, but I focused on beating aggro decks preboard and midrange decks after siding. I think you know what Pierce and Remand can do in tempo decks, so for Undoing, I'll refer you to the iGrow thread. The bottom of the primer has some articles I've written about how to cast the card and why it's so strong in tempo.
I tested all day and am trying a BUG shell right now. Tarmogoyf plugs a lot of holes and Pack Rat is another kill-him-right-now-or-you-lose threat. I also really like Decay in this meta. My creature suite is 4 Bob, 4 Goyf, 4 Delver, 2 Snapcaster, 3 Rat. Shoal is also better in this list since I run a full set of Simic Charm to get Spell Snare mode more often.
Got it for the sideboard and Shoal, still not convinced about a couple of things:
* Spells count for Delver. I still think your Delvers won't flip sometimes. But I guess that's a risk you are willing to take.
* When you say that protecting Delver, Bob or Pyromancer for 1 turn with Shoal will win you the game, you are oversimplifying things, and you know it. It's not that easy. Protecting Bob or Pyro for 1 turn won't win you the game. Not even close. It's a good move, but it won't win you the game.
But I see you are still switching colors and cards so probably you need a bit more testing to decide what you really want to be doing. To me, Temur is better than Grixis for the tempo gameplan you have in mind. So you'll probably just end up going back to Temur. But I might be wrong.
P.S. Your iGrow thing looks like a lot of fun. I'm currently playing Undoing Affinity and having very nice results, it amazes me how nobody is trying out this card. The only problem is people tend to quit on my face on Cockatrice when I cast Day's Undoing.
He'll continue to tell you that it works because he tested it, that your theories and worries hold no water because of his experience playing another deck entirely.
By "minimum count," I mean that I personally wouldn't play a Delver deck with less than 23 Instants and Sorceries. If you want to see successful Modern Delver lists with even less than 23 I/S, Google the BoREMANDos lists of 2012. As for Shoal, all of your theorizing still doesn't mean anything. You'll never convince a person with actual experience of something I just haven't found true. And yes, Confidant, Pyromancer, and Delver are all well worth two cards to save, especially when it means opponents won't have a chance to remove them again. If it wasn't worth it, I wouldn't have built the deck.
What do you mean by "in a Grixis deck?" This color combination is supposed to care about a specific thing? Shoal might (definitely) be bad in your midrange Delver builds, but it's necessary in a tempo deck.
I don't think I need to elaborate on why Delver will flip more frequently if you have more inst/sorcs in your deck. Seriously. Not worth arguing over basic math and common sense.
I guess the question begged continues to be: why use 2 cards to do something that you could have accomplished with 1? With that kind of curve, are you tapping out so frequently that you need Shoal?
With regards to what I meant by Grixis: Shoal requires you to pitch a blue card. Yes, we're blue core, but all the same, I can see you getting stuck with nonblue cards and 2 mana. Just requiring 1 mana to protect our threats with Dispel, Pierce and Snare seems the more logical choice compared to Shoal.
Also, I notice you keep fending off critique with "all your theory means nothing against my real world testing", but you haven't posted any results or match reports. We've actually played our cookie cutter grixis in tournaments; So if you're here to convince us this is the newer, sexier way to play Delver, you're going to have to do better than tell us it works or "its testing well". Example: "As a tempo deck, my build should have much more game against Tron than the Grixis Delver lists in this thread."
Isn't this sort of statement the same kind you're putting down?
I really want to know what happens when you throw 2 cards against a removal spell when facing card value opponents like kikicoco or other grixis decks who'll snapcast their bolt again. Or what happens when Delver doesn't flip by t4 and you aren't drawing Bob. So please do play against some real decks and let us know how it works out, because as you can plainly see, some of us here who are taking the effort to understand your deck, have our doubts.
*18 creatures - According to my testing, the minimum count for flipping Delver is 23 Instants and Sorceries. I try to fit 25 when I can, and run 24 in this list.
What does "minimum count" even mean? Every upkeep you get a chance to flip him, and the odds of that chance are inst&sorc:NOTinst&sorc. Its a statistic that'll apply itself over thousands of games you play. There isn't a minimum count - just the number of games you're left high and dry with a Fugitive Wizard. Even at 27/28 inst/sorc I find myself with an unflipped delver from turns 1 through 5.
I think Disrupting Shoal isn't the best choice in a Grixis deck, either. While tempo can afford to overlook card quality, and sacrifice card advantage with Vapor Snag purely to buy time, this is not merely Vapor Snag. This is 2 of your blues for 1 of their 1 mana spells. And unlike Spell Snare which hits value cards like Voice of Resurgence, Tarmogoyf, Dark Confidant and haymakers like Pyroclasm, this promises very little for 2 blue cards in your hand. At best, you'll pitch a Probe to counter a Path to Exile, but do you have any creature worth saving with 2 cards? You don't have Tasigur.
* Spell Snare is for Pyroclasm when you go with a Delver/Pyromancer plan. Do not waste it on Scrying or stuff like that. They will get their lands. Your gameplan, and here I disagree with MarcWizard, shouldn't be to try to attack their manabase. All you need is a clock and the ability to delay their big spells. Gitaxian is great because it allows you to see if they have Pyroclasm or not.
So you agree on the clock and delay tactic. May I ask why you feel waiting for and countering the spells are a necessarily better plan than stopping the Tron? I feel that once Tron is assembled it becomes only a matter of time before you don't have counterspells for their next bomb. And if that bomb is Karn you have a real problem. Where possible, I always stop/delay the Tron from assembling.
Random thoughts after playing x amount of Delver games on cockatrice over the last several days
- I've gotten enough one-land hands without card draw that I need to either bump my land count from 18 to 19 or up my Gitaxian Probe count from 3 to 4. Probably the latter, as much as I hate taking damage from Probes.
- Tron really, really knocks the crap out Delver. I will often get one game out of three if I'm lucky and I draw an amazing hand. Otherwise, I die.
- Why does what feels like 40% of modern players play Tron on cockatrice? I'm ready to buy every copy of Wurmcoil Engine ever made just so I can burn them all in a huge bonfire and then piss on its ashes
Actually a serious question When playing against Tron, what do you guys normally try to counterspell and/or discard (after sideboarding) against Tron? I've tried countering the combo pieces like Ancient Stirrings and Expedition Map, but Tron usually has too many of them. I've also tried ripping Wurmcoil out of my opponents hand with Thoughtseize, but once my opponent gets Eye of Ugin plus the three Urza lands, it's over (he'll be able to summon Wurmcoil Engine every turn).
I need some advice on this because I don't think I'm doing it right.
A general question about Spellpierce/Spellsnare - On game one I often throw them at the first target that presents itself, because I'm worried I won't have any targets later in the game. Once my opponent plays enough land he can get around Spellpierce, and Spellsnare often doesn't get enough targets. Do you guys even bother casting them asap, or do you wait until you have enough mana to play a threat and keep an island open to pierce/snare the removal?
I beat Tron by clocking them. I don't accept starting hands without 2 threats, especially in Game 1. In G2, artifact destruction and molten rain/fulminators if you have em. Here's an example of what happened at my last match against a tron:
G1
I have a Tasigur, some other disruption and a land. No thought Scour. I mulligan. I draw Delver, Delver, Fetch, swamp and Leak and 1 more card. Easy keep.
I basically run away with 2 Delvers. At one point he lands Wurmcoil when I don't have counters, so I terminate the 6/6 and bolt the 3/3 with LIFELINK. And ignore the deathtouch.
G2
I've sideboarded in 2 molten rains and 1 vandalblast. I lose this round simply because I get stuck on one land. Kept a risky One-Lander with Delver but not much else. Learned a lesson here.
G3
I keep a 2-lander with delver, vandalblast.
T1 Delver, pass. He drops map, pass.
T2 I vandalblast his map. He has this pained look, and I know he's in trouble. If he could see the molten rain my hand he would probably have scooped at that point. Long story short, I rain his powerplant and he never gets past 1 Tower before my Delver finishes the job.
You can't beat Tron toe-to-toe. Slow em down by taking out maps and snaring/piercing Sylvan Scrying. You can't keep them off forever, but you don't have to. Just make sure you clock them. Multitasking between keeping your threat alive or having redundancy while also slowing them down is key. You don't want an overly aggressive hand that will let them run wild, but you can't afford to play control either.
Nearly all of the lists run either Negate, Dispel, or Countersquall out of the sideboard for this reason. Often you side out Abbot for counterspells. You seem to be calling for what people already do.
@MarcWizard: I find it interesting that very few people have actually tested Chapin's list with Bauble and Monastery Swiftspear. Or if they have tested it, then they haven't reported the results here.
Is the first paragraph addressing me? I was responding to the post above me that said he was trying Young P mainboard with counters. So I assumed he was running Abbot, Young p and Counters maindeck and not swapping them around, which is why I commented.
If the first paragraph wasn't for me then ignore this post...
Aren't we just moving backwards into regular Grixis again with Young P and counters?
I'm starting to see a pattern where people are finding their individual comfort zones or "sweet spots" in the curve somewhere between Grixis Delver/Control and Grixis Abbot. One thing to absolutely remember, though, is that being "in between" is invariably going to be worse/less efficient than either extreme, for the simple reason that Abbot is, sooner or later, going to flip up counterspells. And Delver, is going to flip less because now you are playing more creatures and lands to support the mana curve that Abbot requires.
I would advise players who are interested in "Slow Grixis" to not lean back toward Control, because that's not where your synergy lies. The deck creators have built around the Abbot (who clearly is a card that needs building around in order not to be clunky), and Young P and Delver require totally different shells to shine in. If anything, I believe the discussion on Slow Grixis will benefit greatly from more innovative additions like the now-proven Rise/Fall. Is there another amazing spell out there worth tapping mana on your turn for? I sure hope the people here find it.
Its basically an upgraded Sowing Salt. Easier color requirements, and Devoid means dodging things that care about color, such as Flashfreeze. Definitely a competitive sideboard option if you expect to meet Scapeshift. Can also hit Tron pretty hard if they're not fast enough.
Have you tested your deck against Burn yet? The struggle for Grixis Delver against burn is real. If you've got it beat, do let us know the details. I'm definitely interested in any iteration that shores up this terrible MU.
What many Delver pilots, who are conditioned by T1 Delvers and T2 Tasigurs need to understand is that Abbot is basically someone who comes down around the time your snapcaster is also live, and not before. But this is counter-intuitive when you look at your hand and see a red prowess guy who looks like he wants to come down early and start beating.
He tempts you to play him early, which will almost always be a farce and an exiled Kolaghan's command/snapcaster. So we can't treat him like an Elvish Visionary, and anyone who's thinking of him as the red snapcaster has to lower their bar for him.
I've personally stopped trying to run him simply because my other creatures do better than become cantrips. Delver is my T1 threat, which outweighs his being a weak topdeck, because we're a deck that wants to be able to play explosively if the game allows it. Young P is our mid-late game threat, that can potentially start running away from T2 with Probe. Snapcaster needs no explanation. Tasigur is our late-game grinder and also a potential T2 start.
The pattern is that everyone listed has the potential to hit the board T2 (or earlier) and start making waves. Abbot will never do that, and that's why I don't run him (although I still visit this thread because I just love Grixis in all its forms).
TLDR: Cast Abbot when you have 5 mana beyond T5, or 4 mana + land in hand on T5, and he'll never disappoint.
well, this just means you are better used to a traditional control shell with counterspells. Different strokes for different folks.
I don't really like YP even though I'm running the Delver variant with tonnes of cantrips and counterspells. He just feels clunky to me, like Abbot. I feel weird having a creature in my hand that only goes live after t3-4.
I believe its just the way you wave off our concerns, which we back up with real situations, with a dismissive "I've tested this and its not the case". Examples would be like when people talk about Shoal's high probability of only countering 1 CMC, or not having blue cards in hand to pitch. Instead of using examples of why this isn't an issue or how the deck would make up for such issues, you brickwall us with "I've tested it", and the slightly infuriating "your theories mean notthing". They're not theories, they're situations that can, and will present themselves frequently. Shoal is a dual condition card - you need another blue card in hand, and that blue card MUST match the CMC of the spell you need countered. It doesn't answer anything new that we already have issues with in Delver - Abrupt Decay, for instance. You haven't really presented anything so far that isn't tackled by Dispel, for example.
Well, let's not read too much into what I'm saying you're doing. You're debating for the idea you've brought, and I'm playing devil's advocate/opposition. Isn't it perfectly normal to discuss probable improvements to Grixis Delver in a Grixis Delver thread?
Excuse me. When did I take credit for leading a fraction of 12 million players to this established archetype? Is this character assassination?
With regards to the established deck. It's gotten itself plenty of top 8s in PTQ, WMCQs, the most recent (that I've seen) being the ManaDeprived finish by Sammy. If you don't think this deck is very good, you have to be aware you're committing, or at least proposing, an idea that will take this deck beyond 5/8 standing to the finals. Which, don't get me wrong, is great. I don't want to discourage brewing or be seen to be against new ideas, but you'll have to deal with our "theories" based on what we actually meet in real tournaments.
I respect that you've played a tonne of Tempo decks and are definitely better versed in the art of Tempo than I. I've played against RUG Delver and iGrow decks and beat both soundly with Grixis, so I can't say so far that I am impressed by either deck. Of course, my 2-3 matches against RUG can't possibly account for a "fact" that one deck is better than the other, but my impression is that RUG sacrifices a lot of control element for on-curve-Goyf and Mandrills. Things that get soundly beat by Terminate and Murderous cut without fear of Shoal.
Could you elaborate more on the burn match up? I am really interested in this match up. As we already know, the established Grixis Delver is bad against burn and resorts to vampiric links and dragon's claws. If your iteration can beat 12bolts, you've got my full attention.
Eh, don't worry too much about that. I picked it up from gaming forums, most typically video game forums. they use "theorycraft" to describe how they think something will work well in lieu of a content update with new equipment etc. Eg "I think the new Marauder set for demon hunter will work very well with the Pride helm because you can spam cluster arrows" would be a person theorycrafting. You're right in that "theorizing" is the proper english word. If the word annoys you, I'll stick to the proper word =p
If you haven't gotten the point you must not be reading our posts at all. Might want to double back and see the concerns raised by theAller and myself, from playing Grixis Delver against the meta at events.
You've misread what I meant regarding "THIS" delver deck. THIS delver deck simply means HIS Grixis delver. You know, the one he's selling? Let me lay out the sequence of events for you, simplified:
1. Ashton comes into the GRIXIS DELVER thread and tells us: Grixis Delver tuned for tempo and sacrificing midrange, dropping Tasi, Angler, Cut for Bob, Swiftie and Shoal is the BOMB.
2. theAller, myself and a 1 other poster voice our concerns. Mostly over Delver flip and Shoal CA.
3. Ashton: None of your theorycrafting means ANYTHING, because I've tested it and it plays well.
4. Myself: You haven't posted any results with this deck, and you're doing plenty of theorycrafting yourself.
5. Ashton: HAH! You've obviously not seen my links to TEMUR DELVER AND COUNTERCAT.
6. Myself: I'm only interested in THIS deck (HIS deck, the one he's singing about)
In any case, we're just presenting legitimate concerns. You see, UR Delver before the Cruise banning was a great tempo deck. All the testing, tweaking by players has led us to this iteration of Delver in grixis colors. Those who wanted more tempo went to RUG. Splashing black gave access to more solid removals etc etc I think we all know the story, I won't regurgitate what's already on the first page of this primer.
When Ashton tries to go tempo in this Grixis shell, its basically challenging the whole point of going URb, but thats not the issue I've found and I think brewing is great and awesome. (I've brewed my own crazy Grixis burn/delver myself) But its one thing to bring up your radical change for discussion, its another to swipe away any and all criticism with "your theorycrafting means nothing. i've tested this". tested against WHAT? A goldfish? All tier 1 decks? FNM? How did it fare against Soul Sisters? How does it deal with Kitchen Finks/E.Witness/Restoration angels? Can it race burn?
Anything we bring up is swept aside by "I've tested this", and when I call it out, he quotes OTHER Decks that aren't even Grixis colors.
He'll continue to tell you that it works because he tested it, that your theories and worries hold no water because of his experience playing another deck entirely.
No point debating this further. I'm sure you'll post results with THIS deck when you have them. Cheers and keep on brewing.
I don't think I need to elaborate on why Delver will flip more frequently if you have more inst/sorcs in your deck. Seriously. Not worth arguing over basic math and common sense.
I guess the question begged continues to be: why use 2 cards to do something that you could have accomplished with 1? With that kind of curve, are you tapping out so frequently that you need Shoal?
With regards to what I meant by Grixis: Shoal requires you to pitch a blue card. Yes, we're blue core, but all the same, I can see you getting stuck with nonblue cards and 2 mana. Just requiring 1 mana to protect our threats with Dispel, Pierce and Snare seems the more logical choice compared to Shoal.
Also, I notice you keep fending off critique with "all your theory means nothing against my real world testing", but you haven't posted any results or match reports. We've actually played our cookie cutter grixis in tournaments; So if you're here to convince us this is the newer, sexier way to play Delver, you're going to have to do better than tell us it works or "its testing well". Example: "As a tempo deck, my build should have much more game against Tron than the Grixis Delver lists in this thread."
Isn't this sort of statement the same kind you're putting down?
I really want to know what happens when you throw 2 cards against a removal spell when facing card value opponents like kikicoco or other grixis decks who'll snapcast their bolt again. Or what happens when Delver doesn't flip by t4 and you aren't drawing Bob. So please do play against some real decks and let us know how it works out, because as you can plainly see, some of us here who are taking the effort to understand your deck, have our doubts.
What does "minimum count" even mean? Every upkeep you get a chance to flip him, and the odds of that chance are inst&sorc:NOTinst&sorc. Its a statistic that'll apply itself over thousands of games you play. There isn't a minimum count - just the number of games you're left high and dry with a Fugitive Wizard. Even at 27/28 inst/sorc I find myself with an unflipped delver from turns 1 through 5.
I think Disrupting Shoal isn't the best choice in a Grixis deck, either. While tempo can afford to overlook card quality, and sacrifice card advantage with Vapor Snag purely to buy time, this is not merely Vapor Snag. This is 2 of your blues for 1 of their 1 mana spells. And unlike Spell Snare which hits value cards like Voice of Resurgence, Tarmogoyf, Dark Confidant and haymakers like Pyroclasm, this promises very little for 2 blue cards in your hand. At best, you'll pitch a Probe to counter a Path to Exile, but do you have any creature worth saving with 2 cards? You don't have Tasigur.
So you agree on the clock and delay tactic. May I ask why you feel waiting for and countering the spells are a necessarily better plan than stopping the Tron? I feel that once Tron is assembled it becomes only a matter of time before you don't have counterspells for their next bomb. And if that bomb is Karn you have a real problem. Where possible, I always stop/delay the Tron from assembling.
- Grixis Delver pilot
I beat Tron by clocking them. I don't accept starting hands without 2 threats, especially in Game 1. In G2, artifact destruction and molten rain/fulminators if you have em. Here's an example of what happened at my last match against a tron:
G1
I have a Tasigur, some other disruption and a land. No thought Scour. I mulligan. I draw Delver, Delver, Fetch, swamp and Leak and 1 more card. Easy keep.
I basically run away with 2 Delvers. At one point he lands Wurmcoil when I don't have counters, so I terminate the 6/6 and bolt the 3/3 with LIFELINK. And ignore the deathtouch.
G2
I've sideboarded in 2 molten rains and 1 vandalblast. I lose this round simply because I get stuck on one land. Kept a risky One-Lander with Delver but not much else. Learned a lesson here.
G3
I keep a 2-lander with delver, vandalblast.
T1 Delver, pass. He drops map, pass.
T2 I vandalblast his map. He has this pained look, and I know he's in trouble. If he could see the molten rain my hand he would probably have scooped at that point. Long story short, I rain his powerplant and he never gets past 1 Tower before my Delver finishes the job.
You can't beat Tron toe-to-toe. Slow em down by taking out maps and snaring/piercing Sylvan Scrying. You can't keep them off forever, but you don't have to. Just make sure you clock them. Multitasking between keeping your threat alive or having redundancy while also slowing them down is key. You don't want an overly aggressive hand that will let them run wild, but you can't afford to play control either.
Is the first paragraph addressing me? I was responding to the post above me that said he was trying Young P mainboard with counters. So I assumed he was running Abbot, Young p and Counters maindeck and not swapping them around, which is why I commented.
If the first paragraph wasn't for me then ignore this post...
I'm starting to see a pattern where people are finding their individual comfort zones or "sweet spots" in the curve somewhere between Grixis Delver/Control and Grixis Abbot. One thing to absolutely remember, though, is that being "in between" is invariably going to be worse/less efficient than either extreme, for the simple reason that Abbot is, sooner or later, going to flip up counterspells. And Delver, is going to flip less because now you are playing more creatures and lands to support the mana curve that Abbot requires.
I would advise players who are interested in "Slow Grixis" to not lean back toward Control, because that's not where your synergy lies. The deck creators have built around the Abbot (who clearly is a card that needs building around in order not to be clunky), and Young P and Delver require totally different shells to shine in. If anything, I believe the discussion on Slow Grixis will benefit greatly from more innovative additions like the now-proven Rise/Fall. Is there another amazing spell out there worth tapping mana on your turn for? I sure hope the people here find it.