Step 2.
Identify Bombs and Fixing.
Try to make your bombs go exactly in two seperate non-conflicting decks.
For example your bombs might be (after building boros aggro):
Zegana
Vitu Ghazi Guildmage
Varolz
Exava
2x One Thousand Lashes
Skymark Roc
Its hard having 2 three color guild combinations which are going to fit all these. So I basically try to make my mana work as a priority. Synergy between bombs is usually second (which is very unintuitive).
Step 3.
Consider if your deepest color works best split or put in one deck. Sometimes a deep color is deeply divided in terms of strategies (e.g. a bunch of Azorius Arresters and smites). The temptation/trap is to put this in a two color deck.
Step 4.
Guild Synergies. Generally I think this is the least relevant. 4 packs is not enough to get populate or evolve really going usually.
--------------------
So basically I think you should aim for:
Ideal:
2 x 2-Color Aggro Decks (rarely one is Orzhov or Dimir Control)
1 x Control deck (often taking removal and bomb creatures from the aggro deck).
Realisitically:
2-Color Aggro: Boros or Selesnya.
3-Color Deck: Jund Aggro/Midrange, Esper Control, Junk Mid Range.
"The Rest": often base UG or UW.
--------------
Traps to avoid:
Don't make 2 good decks and 1 bad deck.
The 1 hour time limit is rarely enforced, but it PASSES very very very very quickly.
If your aggro deck is good it doesn't need bombs. For example, in San Jose we didn't have carnival hellsteed in our Rakdos Deck.
People play aggro mid (this my observation FWIW), so don't put a slow clunky 5 color garbage in the middle.
Many teams have an unbalanced amount of skill distributed among players. Often its very good to try and tempo (outside the game) bad players. Don't let your weaker players get trapped like this.
---------------
I am planning (80%) to stream Thursday at 7pm EST, discussing team limited while doing a DGM draft, mostly will be Canadians going to Providence watching but if you are interested you can PM me for the link.
First of all just wanted to say I am insanely impressed with oddly's refusal to get baited by idiotic rhetoric of M.
That being said, on Junk v Aristocrats 2 (which is useful discussion).
Depends what you want to beat:
Keep in mind this is relative to other flavors of aristocrats
Act 3 (Junk)
Strengths: SaitoRed, Slightly better against other Aggro Decks, Blue Decks.
Weaknesses:
Jund. FA is the best card against jund. Nothing in Act 3 is on that level. SB wise Mark of Mutiny is the best card against them. Again no good substitute in Junk.
Junk Reanimator. Game 1, you are worse because you don't get to abuse the lack of removal with Reckoner and you don't get to abuse the move away from Lingering souls (with FA). Post SB, deathrite shaman is good. But the nice thing about Act 2 is not needing to have narrow slots for an already good matchup. Also its very easy for Reanimator to beat Deathrites if they are prepared for it (which they will be next week).
Mirror? I haven't tested the mirror. But I think I want to be on the Act 2 side of this coin (especially if I have Thundermaws). Willing to admit I could be wrong post testing.
Act 2 Strengths:
Reanimator.
Jund (The only realistic way to beat this deck is FAx2 g1 and Marks 2).
Bigger Naya. Where reckoner, FA and Mark are very good.
Weaknesses:
Blue Decks.
Newer red decks.
--------------
Black Zombies takes the improvement even further for Jund Matchups at the cost of becoming even worse against aggressive decks. Probably improves U matchups (relative to Act 2 as well).
---------------
So Meta Dependent. Especially in a world where Junk Reanimator is a good deck but not a large part of the meta, I like Act 2. I don't want to waste SB slots, but I do want a good Junk Matchup. However testing the mirror (assuming Act 3 becomes popular in the wake of Brad's victory) will be an important determinant.
-------------
Act 1 won the PTQ in Montreal this weekend which was back half of a WMCQ in Canada (e.g. higher then average quality PTQ). See manadeprived (Justin Richardson) for a list.
FWIW the advice you are getting in this thread is actually very good.
Just some overall higher level (in the over-arching sense) for limited:
1) Most importantly have a plan. Is your deck fast or slow? Are you winning by attacking on the ground? In the air? Some other method (most commonly mill)?
Everything you do in limited should be in the context of "your plan". Like people have told you sometimes good cards are only good in certain decks. Smite is good at advancing a defensive strategy but not at pushing through damage.
Figure out what the games you are winning look like. Then try make your deck stick to the script.
2) Figure out how you are losing. This should be a running thought as you draft/build. Your picks should change in priorities as you get a better idea of what your weaknesses are. What the 20-23rd cards should be also change as you understand whats the place you need to make improvements at the margin.
For example, maybe you have a bunch of solid green creatures but are worried you will die to fliers. Then in return to ravnica aerial predation becomes much better. On the other hand maybe you have a bunch of 3/3 reach scavengers, so the predation isn't as important.
3) Positioning. Signaling is bad name imo for this concept. Especially in the current draft format. The idea is to position yourself well for the whole draft. For example, when you are drafting orzhov the guy to your left is one who has the best opportunities to cut you off (because Orzhov is a gatecrash guild). So you really don't want to be passing too much in your colors. On the other hand if you are drafting and see that Golgari is very open but that you will have to pass some golgari cards, don't worry about it so much. You are sending a bad signal maybe, but you are POSITIONING yourself to be set up in pack 3 (where Golgari is a core guild).
4) Take cards for your sb. If you aren't sbing a card per match you have had a poor draft. Your deck needs to change gears sometimes (see having a plan and knowing how you will lose).
Graveyard/Mill/Alternate Strategy Interaction (Cremate). Sometimes your opponent will interact in an unusual way. Or there will be cards which are nice (but narrow) answers to niche threats.
Go faster/defensive creatures (e.g. I don't like maindecking crosstown courier in my controlling decks, but sometimes you just need to block!).
Fogs - almost never maindeckable (though riot control is close), they are really only good in aggressive matchups that come down to races (typically air v ground matchups)
Go Longer / Durdle Cards - Slow expensive spells, for matchups where you aren't losing quick.
5. Try and get some mana sinks. This helps when you flood (duh!). But more importantly helps in deck construction, because you can build manabases which are more stable. But not have the downside threat of flooding.
6. The biggest trap cards for beginners are cards which don't change who is winning.
For example, both people are at 10 life. You both have no cards in your hand. Your opponent has a 3/3 and you have a 2/2 (or maybe no creature at all). Obviously you are losing this game. Think about whether the card changes who is winning.
Gain Life/Fog (doesn't change who is winning, your opponents board is still better then yours.
Burn Spells (this includes target creature can't block) that only hit players.
Do nothing spells (serene rembrance, hidden strings etc...)
Note that these effects are very rarely playable. But the threshold is high and i see bad/new players consistently overestimate them.
-----------
On your specific deck:
Your deck should of tilted aggressive. You don't have good mana sinks. You don't have bombs (maw is close, but its an aggresive one).
Underworld connections is better in aggressive decks so play it. Smite and Soul Tithe are not good in aggressive decks.
Sinister possession is unplayable. The problem is that it gives your an opponent choices. And good players will know when its worth two life to attack or block. Also see 6.
For some good insight into RTR block limited format, check Out Reid Dukes and Ben Starks recent articles.
For what its worth I think this is the level 1 deck of the PT. Definitely not the breakout.
Its basically Boros from Innistrad block. Most teams will know it, and focus on beating it. A select few will be focused on improving it and they will do well since the deck is good.
I think it pushes Mono-R out of the format as well, since Armadillo cloak has to be unbeatable (especially with smiter or call of the conclave). It makes cyclonic rift much better (pretty much Bants and UWRs best hope v Voice and Friends).
Note I am not q'ed for the PT and this is my conjecture.
@Nemcon, your sbing logic is much better. And maybe thats how I should frame my advice. Figure out your goals in a matchup and make your sb match.
Junk:
This is honestly the most difficult matchup (in terms of correct sbing) in my mind. It used to be very hard for them to interact with Act + Reckoner/BA. SHP is great when things go decently but bad when they go poorly (e.g. fast Angel).
Due to the popularity of Sin Collector I think I would be cutting all acts, though I never used to do this. Other mediocre slots are: 1/2 doomed travelers, 1/2 lingering souls, 1 SHP.
My friend who top 8ed the MODO ptq has started siding out reckoner + acts (Its a ballsy idea I would test if I was going to play standard soon).
RG/Aggro Jund. -4 BA to make yourself less vulnerable to bonfire. Falkenraths are essentially unkillable and they aren't as fast as Blitz or Rg (saito builds).
U decks/Jund:
The 25th land is meant to come in. Not be swapped with a different land.
I totally respect your love for your deck. I am deciding on which list I am going to run this weekend but have been testing stock Act 2 this week.
Being new to this archetype, care to elaborate on why exactly your version is better than the Brad Nelson Act 2 list with 3 Sorin, 0 Priest?
Sorin vs SHP
Blitz - SHP Better. Sorin is slow (though LL is good). 5/5s are basically unbeatable from blitzs perspective. Keeping Curve low is important.
UWR/Esper (assuming they play verdicts) - Sorin is better. These decks aren't good or popular. If they are light on wraths and heavy on Angels then Sorin may actually be worse.
Junk - SHP is better.
Jund - Sorin is better, but not by much. They have a ton of removal but SHP is another must kill threat (they need to save slip for FA, and other stuff for reckoner). Sorin is owned by Bonfire/Kessig Wolf Run.
R/G aggro or Cedric Jund - Sorin is much worse they are already beating you with bonfires and they dont have answers to 5/5s.
Mirror - SHP is much better. In the Mirror Reckoners/Blood Artists already bait a ton of removal (of which their isn't a ton going around).
In the current Meta (and the SCG has only reinforced this) I choose to be softest to Sphinx's Revelations decks. This makes you better everywhere else and arguably is a wash v Jund. Also note that v Jund/Control you are siding into a million expensive (but insane) 4/5 drops. So you would have to cut sorins which then begs the question why are we playing them in the first place.
SHP is a hard card to play. Sorin is an easy one which is why I think its popular. Its possible a 2/1 split is correct (and I have played that before), but intuitively (from a theoretical pov) in a deck with low card velocity I hate these kind of splits.
FA is bad against blitz because you want to keep your curve low (Your primary goal is to survive, since they are always the beatdown). You can only attack with it when you have more creatures then them (and often need one or two more because of mauler/boar). But on defense its basically worse then every one of your other alternative win conditions (Sorin/SHP/BA/Reckoner/Olivia). I basically use SHP and BA as my win conditions and everything else is geared towards not dying. I don't think you need/want 11 win conditions.
--------------------------
This isn't Jund, you are not just a bunch of good cards that you just play as you draw them. You really really need to understand the concepts of having a plan and executing with this deck. For example, if people are fighting us with bonfire then Sorin is bad. It may not be bad tomorrow and it may not have been bad yesterday. If Junk disappears tomorrow, BA goes from important to irrelevant.
Your "Plan" is so important. Not to pick on anyone but look at Nemcon's sb (who at least bothered to try and come up with plans).
He has two electrickery. Those come in against Junk/Blitz/Mirror. Against Junk hes taking out 2 orzhov charm. How much value is there from that swap in the matchup. I would argue its very little. Then in the mirror the only really bad cards are 4 FA (because of mark mutiny and lingering souls) + 1 doomeed traveler. We have 3 Marks already that we definitely want to bring in. 1 Zealous conscript or Obzedat may be reasonable. So we are going to have start cutting cards that are reasonable in the mirror for trickery. Its probably an upgrade but maybe not much of one. Now we need cards for blitz so we don't want to cut the trickerys for something which isn't good in that matchup. But we can probably afford to find something which is good across multiple aggro decks (for example ultimate price kills Hellrider/Gyre/Thundermaw etc...).
Then consider 3 Zealous and 3 Mark. Is this a good plan against Jund? Superficially it might seem like it. Their guys are insane and our sac outlets are resilient. But think a little bit more about games we win vs games we lose. If we have FA around and living is it conceivable we are losing (Nope not really). In the games we lose what happened? They probably out card advantaged us. So does it make sense to have 6 conditional cards (though zealous is a little less so) for this matchup if we are most worried about games where we need to power through mana flood and their value cards? If you are on board with this logic and agree that the 5/6th threaten subpar how do you find what to replace with? Again consider how we lose and then we realize we want self contained resilient threats (enter Obzedat and Thundermaw or Assemble).
The whole sb design is a circular process. You start somewhere, evaluate matchups and then consider the impact of changes on previous sb plans. For example if we have Thundermaws, then we need cards for the mirror even less.
You should be siding out Falkenraths against Blitz and Marks/Boros charm are very bad being situational removal.
I am not heavily invested in STD anymore but I still think my version (see a few pages back) is significantly better then a lot of whats being posted here.
FWIW, its apparently won 2 ptqs (though the england guy came to same conclusions independently) and my friend top 4ed the MODO PTQ with it last Saturday.
This is the hardest deck to play/sb with. Your margins for error are very thin. But you also get a ton of free wins because you are extremely difficult to play against.
Played something similar to Brad's most recent list Saturday at WMCQ. The sideboard was garbage. Sorin was garbage. Even his sb advice was suspect in some matchups.
SB:
2 Thundermaws
1 Zealous Conscripts
2 Mark of Mutiny
1 Slayer's Stronghold
1 Mizzium Mortars
1 Dreadbore
1 O-Ring
1 Ultimate Price
1 Electrickery
2 Obzedat
2 Slaughter Games
You need lots of spot removal to make R/G a good matchup it is also very good in the mirror. Assemble is absolutely terrible. Sorin is too vulnerable for a "big threat". I expected very little blue decks (and there were 2 in top 16), so I cut caverns for cards which actually do something/don't mana screw you.
I used to read a lot of salvation posts. I still try to read competitive section stuff, but the amount of garbage in here makes good players less likely to want to help. I don't bother posting in a lot of places where I presumably would add value because it feels wasted. E.g. I want to be able to have a relevant conversation with someone intelligent and come back two days later without having to wade through pages of irrelevant comments (or even actively worthless).
I think some simple rules would be helpful:
1)
E.g. if you post asking a question (or making a suggestion) you need to post how much you tested, where you tested.
2)
Simple "Hey what do you think?" Posts should not be allowed. If you post a decklist you need to highlight whats different then stock AND why you are doing it that way. You should also have to post what 3-5 decks you are most concerned with beating. I am tired of people posting anti-esper control lists, because they are trying to top 4 fnms exclusively.
Informational Decklist posts (such as the great work done in the Modern Zoo forum of last season) are different (e.g. posting lists with PTQ/Open/GP top 8s don't need the same justification).
3)
People need to acknowledge that FNM is not sufficient evidence for anything. Its fine to say "hey this did well at FNM after I tried it for XYZ reasons, what do you guys think about it on MODO/PTQ/GP etc..". It can be used as evidence but it needs to be a small part. But it doesn't give you the right to tout something as new technology. Similarly winning FNM as a Goal needs to be a small part of the forums.
4)
One budget thread allowed in the Proven subforums. Budget talk restricted to that thread and strictly enforced. If Budget players can get "good/competitive" player's help - good for them.
----
Finally, I think there should be consideration for a private/invite only forum. Exclusive focus on PTQs, Opens and GPs. I know of at least one example where this was done before and was extremely successful.
I think this deck is very well positioned right now. It's one of the few decks that can realistically outrace/hold off against Naya Blitz. Not to mention it being extremely favoured against Junkrites G1. A bit surprised not to see more of this IRL.
There is a singleton Ghost Quarter in my SB for that shenanigans. Otherwise the match up is pretty difficult...actually most of the Thragtusk decks are pretty difficult for this deck. The Wolf Run Bant deck doesn't see a lot of play, so I don't think you should worry too much about it (just hope they misplay into your match win I guess. :p)
I 3-1'ed a Daily Event, losing to Obzedat in games 2 and 3 against BWR aristocrats. Is there a plan against that dude besides going into a fetal position and hoping your anus comes out intact?
When I was testing the deck a while ago, Rapid Hybridization was really good for me. If your angel/wreckoning then its easy to deal with the 3/3. You can also upgrade Augur's or Snapcasters vs Aggro.
This weekend:
5-0 8pm Modo PTQ before losing 2 win and ins.
Top 8 PTQ Eerie before getting game loss for deck reg error and losing in quarters.
Top 8 PTQ Toronto, lose to Tron in finals (he drew well, but its a bad matchup).
One other person played my list and was 1/2 in top 8s.
Final List
4 Verdant
4 Marsh Flats
3 Stirring Wildwood
1 Treetop Village
1 Vault of the Archangel
1 Gavony Township
2 Godless Shrine
1 Isolated Chapel
1 Forest
1 Twilight Mire
2 Swamp
1 Plains
1 Temple Garden
1 Overgrown Tomb
4 Goyf
4 Bob
4 Deathrite
1 Kitchen Finks
4 Lingering Souls
4 Liliana
2 Sorin Lord of Innistrad
4 Path to Exile
2 Abrupt Decay
1 Maelstrom Pulse
1 Zealous Persecution
1 Batterskull
3 Inquisition of Kozilek
1 Thoughtseize
SB:
1 Aven Mindcensor
1 EE
1 Wrath of God
1 Shadow of Doubt
1 Slaughter Pact
2 Stony Silence
1 Sunlance
1 Phyrexian Arena
1 Maelstorm Pulse
1 Torpor Orb
1 Kitchen Finks
2 Thoughtseize
1 Linvala Keeper of Silence
My losses accross 3 PTQs were:
Boros (T8 with Game Loss)
2 Mirrors
1 Tron (Finals)
1 Jund
1 Twin
1 Pod.
I felt favored against every deck in the format except Tron (and maybe eggs).
Identify 2 color aggro deck.
Step 2.
Identify Bombs and Fixing.
Try to make your bombs go exactly in two seperate non-conflicting decks.
For example your bombs might be (after building boros aggro):
Zegana
Vitu Ghazi Guildmage
Varolz
Exava
2x One Thousand Lashes
Skymark Roc
Its hard having 2 three color guild combinations which are going to fit all these. So I basically try to make my mana work as a priority. Synergy between bombs is usually second (which is very unintuitive).
Step 3.
Consider if your deepest color works best split or put in one deck. Sometimes a deep color is deeply divided in terms of strategies (e.g. a bunch of Azorius Arresters and smites). The temptation/trap is to put this in a two color deck.
Step 4.
Guild Synergies. Generally I think this is the least relevant. 4 packs is not enough to get populate or evolve really going usually.
--------------------
So basically I think you should aim for:
Ideal:
2 x 2-Color Aggro Decks (rarely one is Orzhov or Dimir Control)
1 x Control deck (often taking removal and bomb creatures from the aggro deck).
Realisitically:
2-Color Aggro: Boros or Selesnya.
3-Color Deck: Jund Aggro/Midrange, Esper Control, Junk Mid Range.
"The Rest": often base UG or UW.
--------------
Traps to avoid:
Don't make 2 good decks and 1 bad deck.
The 1 hour time limit is rarely enforced, but it PASSES very very very very quickly.
If your aggro deck is good it doesn't need bombs. For example, in San Jose we didn't have carnival hellsteed in our Rakdos Deck.
People play aggro mid (this my observation FWIW), so don't put a slow clunky 5 color garbage in the middle.
Many teams have an unbalanced amount of skill distributed among players. Often its very good to try and tempo (outside the game) bad players. Don't let your weaker players get trapped like this.
---------------
I am planning (80%) to stream Thursday at 7pm EST, discussing team limited while doing a DGM draft, mostly will be Canadians going to Providence watching but if you are interested you can PM me for the link.
That being said, on Junk v Aristocrats 2 (which is useful discussion).
Depends what you want to beat:
Keep in mind this is relative to other flavors of aristocrats
Act 3 (Junk)
Strengths: SaitoRed, Slightly better against other Aggro Decks, Blue Decks.
Weaknesses:
Jund. FA is the best card against jund. Nothing in Act 3 is on that level. SB wise Mark of Mutiny is the best card against them. Again no good substitute in Junk.
Junk Reanimator. Game 1, you are worse because you don't get to abuse the lack of removal with Reckoner and you don't get to abuse the move away from Lingering souls (with FA). Post SB, deathrite shaman is good. But the nice thing about Act 2 is not needing to have narrow slots for an already good matchup. Also its very easy for Reanimator to beat Deathrites if they are prepared for it (which they will be next week).
Mirror? I haven't tested the mirror. But I think I want to be on the Act 2 side of this coin (especially if I have Thundermaws). Willing to admit I could be wrong post testing.
Act 2 Strengths:
Reanimator.
Jund (The only realistic way to beat this deck is FAx2 g1 and Marks 2).
Bigger Naya. Where reckoner, FA and Mark are very good.
Weaknesses:
Blue Decks.
Newer red decks.
--------------
Black Zombies takes the improvement even further for Jund Matchups at the cost of becoming even worse against aggressive decks. Probably improves U matchups (relative to Act 2 as well).
---------------
So Meta Dependent. Especially in a world where Junk Reanimator is a good deck but not a large part of the meta, I like Act 2. I don't want to waste SB slots, but I do want a good Junk Matchup. However testing the mirror (assuming Act 3 becomes popular in the wake of Brad's victory) will be an important determinant.
-------------
Act 1 won the PTQ in Montreal this weekend which was back half of a WMCQ in Canada (e.g. higher then average quality PTQ). See manadeprived (Justin Richardson) for a list.
Just some overall higher level (in the over-arching sense) for limited:
1) Most importantly have a plan. Is your deck fast or slow? Are you winning by attacking on the ground? In the air? Some other method (most commonly mill)?
Everything you do in limited should be in the context of "your plan". Like people have told you sometimes good cards are only good in certain decks. Smite is good at advancing a defensive strategy but not at pushing through damage.
Figure out what the games you are winning look like. Then try make your deck stick to the script.
2) Figure out how you are losing. This should be a running thought as you draft/build. Your picks should change in priorities as you get a better idea of what your weaknesses are. What the 20-23rd cards should be also change as you understand whats the place you need to make improvements at the margin.
For example, maybe you have a bunch of solid green creatures but are worried you will die to fliers. Then in return to ravnica aerial predation becomes much better. On the other hand maybe you have a bunch of 3/3 reach scavengers, so the predation isn't as important.
3) Positioning. Signaling is bad name imo for this concept. Especially in the current draft format. The idea is to position yourself well for the whole draft. For example, when you are drafting orzhov the guy to your left is one who has the best opportunities to cut you off (because Orzhov is a gatecrash guild). So you really don't want to be passing too much in your colors. On the other hand if you are drafting and see that Golgari is very open but that you will have to pass some golgari cards, don't worry about it so much. You are sending a bad signal maybe, but you are POSITIONING yourself to be set up in pack 3 (where Golgari is a core guild).
4) Take cards for your sb. If you aren't sbing a card per match you have had a poor draft. Your deck needs to change gears sometimes (see having a plan and knowing how you will lose).
Helpful SB Cards:
Conditional Removal (Destroy Fliers, Destroy Red Creatures, etc....)
Counterspells
Graveyard/Mill/Alternate Strategy Interaction (Cremate). Sometimes your opponent will interact in an unusual way. Or there will be cards which are nice (but narrow) answers to niche threats.
Go faster/defensive creatures (e.g. I don't like maindecking crosstown courier in my controlling decks, but sometimes you just need to block!).
Fogs - almost never maindeckable (though riot control is close), they are really only good in aggressive matchups that come down to races (typically air v ground matchups)
Go Longer / Durdle Cards - Slow expensive spells, for matchups where you aren't losing quick.
5. Try and get some mana sinks. This helps when you flood (duh!). But more importantly helps in deck construction, because you can build manabases which are more stable. But not have the downside threat of flooding.
6. The biggest trap cards for beginners are cards which don't change who is winning.
For example, both people are at 10 life. You both have no cards in your hand. Your opponent has a 3/3 and you have a 2/2 (or maybe no creature at all). Obviously you are losing this game. Think about whether the card changes who is winning.
Gain Life/Fog (doesn't change who is winning, your opponents board is still better then yours.
Burn Spells (this includes target creature can't block) that only hit players.
Do nothing spells (serene rembrance, hidden strings etc...)
Note that these effects are very rarely playable. But the threshold is high and i see bad/new players consistently overestimate them.
-----------
On your specific deck:
Your deck should of tilted aggressive. You don't have good mana sinks. You don't have bombs (maw is close, but its an aggresive one).
Underworld connections is better in aggressive decks so play it. Smite and Soul Tithe are not good in aggressive decks.
Sinister possession is unplayable. The problem is that it gives your an opponent choices. And good players will know when its worth two life to attack or block. Also see 6.
For some good insight into RTR block limited format, check Out Reid Dukes and Ben Starks recent articles.
Its basically Boros from Innistrad block. Most teams will know it, and focus on beating it. A select few will be focused on improving it and they will do well since the deck is good.
I think it pushes Mono-R out of the format as well, since Armadillo cloak has to be unbeatable (especially with smiter or call of the conclave). It makes cyclonic rift much better (pretty much Bants and UWRs best hope v Voice and Friends).
Note I am not q'ed for the PT and this is my conjecture.
Junk:
This is honestly the most difficult matchup (in terms of correct sbing) in my mind. It used to be very hard for them to interact with Act + Reckoner/BA. SHP is great when things go decently but bad when they go poorly (e.g. fast Angel).
Due to the popularity of Sin Collector I think I would be cutting all acts, though I never used to do this. Other mediocre slots are: 1/2 doomed travelers, 1/2 lingering souls, 1 SHP.
My friend who top 8ed the MODO ptq has started siding out reckoner + acts (Its a ballsy idea I would test if I was going to play standard soon).
RG/Aggro Jund. -4 BA to make yourself less vulnerable to bonfire. Falkenraths are essentially unkillable and they aren't as fast as Blitz or Rg (saito builds).
U decks/Jund:
The 25th land is meant to come in. Not be swapped with a different land.
Sorin vs SHP
Blitz - SHP Better. Sorin is slow (though LL is good). 5/5s are basically unbeatable from blitzs perspective. Keeping Curve low is important.
UWR/Esper (assuming they play verdicts) - Sorin is better. These decks aren't good or popular. If they are light on wraths and heavy on Angels then Sorin may actually be worse.
Junk - SHP is better.
Jund - Sorin is better, but not by much. They have a ton of removal but SHP is another must kill threat (they need to save slip for FA, and other stuff for reckoner). Sorin is owned by Bonfire/Kessig Wolf Run.
R/G aggro or Cedric Jund - Sorin is much worse they are already beating you with bonfires and they dont have answers to 5/5s.
Mirror - SHP is much better. In the Mirror Reckoners/Blood Artists already bait a ton of removal (of which their isn't a ton going around).
In the current Meta (and the SCG has only reinforced this) I choose to be softest to Sphinx's Revelations decks. This makes you better everywhere else and arguably is a wash v Jund. Also note that v Jund/Control you are siding into a million expensive (but insane) 4/5 drops. So you would have to cut sorins which then begs the question why are we playing them in the first place.
SHP is a hard card to play. Sorin is an easy one which is why I think its popular. Its possible a 2/1 split is correct (and I have played that before), but intuitively (from a theoretical pov) in a deck with low card velocity I hate these kind of splits.
FA is bad against blitz because you want to keep your curve low (Your primary goal is to survive, since they are always the beatdown). You can only attack with it when you have more creatures then them (and often need one or two more because of mauler/boar). But on defense its basically worse then every one of your other alternative win conditions (Sorin/SHP/BA/Reckoner/Olivia). I basically use SHP and BA as my win conditions and everything else is geared towards not dying. I don't think you need/want 11 win conditions.
--------------------------
This isn't Jund, you are not just a bunch of good cards that you just play as you draw them. You really really need to understand the concepts of having a plan and executing with this deck. For example, if people are fighting us with bonfire then Sorin is bad. It may not be bad tomorrow and it may not have been bad yesterday. If Junk disappears tomorrow, BA goes from important to irrelevant.
Your "Plan" is so important. Not to pick on anyone but look at Nemcon's sb (who at least bothered to try and come up with plans).
He has two electrickery. Those come in against Junk/Blitz/Mirror. Against Junk hes taking out 2 orzhov charm. How much value is there from that swap in the matchup. I would argue its very little. Then in the mirror the only really bad cards are 4 FA (because of mark mutiny and lingering souls) + 1 doomeed traveler. We have 3 Marks already that we definitely want to bring in. 1 Zealous conscript or Obzedat may be reasonable. So we are going to have start cutting cards that are reasonable in the mirror for trickery. Its probably an upgrade but maybe not much of one. Now we need cards for blitz so we don't want to cut the trickerys for something which isn't good in that matchup. But we can probably afford to find something which is good across multiple aggro decks (for example ultimate price kills Hellrider/Gyre/Thundermaw etc...).
Then consider 3 Zealous and 3 Mark. Is this a good plan against Jund? Superficially it might seem like it. Their guys are insane and our sac outlets are resilient. But think a little bit more about games we win vs games we lose. If we have FA around and living is it conceivable we are losing (Nope not really). In the games we lose what happened? They probably out card advantaged us. So does it make sense to have 6 conditional cards (though zealous is a little less so) for this matchup if we are most worried about games where we need to power through mana flood and their value cards? If you are on board with this logic and agree that the 5/6th threaten subpar how do you find what to replace with? Again consider how we lose and then we realize we want self contained resilient threats (enter Obzedat and Thundermaw or Assemble).
The whole sb design is a circular process. You start somewhere, evaluate matchups and then consider the impact of changes on previous sb plans. For example if we have Thundermaws, then we need cards for the mirror even less.
I am not heavily invested in STD anymore but I still think my version (see a few pages back) is significantly better then a lot of whats being posted here.
FWIW, its apparently won 2 ptqs (though the england guy came to same conclusions independently) and my friend top 4ed the MODO PTQ with it last Saturday.
This is the hardest deck to play/sb with. Your margins for error are very thin. But you also get a ton of free wins because you are extremely difficult to play against.
Won 220 person PTQ the next day.
List:
2 Clifftop Retreat
2 Plains
4 Godless
4 Isolated
4 Sacred
4 Dragonskull
4 Blood Crypt
4 Cartel
4 Falkenrath
4 Blood artist
4 Doomed Traveler
4 Slip
4 Lingering Souls
4 Boros Reckoner
3 Blasphemous Act
3 Skirsdag High Priest
1 Orzhov Charm
1 Olivia Voldaren
SB:
2 Thundermaws
1 Zealous Conscripts
2 Mark of Mutiny
1 Slayer's Stronghold
1 Mizzium Mortars
1 Dreadbore
1 O-Ring
1 Ultimate Price
1 Electrickery
2 Obzedat
2 Slaughter Games
You need lots of spot removal to make R/G a good matchup it is also very good in the mirror. Assemble is absolutely terrible. Sorin is too vulnerable for a "big threat". I expected very little blue decks (and there were 2 in top 16), so I cut caverns for cards which actually do something/don't mana screw you.
1st Aristocrats Act 2.
2nd R/G Ross Meriam
3rd/4th
Aristocrats Act2 and RG Saito
5-8th
Naya
Jund
1 Unknown (he conceded in t8) but I think it was Naya
UWR
Couldn't help but comment, played Cuneo in the blue mirror yesterday (we were 3-0 in the daily), I had syncopates.
In the first round I handily crushed esper by syncopating some revelations.
In the 4th round, they were terrible. So I would say that against competent players that is in fact exactly how it plays out.
I used to read a lot of salvation posts. I still try to read competitive section stuff, but the amount of garbage in here makes good players less likely to want to help. I don't bother posting in a lot of places where I presumably would add value because it feels wasted. E.g. I want to be able to have a relevant conversation with someone intelligent and come back two days later without having to wade through pages of irrelevant comments (or even actively worthless).
I think some simple rules would be helpful:
1)
E.g. if you post asking a question (or making a suggestion) you need to post how much you tested, where you tested.
2)
Simple "Hey what do you think?" Posts should not be allowed. If you post a decklist you need to highlight whats different then stock AND why you are doing it that way. You should also have to post what 3-5 decks you are most concerned with beating. I am tired of people posting anti-esper control lists, because they are trying to top 4 fnms exclusively.
Informational Decklist posts (such as the great work done in the Modern Zoo forum of last season) are different (e.g. posting lists with PTQ/Open/GP top 8s don't need the same justification).
3)
People need to acknowledge that FNM is not sufficient evidence for anything. Its fine to say "hey this did well at FNM after I tried it for XYZ reasons, what do you guys think about it on MODO/PTQ/GP etc..". It can be used as evidence but it needs to be a small part. But it doesn't give you the right to tout something as new technology. Similarly winning FNM as a Goal needs to be a small part of the forums.
4)
One budget thread allowed in the Proven subforums. Budget talk restricted to that thread and strictly enforced. If Budget players can get "good/competitive" player's help - good for them.
----
Finally, I think there should be consideration for a private/invite only forum. Exclusive focus on PTQs, Opens and GPs. I know of at least one example where this was done before and was extremely successful.
I know he beat RG x2 and Junk Rites x Million. Losing to UWR in finals.
Why would u be favored g1 against Junk Rites?
When I was testing the deck a while ago, Rapid Hybridization was really good for me. If your angel/wreckoning then its easy to deal with the 3/3. You can also upgrade Augur's or Snapcasters vs Aggro.
5-0 8pm Modo PTQ before losing 2 win and ins.
Top 8 PTQ Eerie before getting game loss for deck reg error and losing in quarters.
Top 8 PTQ Toronto, lose to Tron in finals (he drew well, but its a bad matchup).
One other person played my list and was 1/2 in top 8s.
Final List
4 Verdant
4 Marsh Flats
3 Stirring Wildwood
1 Treetop Village
1 Vault of the Archangel
1 Gavony Township
2 Godless Shrine
1 Isolated Chapel
1 Forest
1 Twilight Mire
2 Swamp
1 Plains
1 Temple Garden
1 Overgrown Tomb
4 Goyf
4 Bob
4 Deathrite
1 Kitchen Finks
4 Lingering Souls
4 Liliana
2 Sorin Lord of Innistrad
4 Path to Exile
2 Abrupt Decay
1 Maelstrom Pulse
1 Zealous Persecution
1 Batterskull
3 Inquisition of Kozilek
1 Thoughtseize
SB:
1 Aven Mindcensor
1 EE
1 Wrath of God
1 Shadow of Doubt
1 Slaughter Pact
2 Stony Silence
1 Sunlance
1 Phyrexian Arena
1 Maelstorm Pulse
1 Torpor Orb
1 Kitchen Finks
2 Thoughtseize
1 Linvala Keeper of Silence
My losses accross 3 PTQs were:
Boros (T8 with Game Loss)
2 Mirrors
1 Tron (Finals)
1 Jund
1 Twin
1 Pod.
I felt favored against every deck in the format except Tron (and maybe eggs).