I am actually super excited for this set. I get why people are upset. But I find myself moving more and more towards just playing Casual Commander anyways. So being able to pick up a few neat singles with new art - is appealing to me. Sure, they are not cheap singles, but I don't mind. Anyone who pimps decks out, are aware they are spending a lot anyways.
What is most unfortunate is the price tag preventing crazy mass opening. Which is slightly unfortunate.
I have been playing a version with Sarkhan, Fireblood on MTGA. I am liking it so far, he does a lot of looting which is nice. I have gotten him to ult a crazy amount of times. When reading Gerry Thompson's Top 10 most Standard Underrated Cards, I was not shocked to see Sarkhan in the top 5. Niv-Mizzet, Parun is an insanely powerful finisher and Sarkhan plays really well with him. I am not sure what a final form of a list would look like, but I feel like it is absolutely a sleeper combo in the format. Especially if it can be paired well enough with Teferi, Hero of Dominaria.
As for Ral, Izzet Viceroy, the card is pretty powerful. I think the reason most find it underwhelming is that it competes heavily with Teferi and that alone is probably enough of a reason why it isn't worth running. I like the idea of it being a board options, but pretty sure there are just better options there as well.
On Chromium, the Mutable, I dropped this card. I liked the idea of it, but boy did it feel bad tapping mana for it on the rare chance I was stable on 7. My games with Lyra Dawnbringer were much more stable.
I don't understand the problem with "tapping" for Chromium, The Mutable, he haves flash so that is not a problem. I would argue that a 7 CMC is the real issue in this kinda fast meta.
I don't know if the mana is good enough to support Settle the Wreckage turn 4 consistently so that could be a problem.
Because vs decks that go to the length where tapping 7 EOT is a thing, often times it was draw go and they just countered it. He had to be safely cast on turn 10 if I wanted him to somewhat reliably resolve.
The game really should not go that long, and your finishers shouldn't be taking that long to drop. Tapping 7 for Chromium felt bad unless I had backup mana for counter magic. The difference between something like Chromium costing 7 and something like Nexus costing 7 is pretty substantial because Nexus rebuys itself and doesn't require additional mana to EOT in the matches that go so incredibly long. Ionize + Sabotage is brutal for Chromium and I see a good amount of UR Control on Arena - far more than I see any other kind of Control deck.
I played all day on Arena today, and I came to a few realizations. First, I ran through most of the day just testing the deck in casual constructed. A lot of aggro decks fill this void so it really put the list to the test, as I knew it generally already had a strong control mirror game more often than not. FOr my final run tonight, I delved into the Competitive Constructed run. Most Casual runs net me about 3 wins (3 losses and you are done), sometimes less. My Competitive Constructed run was a 5-1 record (2 losses and you are done with your run). I ran my competitive run with 0 SB cards.
Notion Rain is a rough card. It is handy when you are in the clear to cast it, but against proactive decks, it is the last card I ever wanted to see. Too often I was cornered and it was a dead card from the start. I think the deck really needs this 3cmc slot filled though, as a lot of the time I felt I was just waiting on that turn and doing nothing. Notion Rain was sometimes left in hand on turn 3 and I really did not like that. I think running more Chemister's Insight is actually, more than likely, correct.
All in on Vraska's Contempt was also pretty painful in my Casual Constructed games. The matches I was facing were pretty aggressive token or RW aggro builds. For my Competitive Constructed run I added 2x Settle the Wreckage and 1x Cleansing Nova. I went down to 3 Contempt. Overall, the sweepers did a lot of work when I needed them to. I don't think I will be going back to a sweeper-less build. Contempt also had me wondering if Ixalan's Binding is possibly better. It is hard to say, but I will touch on this in a bit.I did run Ritual of Soot in a couple of runs, and the card was pretty sub-par.
As for Essence Scatter, I dropped these in favor of Syncopate. Initially, I was pretty skeptical. Syncopate can sometimes just be a dead spell, and I confirmed this in a number of games. But it actually turned out to be better than Scatter when it was played. It did pick me out of a few tight spots where Scatter would have missed and killed my chance at untapping into a Teferi.
On Chromium, the Mutable, I dropped this card. I liked the idea of it, but boy did it feel bad tapping mana for it on the rare chance I was stable on 7. My games with Lyra Dawnbringer were much more stable. I also ran a 1x copy of Nexus of Fate in my Competitive Constructed run, and man that card did a crazy amount of work. There were a few times where it won me the game by simply going infinite. I had actually started running this in my last Casual Constructed run, and I was lacking any sweepers to deal with Carnage Tyrant, but I got to the point where I had just gone infinite and my last 2 cards in my deck were Lyra + Nexus and I just beat him down. I think a single copy of Nexus is a pretty solid failsafe for any match that may go long. I am not entirely sold on it, but I was completely surprised at how much heavy lifting it did sometimes.
Revisiting my remarks about a 3 drop, and about Ixalan's Binding... I wonder if Vona's Hunger is playable. Part of the problem I have with cards like Price of Fame is how narrow it actually is in practice. Things like Seal Away and Baffling End give you an increased pip count towards the City's Blessing. It fills the 3 drop slot in a very strong way and it scales well in the late game.
I look forward to making some adjustments to my Esper list on Arena and doing another run tomorrow. But those were my thoughts after my run. Below is the list I ran for the 5-1 record in Competitive Constructed event.
Overall, the deck felt decent. I think some of the conventional choices are probably a little loose, but I am not sure how paper will pan out compared to Arena. I faced a fair amount of GB decks, UB Surveil decks, UR Counterburn decks, GW token decks, and RW aggro decks. Esper seems fairly stable with Lyra in it, but I will unlikely ever go back to Chromium outside of maybe a SB role.
be·long
verb
1. be the property of.
"the vehicle did not belong to him"
synonyms: be owned by, be the property of, be the possession of, be held by, be in the hands of "the house belongs to his mother"
2. be a member or part of (a particular group, organization, or class).
"they belong to garden and bridge clubs"
synonyms: be a member of, be in, be affiliated to/with, be allied to, be associated with, be linked to, be an adherent of "I belong to a book club"
This is my fault. You and I are using the word interchangeably and it is causing miscommunication. I don't think Goyf has a home in Control as you are suggesting, and understand that you don't think Goyf is a Control-centric creature.
Moving on.
I think Delve threats in Modern Control, by and large, suffer from the same pitfalls as Goyf does albiet have built in security features making them more plausible. As I said, Modern has a wide arrange of removal across a wide variety of decks and a vast array of playable removal means more often than not, DTR holds true for Delve threats in Modern. I believe Tasigur is more of an exception because of his unique ability to generate actual card advantage. Legacy has become a format so littered with a small but dense number of cards that limit the opportunity to use a diverse selection of removal - comparatively speaking when it comes to Legacy vs Modern. Modern has a more even level of power distribution meaning that the removal options naturally flourish in more ways.
Working with that, I really do not think Thing in the Ice is a viable finisher if you really expect the deck to perform well in Modern. It suffers from the exact same issue Tarmogoyf does except it isn't vanilla in the best case scenario. The problem is the workload necessary in Modern for it to reach the ceiling. The card probably gets a little better when Assassin's Trophy starts taking the driver's seat from Abrupt Decay, but that is a pretty marginal swing in TiTi's favor.
So that really just leaves us with Tasigur from these UB lists and from there I really ask again: Why would you run Tarmogoyf in UBg Control? If Tasigur is not enough, then Tasigur is not the right finisher. Notice that UW's primary wincon other than JTMS, is a card with heavy, built in protection. I don't expect UB to have a finisher on the same level as Teferi, Hero of Dominaria, but it illustrates my point that you don't want to be using finishers that require constant resource devotion in order to put in an 8 hour shift. This is why Control decks have always hinged upon value over attrition. That is where the bread and butter is stored.
Anyways. Moving on, because I think that is about all I have to say. I have made all the points I want to make and you are going to do you, regardless.
I think if you are looking for a Sultai Control list, your best option is going to be to toolbox. If there is really one thing that green does for decks like these, it is to allow them to toolbox. This becomes more valuable when you have playable finishers but they are too situational to make the deck cohesive enough to play against an open field. If there is a Gifts deck in Modern worth brewing, I have always felt it is likely some Sultai core. The problem with Esper cores or Grixis cores is - as you have said in regards to UB, that they historically have issues dealing with particular permanents. Trophy alleviates this, gifts lets you tutor scenario specific plays, and you can tie it all together with playable options like Thragtusk, Noxious Revival, Snapcaster Mage, and various spells without having to have awkward situations where you might just get blown out by Bloodmoon. You get bullets like Life from the Loam and Raven's Crime. Thrun, the Last Troll and Obstinate Baloth. Who knows, maybe this makes something like Emrakul, the Promised End a reasonable finisher.
I think no matter how it is swung, Midrange has the best chance for success with GRN and Sultai. It has a solid core with a foundation already built for it. It is also in a format where proactive play is heavily rewarded and reactive play can often be loose. Assassin's Trophy does solve a significant piece of the puzzle in terms of Modern UBx Control, but there are still some other issues the deck has and to deny them seems a bit silly.
You would be surprised how accurate wiki is more often than not. I genuenly think it has a bad reputation unjustified. If something is wrong on a given topic it is usually changed within hours on the site. Did you actually spend time and scroll through the whole content of a wiki page for example? There is a neat section which is reserved for discussion there, where you can find accurate commends on any topic of a given wiki page. And lets be honest, we are talking about magic here not about deeply complex science topics. You have to admit that what you said about counterspells not being attrition cards is just wrong. Doesn't matter where you search the defintion from. If you want to argue in that way I could also just say "even" wiki (like you put it) knows it better than you. So just please stick to actual arguments for the discussion, not this nonsense.
It isn't necessarily that a Wiki is inaccurate, it is that it is an open source encyclopedia and you linked me to one that is about theory. Do you not see how that becomes a problem when talking about groupthink? There is a difference between a wiki that sources scientific literature about something like quantum theory and something that talks about MTG theorycraft. A BIG difference. The fact that it is a) Content subject to a matter of opinion and b) Content that is editable to the point of finding general consensus - i.e conventional wisdom and groupthink.
These two things are not always bad, but you have to understand that they can absolutely lead to sub-optimization by nature and an audience would be none the wiser. Yes, they can also lead to ideal optimization in the same vein. But unless you are aware of the polarity, you likely would never really know or understand the difference.
If you think that just because this is MTG and that makes is non-complex... then you must not be that into something like Chess.
Anyways, if you want to exit this talking point, I am okay letting it go to rest.
I disagree to a certain extent that control decks use always raw value to win the game. However, to explain why there, I think I need to ask a question (which is in my understanding at least clear): DO you think there is a difference in Goyf and Angler for control decks? Its just different stats and different mana and different colour. I think there is no difference of the role in general. Both are simply stats for mana. And the point is, there is one simple prominent example where Gurmag is actually played in a control deck: In legacy grixis control. So I don't think control always tries to win with value. We could now argue that gurmag is more worth it because as a single creature it sticks more, which is something I could get down to, but both cards are in the same category. So based on this, I could actually see a control deck running goyf for that reason. I think what your main point simply is, is that goyf dies to fast as a singlet creature which is supposed to win the game. And I can agree with that. Lastly, I never said Goyf just belongs into control. I said its imaginable for me. But not confirmed. Just stick to the facts please.
Yes. There is a difference between Goyf and Angler for Control decks. Albiet I will admit that it is not entirely substantial. Angler lessens risk by comparison. It offers a flat rate body, meaning it isn't contingent on external factors that would determine if it dies to something like Burst Lightning or Bolt. It cost more than 2 mana, which means it isn't prone to dying to Fatal Push or Abrupt Decay. You could argue that they are simply stats for mana, but they also have external factors going on. DTR is a far more relevant argument when evaluating creatures for Control decks, because it determine if/when/how often, you will need to spend resources to ensure that it can actually put in an 8 hour shift. Something else you should consider when talking about Legacy, is that premier removal is extremely limited in this format. This means that you remove a lot of diversity when it comes to what can remove your creature and from there it is a matter of "does it dodge A, B, or C?" Instead of "Does it dodge A-z?. As I said, the DTR argument, as much as I think invoking that argument is invalid, is something that is a critical argument when evaluating creatures for Control. Bringing it back to my argument about decks like GBx - DTR becomes a less valuable argument because it is more about running them out of resources and having something naturally stick as a result. It doesn't care if Goyf dies because it has something else to stick. Control cares about DTR because it determines the level of investment when calculating the overall value. Less removal diversity = more value and that is the core DTR.
Modern has a vastly superior amount of removal diversity than Legacy which means stat based win conditions in control drops dramatically. This is also evident in Limited which shows that there is a correlation between the effectiveness of stats and the amount of available removal and how diverse said removal is.
You tell me that I am not sticking to facts, when I am literally telling you that this thread contains empirical data on BGx Sultai vs UBx Sultai based on a collective of top finishes.
The facts are that you said UB Control's problem in Modern is not the lack of a stable finisher. Yet you are advocating Tarmogoyf, a card I pointed out is a Midrange creature, over any of the other cards that are apparently proving that UB Control doesn't suffer from the lack of a playable finisher in Modern. I never said you called Goyf a control creature. So you if you want to try to call me out for putting words in your mouth, then I would argue that you let go of some of the contextual elements in the discussion... not that I am not sticking to facts.
To conclude, I think control decks do often really win with value, but not 100 % of the time. Goyf may or not be a finisher for control, I am yet unsure about that. However I think it is worth investigating at least since it doesnt require cards like thoughtscour to build around goyf like delve threats demand. Delve threats are indeed very attractive for control since control wants be able to rely on them to not get removed easily. And I am split between those two. I also mentioned it could be viable to simply splash for trophy since it benefits the the decks actual problems. A threat is not the problem in ub. It is the lack of dealing with permanents.
I think the notion that Tasigur, the Golden Fang needs something like Thoughtscour to power him is utter nonsense. Sure, Scour can help power him out - but if your game plan is to play the long game, he is going to convert resources all the same. I honestly doubt Tasigur is the answer to UB Control's lack of a playable finisher. But the fact that you are now encouraged to go into Green for Trophy means there is more inherent appeal to Tasigur over some other options.
You keep saying that UB Control does not suffer from the lack of a stable finisher in Modern yet the only UB Control variants we see are Esper which utilize cards like Creeping Tar Pit, Snapcaster Mage, and Lightning Bolt to chip away life totals. That becomes an entirely different situation when you remove Lightning Bolt from the equation because now you are skimming on your reach. IF you want to show me examples of UBx Control decks that are not Grixis that have shown that a lack of a finisher is not the issue - then I will wait.
I don't disagree that the inability to deal with a diverse selection of resolved permanents is a huge problem for UB Control in Modern. But I do disagree that it is the only serious issue the deck faces. I expect that after your stint of testing Sultai Control with the lack of a viable finisher, the same conclusion is inevitable.
There is something to say about conventional wisdom and groupthink pitfalls, that often go completely unobserved in collective discussions like this.
Goyf is, and always has been, an attrition creature. There is a reason he works well in creature based decks and with discard and why he is less efficient in blue decks with disruption like counter magic. Counterspells are not attrition cards. Control decks are also not so much attrition based as they are preparation based. They reward set ups, not grindy maneuvering.
I think people get too lost in card tier that they simply forget about fundamental MTG theory and this is why Pro Tours feature breakout decks and SCG Opens often don't anymore. People favor groupthink and conventional wisdom over flexing fundamental game theory.
Control decks are attrition decks at heart. Attrition means outlasting, decks which play for the lategame, which control decks are doing moresoe than Midrange decks even. And Counterspells are one of the purest attrition cards out there, besides removal and discard. Just to correct your statement. And if you say Goyf only works in attrition decks then it would perfectly fit control decks according to your assessment.
It would be advisable to look up the basic defintions of magic deck archetypes up and using the terms correctly before accusing everybody else on not referring to fundamental MTG theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic:_The_Gathering_deck_types
Reference: Control: "Control decks avoid racing and attempt to slow the game down by executing an attrition plan." etc. etc.
Another hint would be that control mirror matchups are often referred to as being attrition based matchups. Which they simply are.
And to add, the clock is definitely not the main problem of a UB style control deck. Its the lack of dealing with specific permanents. Delve threats are perfectly reasonable finishes if you want to play them. And so are goyfs, this is just completely biased assessments you give here. When you look up the most played removal spells in the format then Bolt is by far number 1, followed by Path. Both Goyf and delve threats are equal here (and to add, when you play a goyf into a bolt then its your own fault, this should be a thing to play around). Push as the only card would make goyf less good than delve threats, but thats about it and Push is played way less compared to the other 2 removal spells. So all your listing about goyf actually not really matter at all compared to a angler for example. And why I am saying this is because anglers or tasigurs have always been played in black style of control decks. So let alone for that goyfs should at least not be completely counterintuitive like you claim.
I like that I talk about the problem with conventional wisdom + groupthink and you link me to a wiki as a defense...
There is a difference between a deck that focuses on attrition and a deck that focuses on actual value. You seem to disambiguate the two based on slight commonalities. Even the wiki seems to disambiguate the two, which I find oddly satisfying given the current discussion.
Let's start with what we know about Tarmogoyf. Tarmogofy traditionally finds strong roles in GBx decks, which utilize attrition to grind out games through 1 for 1 trading via spells for spells or spells for creatures. The general premise of these decks, historically, is to throw down efficient creatures until one sticks - increasing the likelihood that one sticks through means of 1 for 1 trading. Either another creatures eats a removal spell or you trade a spell for a spell, such as Thoughtseize. Tarmogoyf plays a key role in these decks because it is a hit the ground running kind of card. Low mana cost, scales well, and can present a clock on a clean board. These decks do not care that the creature has conversion because it either dies or sticks and that is literally all they care about. If it dies, then something else lives - Voice of Resurgence, Knight of the Reliquary, Dark Confidant, Grim Flayer, Tireless Tracker, etc. The card is made to pay off when the game is grindy. Cards like Spiritmonger and Phyrexian Plaguelord are attrition cards. They don't generate inherent resource value they only cause the game to incrementally move forward until resources are depleted. Goyf is strong in these decks because it can demand a removal spell and pave the way for clean boards... or simply just run away with the game.
Now let's look at Control decks, decks that utilize attrition through the trading of spells. Examples are things like Doom Blade, Disallow, Force of Will. These are the things that you are attributing to attrition. But if you dig deeper, the real cards that are the most linear across Control decks are cards like Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Consecrated Sphinx, Bitterblossom, Grave Titan, Meloku the Clouded Mirror. Now we start to delineate between the key concepts of Control and the key Concepts of a Midrange deck when it comes to what attrition means and how it is used. GBx decks as stated above, lean into a straight up raw attrition game plan. That is how they win. Control on the other hand, while it may use methods of attrition, what it actually uses to win is raw value. Things snowball and generate additional resources vs deplete resources. You even touched on this in a prior comment when you quoted your lord and savior Todd Stevens, but you ignore it in making a muddied defense as to why Tarmogoyf belongs in Control as a finisher and why you think it is reasonable/viable. Talk about a contradiction.
So yes, you are correct in that Control used a method of attrition. But the archetype fundamentally wins through value cards that snowball.
Tarmogoyf is a midrange creature through and through. It is laughable that people think it is a Control finisher and the fact that people think that in Modern stands as a testament to the real problem of UB. It lacks a finisher, so much so that people are trying to justify Tarmogoyf as a finisher... That reeks of desperation to me.
You know who doesn't die to Fatal Push? Tasigur. You know who doesn't die to Abrupt Decay? Tasigur. You know who doesn't die Lightning Bolt? Tasigur. Consider something like Tasagur as a finisher if you want to focus on UBg and be real with yourself. Tasigur avoids all of the pitfalls Goyf has for a Control deck + he actually does what Control needs their finishers to do - convert resources or generate card advantage as raw value. He doesn't need you to continually spend resources to clear the board for him without offering a return. He doesn't need you to continually spend resources to protect him without offering a return.
Discard should be more then enough to cut off unfettered use of Reveler (the only card I would remotely consider using Unmoored Ego on in their list), and this deck has plenty of removal to kill a pyromancer the moment it drops should it resolve.
firtst of all discard doesnt do anything vs the top of the deck.Mardu pyro has 3 to 5 ways to win the game.Pyro tokens,lingering souls,reveler beatdowns and sometimes walkers.the later 2 can be dealt so easy with AT.With ego i would just name lingering.You deal with 1/3 of their deck with just one card.
How does Trophy solve the plague UB has, that is a lack of an efficient modern playable finisher?
UB cant remove problematic permanents(walkers artifacts enchantments big creatures) AT deals with all of those . More over goyf is the perfect finisher(i would like to try tusks in the main like fabiano's list from 2015 )
Gofy is arguably one of the most susceptible creatures to Modern removal spells in the entire format, in terms of playable creatures. He slots into decks where there isn't enough going on around him to continually absorb removal. He cost less than 3 mana. He is 1 color. He isn't a black creature. He doesn't have hexproof. He doesn't have flying. He doesn't have trample... He is a cheap dork with no evasion and no protection and his toughness is based on other factors meaning he does indeed sometime even die to Lightning Bolt. He is best when other things are eating those kinds of spells increasing the odds that he can actually put in an 8 hour shift.
There is something to say about conventional wisdom and groupthink pitfalls, that often go completely unobserved in collective discussions like this.
Goyf is, and always has been, an attrition creature. There is a reason he works well in creature based decks and with discard and why he is less efficient in blue decks with disruption like counter magic. Counterspells are not attrition cards. Control decks are also not so much attrition based as they are preparation based. They reward set ups, not grindy maneuvering.
Tying this in with the discussion previously had about Sultai and why the deck is constantly at odds with itself based on color pairings and color pie fundamentals - You need to decide if you are going GBx attrition with Sultai or if you are going UB prep control set up with Sultai. From there you can give your deck a cohesive element by cutting out cards that are intuitive to your overall game plan. This means removing cards like Mana Leak, Cryptic Command, and Damnation from your 60 of a GBu Sultai list. Or removing things like Tarmogoyf and Tireless Tracker from your UBg Sultai. Running counter intuitive cards mean your openings are going to be partial and clunky. This is historically why the UBg Sultai decks never took off in the first place, because they lack a solid UB Control style finisher and they opt to run attrition cards instead of straight value cards like a traditional control deck. This is also why GBu Sultai decks have historically struggled to make a footing, they too often revert to powerful options that are at odds wit hthe gameplan of playing a straight attrition game.
This is also why Legacy has seen Sultai lists do well - they ran and still run a cohesive gameplan. Now you would argue that Force of Will and Cryptic Command serve the same purpose, but in reality they operate on completely different levels because FoW's only resource cost is a single card. meaning you can use your mana to play the hard attrition ground game with little opportunity cost. Modern does not let you do that when you are tapping 4 mana to make a play that is 100% reactive.
I think people get too lost in card tier that they simply forget about fundamental MTG theory and this is why Pro Tours feature breakout decks and SCG Opens often don't anymore. People favor groupthink and conventional wisdom over flexing fundamental game theory.
@Superna7ural No worries, I am not a guy who gets on a personal level when it comes down to discussion (I think this also doesn't make much sense for the sake of being constructive), this is just a pure "we are on different side of things" topic for me.
I have to say I was not quite aware of this information. And I agree it should not be dismissed. The question for me remains what is the key message to gain from that data. These lists where all from the first half of 2018 pretty much. This was pretty much the timeframe where the meta was up in the air due to the unbanning of BBE and Jace. As we know, at the beginning people overplayed Jace and BBE in control and Jund decks first, until they realized that Humans and Hollow One are simply faster, and more consistant than those decks. We have a pretty defined meta right now, which is still wide open, but the top decks are defined. So I would say I am more interested in the decks from june rather those of february and march for that reason.
The meta really has not shifted much from where it was in February though, that is my point. Se saw these Jace and BBE decks crop up, but the decks that stuck around were the same decks that were there from the start. As a Sultai player from day 1, my experience is about the same as Jund - a very strong deck across the vast majority of the field but not flexible enough to be played without thinning itself out way too much. Both Jund and Sultai were fine decks until you realized that your SB and slot counts get super awkward and inefficient once you try to tackle everything. Todd Anderson and Brad Nelson were actually just talking about this in an offhand comment during a Standard stream. GBx decks are just not flexible when it comes to adapting to meta shifts because there are not enough broad spectrum cards to work with. You end up with clunky SBs where you are jamming 3 Fulminators, 2 Damping Spheres and maybe a LtLH just to try and slow down a Tron deck enough to do something. Or you crumble to KCI unless you overdo your answers and fold to Tron or UW.
These were problems GBx had before Jace was unbanned, during the unbanning phase, and well after. So I think the question really becomes "Why now with GRN?"
To which I really answer: Assassin's Trophy gives your broader coverage to decks like UW, Tron, and even KCI, all while being a mainboard answer. Ego allows us to condense some 6 or so slots down to a mere 3 and is flexible enough to hit both Tron as well as combo decks like KCI, Scapeshift, and so on - while freeing up more slots for matches like Humans, while leaving use with a much cleaner SB plan across the entirety of the format. Which is really what GB needed. Not all that it needed, but a big part of what it needed.
The fact that we have all this previous information from GBx decks makes starting with them more reasonable than reverting to a mere brew with much less data behind it, all for the sake of 1 or 2 cards.
And also to add, where I am coming from with the controllish strategy, there has been some very recent Modo 5-0 by Jaberwocki playing an UB control deck. Jaberwocki is a very good player with consistant good results which I value very highly. Plus its very recent. And based on that, I thought it might be a good idea to try to just splash green for Goyf and Trophy in that version. I think this could have some merit. I can't share a search link, but you will find the lists on mtgtop8 by searching for him.
I have seen the Jaberwocki list. I think it might be a plausible start for something like Sultai Control. Historically though, the main issue with UB Control decks in Modern is a strong way to actually finish out the game. UW is fortunate to have Teferi, a permanent that is quite hard to interact with. UB really doesn't have any of that, and Goyf is not a card that is going to be that solution. It cost less than 4 mana, has no immediate board presence, no evasion to get around the combat zone, nothing. It is just a cheap, dumb dork in a Control shell. I would lean more towards some sort of 4 Color Gifts package in a Sultai Control Shell before I used Goyf to finish the game as a Control deck.
But I digress.
UG cards traditionally lean towards more tempo oriented play. UB cards traditionally lean towards reactive play. BG traditionally leans towards very proactive play. UG is likely the secret to bridging the gap between a BG focus and a UB focus, but there is little to be desired in Modern to help bridge that gap. Which is why we are seeing BG lists that lean into their opponent on turn 1, or UB lists that sit back in the early game. You are going to be hard pressed to find something in between that is effective, because you tend to find that those decks do incredibly awkward things with incredibly divided opening hands and you have to pivot from time to time, in the most inefficient way.
I want to let you know that I am not trying to really get in your face or anything. Sorry if I am coming off that way, I do owe you an apology for my general attitude towards you in recent posts. I really just want to point out that we have previous information to work with and that I don't think there is any value in just dismissing that.
I can agree to disagree on the correct land count discussion.
But the difference between what Todd Stevens is doing and what all these other lists have been doing, are fundamentally different no matter how similar they may look on paper.
To make clear, I am not saying I am thinking Todd Stevens approach is the correct one, I never said that. Thats not whats my point here. I just think we should not only focus on one particular version with Trophy coming up. Even your lists at least contain several what I would consider different builds, which does maybe give a hint for whats good, but not give yet a fully clear picture.
And my opinion on LoTV still holds pretty much, also in midrange. I think due to trophy snapcaster is a very potent card to run in Sultai (even if you consider it to be the worst blue card in the deck). And since we naturally want to run discard, then snapcaster alongside LotV gets weaker. However, I think Snapcaster works brilliantly together with LtLH. Thats why I am more leaning towards those cards. And besides that, LoTV is in general bad shape for the overall format anyway.
Those lists are pretty congruent save for filler slots - which tend to be cards like Tireless Trackers, Grim Flayers, Dark Confidants, or Scavenging Ooze. None of those cards shift the core of the deck substantially, so "different builds" among the above posted lists is something I would also call into question.
I agree that Trophy adds more value to Snapcaster Mage. My comment about most people finding the card underwhelming is that we don't have much to use him for save for discard. His other options are really not that interesting. Trophy definitely adds value layers to Snapcaster. If you saw my list from the PPTQ you would have noticed I ran 2 and that with Trophy coming up, I am increasing it to 3 copies of Snap. I don't think Trophy packs on so much value to Snap that he is worth a 4 of and completely shifting to things like Cryptic Command though. You still need to have a deck that has a robust offensive line and that is the trick with Sultai as opposed to Jund or Abzan - blue is at odds with the proactive GB strategy.
As a Jund Pilot, I would agree that Liliana is not the most efficient card right now. As a Sultai player, I would say that it provides a much needed board presence at a much needed slot of 3 mana. So I think her place in the meta is actually pretty subjective in that sense. I think LtLH is actually not a great card in this deck. Sure it can fill the yard and stick out some meat, but as someone who has ran her extensively in the SB with Fulminators... her value kind of ends there over the course of an event. I ended up cutting her from the board entirely because she just wasn't that good, even with the Fulminators. Some games I just brought in Fulminators and left her out. I would value something like Garruk, Relentless over her even, and the only match I found him to be strong in is the Jund/Abzan match. As much as I like the option to continue to rebuy threats vs Trophy decks, I think I would just rather run more threats if T1 Discard T2 threats is the gameplan.
I will be closely watching to see how you feel about her, but I never liked her as a board option enough to ever want her main over a lot of other options - especially at 3 mana.
@Superna7ural It seems we have a disagreement and this is fine by me. But Sultai is not in anyway an established archetype in modern by my understanding, nor has this threat a strict requirement for which midrange version to talk about here. In my mind, this is nitpicking whether this deck is now UBg or GBu, in my mind there is no correct way yet. There is surely a difference in Control and Midrange, but again, the differences are marginal atm (simply due to trophy) and in my mind it wouldn't make sense to actively exclude any version from discussion and seperate them because many thoughts of midrange sultai can surely be helpful for control and vice versa. We are on the verge of a possible real sultai archetype getting defined, so by my understanding, all is pretty much up in the air. You can surely claim that some specific versions have been more successful in the past, but in my mind this doesn't mean much unless we can see consistant positive results. This is not to be mean, this is just not how you can define an established deck.
Do you have links to the decklists you mentioned? I am interested to see the builds and the exact time when they have been succesful. Was this in a short period of time? Or was this on a bigger stretch? Which banlist was the active one?
Sultai, in the discussion of the Midrange vs Control, is established. This thread used to be the old Sultai Control thread and was renamed accordingly because of the results that were going up and how the deck shifted. You might see it as nitpicking, but the difference between a BGu core and a UBg core is pretty substantial in how they play out. BG plays a proactive early game into stabilizing reactive cards where UB plays a reactive early game into a stablized proactive game. I have played enough to have experienced how different they are, and they are not marginal at all. BG is far more aggressive than UB. Trophy does not change that in any significant way. The only thing Trophy does is shore up the problem matches the lists below have vs the current modern Climate. It doesnt solve the UB core's issue of having to use bad Tarmos as finishers.
Have these decks continued to have consistent results? Not on the trajectory they had early on... but these lists are far more relevant that Todd Stevens brews which have nowhere near the amount of footing in an arguably exact same Modern meta that existed early in 2018. The decks tapered off in the same fashion as Jund, not because they were inferior to UB cores, but because they BGx had problems that Trophy clearly resolves and in a much better way than it does for Jund.
Sultai Midrange by Nick Moore 1st Place SCG IQ Findlay 3.11.18
I recently made a fairly easy run to the top 8 of a PPTQ with the list I posted a couple of pages back. The deck is still gas in the same way it was earlier in the year. The only difference is now you have outs with Trophy and you can streamline your sideboard WAY more efficiently with Ego. No more having to have 6-8 slots specifically for Tron in your SB. Freeing up space to cut out fat vs your tough matches like Humans and KCI.
Like I said, is the Control the possible future of the deck? Possibly. But this thread is going to progress a lot more efficiently by going back to the basics above which are more established lists. The meta has not shifted in any significant way since early 2018 after the unbanning of JTMS and BBE, that would make these above lists any less effective.
If you can provide a comparable level of results for lists more like that of Todd Stevens, I will open up to the idea.
But at the end of the day, results speak louder than conjecture.
What is most unfortunate is the price tag preventing crazy mass opening. Which is slightly unfortunate.
As for Ral, Izzet Viceroy, the card is pretty powerful. I think the reason most find it underwhelming is that it competes heavily with Teferi and that alone is probably enough of a reason why it isn't worth running. I like the idea of it being a board options, but pretty sure there are just better options there as well.
Fixed!
Because vs decks that go to the length where tapping 7 EOT is a thing, often times it was draw go and they just countered it. He had to be safely cast on turn 10 if I wanted him to somewhat reliably resolve.
The game really should not go that long, and your finishers shouldn't be taking that long to drop. Tapping 7 for Chromium felt bad unless I had backup mana for counter magic. The difference between something like Chromium costing 7 and something like Nexus costing 7 is pretty substantial because Nexus rebuys itself and doesn't require additional mana to EOT in the matches that go so incredibly long. Ionize + Sabotage is brutal for Chromium and I see a good amount of UR Control on Arena - far more than I see any other kind of Control deck.
I suspect that this card is actually quite underrated.
Notion Rain is a rough card. It is handy when you are in the clear to cast it, but against proactive decks, it is the last card I ever wanted to see. Too often I was cornered and it was a dead card from the start. I think the deck really needs this 3cmc slot filled though, as a lot of the time I felt I was just waiting on that turn and doing nothing. Notion Rain was sometimes left in hand on turn 3 and I really did not like that. I think running more Chemister's Insight is actually, more than likely, correct.
All in on Vraska's Contempt was also pretty painful in my Casual Constructed games. The matches I was facing were pretty aggressive token or RW aggro builds. For my Competitive Constructed run I added 2x Settle the Wreckage and 1x Cleansing Nova. I went down to 3 Contempt. Overall, the sweepers did a lot of work when I needed them to. I don't think I will be going back to a sweeper-less build. Contempt also had me wondering if Ixalan's Binding is possibly better. It is hard to say, but I will touch on this in a bit.I did run Ritual of Soot in a couple of runs, and the card was pretty sub-par.
As for Essence Scatter, I dropped these in favor of Syncopate. Initially, I was pretty skeptical. Syncopate can sometimes just be a dead spell, and I confirmed this in a number of games. But it actually turned out to be better than Scatter when it was played. It did pick me out of a few tight spots where Scatter would have missed and killed my chance at untapping into a Teferi.
On Chromium, the Mutable, I dropped this card. I liked the idea of it, but boy did it feel bad tapping mana for it on the rare chance I was stable on 7. My games with Lyra Dawnbringer were much more stable. I also ran a 1x copy of Nexus of Fate in my Competitive Constructed run, and man that card did a crazy amount of work. There were a few times where it won me the game by simply going infinite. I had actually started running this in my last Casual Constructed run, and I was lacking any sweepers to deal with Carnage Tyrant, but I got to the point where I had just gone infinite and my last 2 cards in my deck were Lyra + Nexus and I just beat him down. I think a single copy of Nexus is a pretty solid failsafe for any match that may go long. I am not entirely sold on it, but I was completely surprised at how much heavy lifting it did sometimes.
Revisiting my remarks about a 3 drop, and about Ixalan's Binding... I wonder if Vona's Hunger is playable. Part of the problem I have with cards like Price of Fame is how narrow it actually is in practice. Things like Seal Away and Baffling End give you an increased pip count towards the City's Blessing. It fills the 3 drop slot in a very strong way and it scales well in the late game.
I look forward to making some adjustments to my Esper list on Arena and doing another run tomorrow. But those were my thoughts after my run. Below is the list I ran for the 5-1 record in Competitive Constructed event.
2 Lyra Dawnbringer
Planeswalker
4 Teferi, Hero of Dominaria
Instant
3 Syncopate
4 Sinister Sabotage
2 Moment of Craving
2 Cast Down
2 Settle the Wreckage
3 Vraska's Contempt
3 Chemister's Insight
2 Anticipate
1 Nexus of Fate
2 Notion Rain
1 Cleansing Nova
Enchantment
2 Search for Azcanta
Land
27 Lands
Overall, the deck felt decent. I think some of the conventional choices are probably a little loose, but I am not sure how paper will pan out compared to Arena. I faced a fair amount of GB decks, UB Surveil decks, UR Counterburn decks, GW token decks, and RW aggro decks. Esper seems fairly stable with Lyra in it, but I will unlikely ever go back to Chromium outside of maybe a SB role.
verb
1. be the property of.
"the vehicle did not belong to him"
synonyms: be owned by, be the property of, be the possession of, be held by, be in the hands of "the house belongs to his mother"
2. be a member or part of (a particular group, organization, or class).
"they belong to garden and bridge clubs"
synonyms: be a member of, be in, be affiliated to/with, be allied to, be associated with, be linked to, be an adherent of "I belong to a book club"
This is my fault. You and I are using the word interchangeably and it is causing miscommunication. I don't think Goyf has a home in Control as you are suggesting, and understand that you don't think Goyf is a Control-centric creature.
Moving on.
I think Delve threats in Modern Control, by and large, suffer from the same pitfalls as Goyf does albiet have built in security features making them more plausible. As I said, Modern has a wide arrange of removal across a wide variety of decks and a vast array of playable removal means more often than not, DTR holds true for Delve threats in Modern. I believe Tasigur is more of an exception because of his unique ability to generate actual card advantage. Legacy has become a format so littered with a small but dense number of cards that limit the opportunity to use a diverse selection of removal - comparatively speaking when it comes to Legacy vs Modern. Modern has a more even level of power distribution meaning that the removal options naturally flourish in more ways.
I am not sure what Jabberwocki list you are referring to, because I see Snapcaster Mage, Thing in the Ice, and Tasigur, the Golden Fang. I don't see things like Gurmag Angler, Hooting Mandrills, or even Tombstalker. I think it is important not to refer to the lone Delve creature as if there are a lot of other prominent delve creatures in these UB lists, because as stated above Tasigur is an exception because of his unique ability.
Working with that, I really do not think Thing in the Ice is a viable finisher if you really expect the deck to perform well in Modern. It suffers from the exact same issue Tarmogoyf does except it isn't vanilla in the best case scenario. The problem is the workload necessary in Modern for it to reach the ceiling. The card probably gets a little better when Assassin's Trophy starts taking the driver's seat from Abrupt Decay, but that is a pretty marginal swing in TiTi's favor.
So that really just leaves us with Tasigur from these UB lists and from there I really ask again: Why would you run Tarmogoyf in UBg Control? If Tasigur is not enough, then Tasigur is not the right finisher. Notice that UW's primary wincon other than JTMS, is a card with heavy, built in protection. I don't expect UB to have a finisher on the same level as Teferi, Hero of Dominaria, but it illustrates my point that you don't want to be using finishers that require constant resource devotion in order to put in an 8 hour shift. This is why Control decks have always hinged upon value over attrition. That is where the bread and butter is stored.
Anyways. Moving on, because I think that is about all I have to say. I have made all the points I want to make and you are going to do you, regardless.
I think if you are looking for a Sultai Control list, your best option is going to be to toolbox. If there is really one thing that green does for decks like these, it is to allow them to toolbox. This becomes more valuable when you have playable finishers but they are too situational to make the deck cohesive enough to play against an open field. If there is a Gifts deck in Modern worth brewing, I have always felt it is likely some Sultai core. The problem with Esper cores or Grixis cores is - as you have said in regards to UB, that they historically have issues dealing with particular permanents. Trophy alleviates this, gifts lets you tutor scenario specific plays, and you can tie it all together with playable options like Thragtusk, Noxious Revival, Snapcaster Mage, and various spells without having to have awkward situations where you might just get blown out by Bloodmoon. You get bullets like Life from the Loam and Raven's Crime. Thrun, the Last Troll and Obstinate Baloth. Who knows, maybe this makes something like Emrakul, the Promised End a reasonable finisher.
I think no matter how it is swung, Midrange has the best chance for success with GRN and Sultai. It has a solid core with a foundation already built for it. It is also in a format where proactive play is heavily rewarded and reactive play can often be loose. Assassin's Trophy does solve a significant piece of the puzzle in terms of Modern UBx Control, but there are still some other issues the deck has and to deny them seems a bit silly.
Creature
2 Emrakul, the Promised End
1 Thragtusk
1 Grave Titan
2 Snapcaster Mage
Enchantment
2 Search for Azcanta
Planeswalker
3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Instant
3 Assassin's Trophy
2 Abrupt Decay
3 Gifts Ungiven
1 Noxious Revival
4 Remand
3 Cryptic Command
Sorcery
1 Damnation
1 Languish
4 Thoughtseize
2 Collective Brutality
4 Creeping Tar Pit
4 Verdant Catacombs
4 Polluted Delta
2 Darkslick Shores
1 Misty Rainforest
2 Overgrown Tomb
2 Watery Grave
1 Breeding Pool
2 Swamp
2 Island
1 Forest
1 Thrun, the Last Troll
3 Obstinate Baloth
2 Negate
1 Dispel
1 Assassin's Trophy
2 Fatal Push
2 Spell Snare
2 Liliana of the Veil
1 Collective Brutality
It isn't necessarily that a Wiki is inaccurate, it is that it is an open source encyclopedia and you linked me to one that is about theory. Do you not see how that becomes a problem when talking about groupthink? There is a difference between a wiki that sources scientific literature about something like quantum theory and something that talks about MTG theorycraft. A BIG difference. The fact that it is a) Content subject to a matter of opinion and b) Content that is editable to the point of finding general consensus - i.e conventional wisdom and groupthink.
These two things are not always bad, but you have to understand that they can absolutely lead to sub-optimization by nature and an audience would be none the wiser. Yes, they can also lead to ideal optimization in the same vein. But unless you are aware of the polarity, you likely would never really know or understand the difference.
If you think that just because this is MTG and that makes is non-complex... then you must not be that into something like Chess.
Anyways, if you want to exit this talking point, I am okay letting it go to rest.
Yes. There is a difference between Goyf and Angler for Control decks. Albiet I will admit that it is not entirely substantial. Angler lessens risk by comparison. It offers a flat rate body, meaning it isn't contingent on external factors that would determine if it dies to something like Burst Lightning or Bolt. It cost more than 2 mana, which means it isn't prone to dying to Fatal Push or Abrupt Decay. You could argue that they are simply stats for mana, but they also have external factors going on. DTR is a far more relevant argument when evaluating creatures for Control decks, because it determine if/when/how often, you will need to spend resources to ensure that it can actually put in an 8 hour shift. Something else you should consider when talking about Legacy, is that premier removal is extremely limited in this format. This means that you remove a lot of diversity when it comes to what can remove your creature and from there it is a matter of "does it dodge A, B, or C?" Instead of "Does it dodge A-z?. As I said, the DTR argument, as much as I think invoking that argument is invalid, is something that is a critical argument when evaluating creatures for Control. Bringing it back to my argument about decks like GBx - DTR becomes a less valuable argument because it is more about running them out of resources and having something naturally stick as a result. It doesn't care if Goyf dies because it has something else to stick. Control cares about DTR because it determines the level of investment when calculating the overall value. Less removal diversity = more value and that is the core DTR.
Modern has a vastly superior amount of removal diversity than Legacy which means stat based win conditions in control drops dramatically. This is also evident in Limited which shows that there is a correlation between the effectiveness of stats and the amount of available removal and how diverse said removal is.
You tell me that I am not sticking to facts, when I am literally telling you that this thread contains empirical data on BGx Sultai vs UBx Sultai based on a collective of top finishes.
The facts are that you said UB Control's problem in Modern is not the lack of a stable finisher. Yet you are advocating Tarmogoyf, a card I pointed out is a Midrange creature, over any of the other cards that are apparently proving that UB Control doesn't suffer from the lack of a playable finisher in Modern. I never said you called Goyf a control creature. So you if you want to try to call me out for putting words in your mouth, then I would argue that you let go of some of the contextual elements in the discussion... not that I am not sticking to facts.
I think the notion that Tasigur, the Golden Fang needs something like Thoughtscour to power him is utter nonsense. Sure, Scour can help power him out - but if your game plan is to play the long game, he is going to convert resources all the same. I honestly doubt Tasigur is the answer to UB Control's lack of a playable finisher. But the fact that you are now encouraged to go into Green for Trophy means there is more inherent appeal to Tasigur over some other options.
You keep saying that UB Control does not suffer from the lack of a stable finisher in Modern yet the only UB Control variants we see are Esper which utilize cards like Creeping Tar Pit, Snapcaster Mage, and Lightning Bolt to chip away life totals. That becomes an entirely different situation when you remove Lightning Bolt from the equation because now you are skimming on your reach. IF you want to show me examples of UBx Control decks that are not Grixis that have shown that a lack of a finisher is not the issue - then I will wait.
I don't disagree that the inability to deal with a diverse selection of resolved permanents is a huge problem for UB Control in Modern. But I do disagree that it is the only serious issue the deck faces. I expect that after your stint of testing Sultai Control with the lack of a viable finisher, the same conclusion is inevitable.
I like that I talk about the problem with conventional wisdom + groupthink and you link me to a wiki as a defense...
There is a difference between a deck that focuses on attrition and a deck that focuses on actual value. You seem to disambiguate the two based on slight commonalities. Even the wiki seems to disambiguate the two, which I find oddly satisfying given the current discussion.
Let's start with what we know about Tarmogoyf. Tarmogofy traditionally finds strong roles in GBx decks, which utilize attrition to grind out games through 1 for 1 trading via spells for spells or spells for creatures. The general premise of these decks, historically, is to throw down efficient creatures until one sticks - increasing the likelihood that one sticks through means of 1 for 1 trading. Either another creatures eats a removal spell or you trade a spell for a spell, such as Thoughtseize. Tarmogoyf plays a key role in these decks because it is a hit the ground running kind of card. Low mana cost, scales well, and can present a clock on a clean board. These decks do not care that the creature has conversion because it either dies or sticks and that is literally all they care about. If it dies, then something else lives - Voice of Resurgence, Knight of the Reliquary, Dark Confidant, Grim Flayer, Tireless Tracker, etc. The card is made to pay off when the game is grindy. Cards like Spiritmonger and Phyrexian Plaguelord are attrition cards. They don't generate inherent resource value they only cause the game to incrementally move forward until resources are depleted. Goyf is strong in these decks because it can demand a removal spell and pave the way for clean boards... or simply just run away with the game.
Now let's look at Control decks, decks that utilize attrition through the trading of spells. Examples are things like Doom Blade, Disallow, Force of Will. These are the things that you are attributing to attrition. But if you dig deeper, the real cards that are the most linear across Control decks are cards like Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Consecrated Sphinx, Bitterblossom, Grave Titan, Meloku the Clouded Mirror. Now we start to delineate between the key concepts of Control and the key Concepts of a Midrange deck when it comes to what attrition means and how it is used. GBx decks as stated above, lean into a straight up raw attrition game plan. That is how they win. Control on the other hand, while it may use methods of attrition, what it actually uses to win is raw value. Things snowball and generate additional resources vs deplete resources. You even touched on this in a prior comment when you quoted your lord and savior Todd Stevens, but you ignore it in making a muddied defense as to why Tarmogoyf belongs in Control as a finisher and why you think it is reasonable/viable. Talk about a contradiction.
So yes, you are correct in that Control used a method of attrition. But the archetype fundamentally wins through value cards that snowball.
Tarmogoyf is a midrange creature through and through. It is laughable that people think it is a Control finisher and the fact that people think that in Modern stands as a testament to the real problem of UB. It lacks a finisher, so much so that people are trying to justify Tarmogoyf as a finisher... That reeks of desperation to me.
You know who doesn't die to Fatal Push? Tasigur. You know who doesn't die to Abrupt Decay? Tasigur. You know who doesn't die Lightning Bolt? Tasigur. Consider something like Tasagur as a finisher if you want to focus on UBg and be real with yourself. Tasigur avoids all of the pitfalls Goyf has for a Control deck + he actually does what Control needs their finishers to do - convert resources or generate card advantage as raw value. He doesn't need you to continually spend resources to clear the board for him without offering a return. He doesn't need you to continually spend resources to protect him without offering a return.
Gofy is arguably one of the most susceptible creatures to Modern removal spells in the entire format, in terms of playable creatures. He slots into decks where there isn't enough going on around him to continually absorb removal. He cost less than 3 mana. He is 1 color. He isn't a black creature. He doesn't have hexproof. He doesn't have flying. He doesn't have trample... He is a cheap dork with no evasion and no protection and his toughness is based on other factors meaning he does indeed sometime even die to Lightning Bolt. He is best when other things are eating those kinds of spells increasing the odds that he can actually put in an 8 hour shift.
There is something to say about conventional wisdom and groupthink pitfalls, that often go completely unobserved in collective discussions like this.
Goyf is, and always has been, an attrition creature. There is a reason he works well in creature based decks and with discard and why he is less efficient in blue decks with disruption like counter magic. Counterspells are not attrition cards. Control decks are also not so much attrition based as they are preparation based. They reward set ups, not grindy maneuvering.
Tying this in with the discussion previously had about Sultai and why the deck is constantly at odds with itself based on color pairings and color pie fundamentals - You need to decide if you are going GBx attrition with Sultai or if you are going UB prep control set up with Sultai. From there you can give your deck a cohesive element by cutting out cards that are intuitive to your overall game plan. This means removing cards like Mana Leak, Cryptic Command, and Damnation from your 60 of a GBu Sultai list. Or removing things like Tarmogoyf and Tireless Tracker from your UBg Sultai. Running counter intuitive cards mean your openings are going to be partial and clunky. This is historically why the UBg Sultai decks never took off in the first place, because they lack a solid UB Control style finisher and they opt to run attrition cards instead of straight value cards like a traditional control deck. This is also why GBu Sultai decks have historically struggled to make a footing, they too often revert to powerful options that are at odds wit hthe gameplan of playing a straight attrition game.
This is also why Legacy has seen Sultai lists do well - they ran and still run a cohesive gameplan. Now you would argue that Force of Will and Cryptic Command serve the same purpose, but in reality they operate on completely different levels because FoW's only resource cost is a single card. meaning you can use your mana to play the hard attrition ground game with little opportunity cost. Modern does not let you do that when you are tapping 4 mana to make a play that is 100% reactive.
I think people get too lost in card tier that they simply forget about fundamental MTG theory and this is why Pro Tours feature breakout decks and SCG Opens often don't anymore. People favor groupthink and conventional wisdom over flexing fundamental game theory.
The meta really has not shifted much from where it was in February though, that is my point. Se saw these Jace and BBE decks crop up, but the decks that stuck around were the same decks that were there from the start. As a Sultai player from day 1, my experience is about the same as Jund - a very strong deck across the vast majority of the field but not flexible enough to be played without thinning itself out way too much. Both Jund and Sultai were fine decks until you realized that your SB and slot counts get super awkward and inefficient once you try to tackle everything. Todd Anderson and Brad Nelson were actually just talking about this in an offhand comment during a Standard stream. GBx decks are just not flexible when it comes to adapting to meta shifts because there are not enough broad spectrum cards to work with. You end up with clunky SBs where you are jamming 3 Fulminators, 2 Damping Spheres and maybe a LtLH just to try and slow down a Tron deck enough to do something. Or you crumble to KCI unless you overdo your answers and fold to Tron or UW.
These were problems GBx had before Jace was unbanned, during the unbanning phase, and well after. So I think the question really becomes "Why now with GRN?"
To which I really answer: Assassin's Trophy gives your broader coverage to decks like UW, Tron, and even KCI, all while being a mainboard answer. Ego allows us to condense some 6 or so slots down to a mere 3 and is flexible enough to hit both Tron as well as combo decks like KCI, Scapeshift, and so on - while freeing up more slots for matches like Humans, while leaving use with a much cleaner SB plan across the entirety of the format. Which is really what GB needed. Not all that it needed, but a big part of what it needed.
The fact that we have all this previous information from GBx decks makes starting with them more reasonable than reverting to a mere brew with much less data behind it, all for the sake of 1 or 2 cards.
I have seen the Jaberwocki list. I think it might be a plausible start for something like Sultai Control. Historically though, the main issue with UB Control decks in Modern is a strong way to actually finish out the game. UW is fortunate to have Teferi, a permanent that is quite hard to interact with. UB really doesn't have any of that, and Goyf is not a card that is going to be that solution. It cost less than 4 mana, has no immediate board presence, no evasion to get around the combat zone, nothing. It is just a cheap, dumb dork in a Control shell. I would lean more towards some sort of 4 Color Gifts package in a Sultai Control Shell before I used Goyf to finish the game as a Control deck.
But I digress.
UG cards traditionally lean towards more tempo oriented play. UB cards traditionally lean towards reactive play. BG traditionally leans towards very proactive play. UG is likely the secret to bridging the gap between a BG focus and a UB focus, but there is little to be desired in Modern to help bridge that gap. Which is why we are seeing BG lists that lean into their opponent on turn 1, or UB lists that sit back in the early game. You are going to be hard pressed to find something in between that is effective, because you tend to find that those decks do incredibly awkward things with incredibly divided opening hands and you have to pivot from time to time, in the most inefficient way.
I want to let you know that I am not trying to really get in your face or anything. Sorry if I am coming off that way, I do owe you an apology for my general attitude towards you in recent posts. I really just want to point out that we have previous information to work with and that I don't think there is any value in just dismissing that.
I can agree to disagree on the correct land count discussion.
But the difference between what Todd Stevens is doing and what all these other lists have been doing, are fundamentally different no matter how similar they may look on paper.
Those lists are pretty congruent save for filler slots - which tend to be cards like Tireless Trackers, Grim Flayers, Dark Confidants, or Scavenging Ooze. None of those cards shift the core of the deck substantially, so "different builds" among the above posted lists is something I would also call into question.
I agree that Trophy adds more value to Snapcaster Mage. My comment about most people finding the card underwhelming is that we don't have much to use him for save for discard. His other options are really not that interesting. Trophy definitely adds value layers to Snapcaster. If you saw my list from the PPTQ you would have noticed I ran 2 and that with Trophy coming up, I am increasing it to 3 copies of Snap. I don't think Trophy packs on so much value to Snap that he is worth a 4 of and completely shifting to things like Cryptic Command though. You still need to have a deck that has a robust offensive line and that is the trick with Sultai as opposed to Jund or Abzan - blue is at odds with the proactive GB strategy.
As a Jund Pilot, I would agree that Liliana is not the most efficient card right now. As a Sultai player, I would say that it provides a much needed board presence at a much needed slot of 3 mana. So I think her place in the meta is actually pretty subjective in that sense. I think LtLH is actually not a great card in this deck. Sure it can fill the yard and stick out some meat, but as someone who has ran her extensively in the SB with Fulminators... her value kind of ends there over the course of an event. I ended up cutting her from the board entirely because she just wasn't that good, even with the Fulminators. Some games I just brought in Fulminators and left her out. I would value something like Garruk, Relentless over her even, and the only match I found him to be strong in is the Jund/Abzan match. As much as I like the option to continue to rebuy threats vs Trophy decks, I think I would just rather run more threats if T1 Discard T2 threats is the gameplan.
I will be closely watching to see how you feel about her, but I never liked her as a board option enough to ever want her main over a lot of other options - especially at 3 mana.
Sultai, in the discussion of the Midrange vs Control, is established. This thread used to be the old Sultai Control thread and was renamed accordingly because of the results that were going up and how the deck shifted. You might see it as nitpicking, but the difference between a BGu core and a UBg core is pretty substantial in how they play out. BG plays a proactive early game into stabilizing reactive cards where UB plays a reactive early game into a stablized proactive game. I have played enough to have experienced how different they are, and they are not marginal at all. BG is far more aggressive than UB. Trophy does not change that in any significant way. The only thing Trophy does is shore up the problem matches the lists below have vs the current modern Climate. It doesnt solve the UB core's issue of having to use bad Tarmos as finishers.
Have these decks continued to have consistent results? Not on the trajectory they had early on... but these lists are far more relevant that Todd Stevens brews which have nowhere near the amount of footing in an arguably exact same Modern meta that existed early in 2018. The decks tapered off in the same fashion as Jund, not because they were inferior to UB cores, but because they BGx had problems that Trophy clearly resolves and in a much better way than it does for Jund.
Sultai Midrange by Nick Moore 1st Place SCG IQ Findlay 3.11.18
Sultai Midrange by Jesse Clevenger 11th Place SCG Open Classic Cincinnati 3.25.18
Sultai Midrange by yuurari_yuko 5-0 Competitive Modern League 3.20.18
Sultai Midrange by Mr_DeathCloud 5-0 Competitive Modern League 2.27.18
Sultai Midrange by kogamo 5-0 Competitive Modern League 2.23.18
Sultai Midrange by lighdar 5-0 Competitive Modern League 2.20.18
Sultai Midrange by Jeff Hoogland 5-2 Competitive Modern Challenge 2.10.18
Sultai Midrange by Raja Sulaiman 12th place Team Constructed 3.25.18
Sultai midrange by Shaun Raj 8th Place SCG Regionals 6.2.18
Sultai Midrange by Edgar Magalhaes top 8 F2F 1K
Sultai Midrange by Somniloquist_ Modern Competitive League 6.22.18
Sultai Midrange by Robert Baker Modern Staples 42 man event top 8
I recently made a fairly easy run to the top 8 of a PPTQ with the list I posted a couple of pages back. The deck is still gas in the same way it was earlier in the year. The only difference is now you have outs with Trophy and you can streamline your sideboard WAY more efficiently with Ego. No more having to have 6-8 slots specifically for Tron in your SB. Freeing up space to cut out fat vs your tough matches like Humans and KCI.
Like I said, is the Control the possible future of the deck? Possibly. But this thread is going to progress a lot more efficiently by going back to the basics above which are more established lists. The meta has not shifted in any significant way since early 2018 after the unbanning of JTMS and BBE, that would make these above lists any less effective.
If you can provide a comparable level of results for lists more like that of Todd Stevens, I will open up to the idea.
But at the end of the day, results speak louder than conjecture.