MTG Salvation

Quote from BlackVise »

I'd agree with most of that, but not the mono-green bit - even a 75% tuned Azusa, Lost but Seeking deck can be incredibly powerful. Equally, I run a Hua Tuo, Honored Physician list which isn't particularly tuned (it's probably around 85%) and it has a really high win rate. Mono-green has access to absurd ramp, answers to most threats, powerful draw and tutors and of course a lot of win conditions.

Which is really annoying. I'd love to play mono-green, -black, and -blue but without the card advantage restrictions that white has I end up with far too many card advantage options and no idea of where to start with them and any lists I complete don't feel like they have personality to me. They're all just card drawing and tutoring. I just end up building more mono-white decks. I've got like three or four.

Mono-color is the way to go. Especially mono-white and, yeah, mono-green. Or really any sort of limitation that places an artificial cap on how strong your deck can be based on card quality while not capping how well you do by way of experience, deck construction, and etc.

Also people won't take you seriously if it's not meta and not blue. My Elesh Norn deck wins far too many games it shouldn't because I'll be at a four man table against three- and four-color decks but end up winning anyway because they play into my hand by assuming I'm not a threat and just ignoring me.

If I were given the choice between growth in popularity and not having custom-made generals for cookie cutter decks that make it far too easy for tryhards to spike casual games, I'd choose the latter. The extra people playing is not worth getting blown out by Combo Animar in two out of three games.

The glass is half-empty, buddy.

Man that list is depressing. Wizards has almost completely ruined the format with their designer generals.

Drew Levin should be banned for attributing to the harassment of another player. If WotC is really concerned with players' "safety" that should extend to not having your personal life dragged into the spotlight by a jealous scrub.

Also I pooled the whole thing here for those who don't know what happened.

This deck is still fine. It has everything a good Modern deck needs: a strong proactive game plan, a degree of interactivity, and flexibility to play both offensively and defensively. It's a perfectly reasonable choice.

Quote from TwinSais »

Collected Merfolk?
Collected Hatebears? (Too bad Gaddock says otherwise...)

I would gladly drop Teeg to make room for CC.

Still good, though.

DON'T CALL IT A COMEBACK!

Ojutai's Command is incredible. It's got just the right modes UW need to help it pull through the midgame. I'm going to play them over Cryptics.

I can't wait to live the dream and Ojutai's Commanding to draw a card and return Wall of Omens to battlefield to draw another card. Or Ojutai's Command to bounce your guy, reanimate Snapcaster, and snapback a Path to Exile on your other guy. Or Command to gain four life and reanimate Snapcaster Mage to snap back Ojutai's Command to gain four more life and boune your threat.

IT'S A CIRCUS OF VAAAAALUUUUUUUE!

I feel vindicated by that Sultai list. It has a bunch of cards I've supported and been admonished for it. It's also more evidence that a major issue with control deck is suppression of experimentation. If that list was posted here it'd be nitpicked to death.

Also it's hilarious that Sultai wins mere days after Badd B declares it unplayable.

Are you playing a lot of mana rocks? If not, Jokulhaups seems fine too.

Regarding insight into the card - be aware that these effects much less powerful against decks with a lot of recursion. In fact, against some decks, casting these spells will actually hurt you. Things like Marchesa, the Black Rose, for example.

Really bad against Sigarda, Host of Herons. Most decks don't think about Sigarda, because their board wipes work against her. But, if you are making people sacrifice lands, you need to have a way of clearing Sigarda if she hits play. There are a lot of options (Cyclonic Rift, Blasphemous Act, Arcane Lighthouse + removal). As long as you have something. No fun having a game with zero outs.

Also, be careful about having Keranos "on" when you cast this. Someone responding with Swords to Plowshares will set you back quite a bit.

Date went very well. Like them both, and have lots in common with her but not sure of her interest. He texted me afterward that he would see me soon, though.

Eh, who knows! Have another date tomorrow with a Brit and seeing a "nice Jewish boy" again for a picnic Saturday.

Dance card is full enough as it is!

Quote from The Dead Weatherman »

hi, guys. what's good?

Just got a number while waiting for my dates to arrive.

Just got the basement cleared out so that I can get to all of my music stuff and my pool table and shot a few games. (It's been so long that I need to practice before I try to make half the shots I used to)

Quote from Valanarch »

Quote from The Dead Weatherman »

Again, sideboard Hallowed Moonlight is wrong. Play it main deck or don't play it at all.

How does this make any sense? It is just a terrible cantrip against most decks. It is purely a sideboard card.

It's a metacall card in the same way as Shadow of Doubt. Against the fair decks, it is just a cruddy cantrip card.
I think it's best in a 1-of flex spot in the main as well. That's your one chance to do a "got em" victory.

Comment Hidden

Okay. So

Your upkeep-remove the last counter from Keldon and sac it. It leaves play and deals it's one damage. The blood artist triggers and you respond with a bolt.
The stack now reads.
Bolt
Blood artist trigger.

The bolt resolves first since it was put on the stack after the blood artist triggers.
Bolt resolves and the next time state based actions are checked your opponent is at less than 0 hp and loses the game.

Quote from The Dead Weatherman

Second, the primer at the beginning of this thread is awful. I'm sorry, but real UW Revelation does not now and will not ever play Mana Tithe or Dissolve. If we're going to have an actual discussion for UW Revelation the primer representing the community must be much more accurate than what ML has presented. I said I'd write one back during PT Valencia and it's still forthcoming. I've been playing this deck for far longer than ML and I've demonstrably more research into what people are actually playing.

I can get behind you on some of this for sure, but unfortunately that is up to Lantern and ktkenshinx as they are the people that are in charge of keeping the Modern forums organized. If you just make a new one then they will just merge these most likely. What I suggest is to present your ideas clearly and calmly (as you did in this post) and suggest that the four of you (including ML) engage in a dialog via PM or chat-room about this subject. Calm, rational, heads will prevail and the community will benefit from the outcome.

Quote from rickster_

7 Control decks had 18 points, i did not classify faeries as control (only 2 faeries decks got 18 points) nor any deck running geists or blade splicers, and it's questionable whether blue moon is control or prison

Marco Cammilluzzi - 4c gifts
Kelvin Chew - blue moon
Lee Shi Tian - blue moon
Diego Mayo - UWR control
Shaun McLaren - UWR Control
Gabriel Nassif - UW Control
Guillaume Wafo-Tapa - UWR Control

I counted around 113 decks that got 18 points or better, so 6% are control

control still underrepresented as an archetype

I can have fun with arbitrary categorization to make my case too!

Only 13 aggro decks had more than 18 points. I do not classify Infect, Burn, or Bogle as aggro decks because they are so single-minded and uninteractive that they're really more like combo. I did not count any deck with a 4+ drop that wasn't Ghor-clan Rampager or Thoughtcast as aggro as anything with a curve like that just midrange. I also didn't count Fish, Faeries, or most of the GoST decks since those are actually tempo builds. Affinity is pretty borderline; it's closer to a burn deck than it is to true aggro, but I counted it here.

Alan Armand-Ugon - Zoo
Pat Cox - Domain Zoo
Nicolas De Nicola - Domain Zoo
Kyle Debimski - Zoo
Tim Edwardson - Zoo
Daniel Fior - Affinity
Mattia Fornacini - Domain Zoo
Ben Lundquist - Affinity
Devron O'Donnel - Affinity
Christian Seibold - Affinity
Jon Stern - Affinity
Sergiy Sushalskyy - Zoo
Omri Tubiana - Zoo

Barely 11.5% of the meta is just pitiful, especially post-Nactal unbanning. What's even more damning, however, is that control was 100% more represented in the T8. Truly, aggro is underrepresented and dead in this format. When will we be able to just play dudes and turn them sideways again?
================================

Splitting things like this is not only entirely subjective and biased, it's not particularly interesting.

Quote from Dice_Bag

Also, I will admit to my amusement of people stating they don't give thought to the ban list but care enough to post here.

Yea, I get drawn into it now and then, but then I walk away from the thread because there is never any new argument or ideas. I think I get mired in threads like this more for the intensity than any interest in the banlist itself. I genuinely almost never think about it when I think of Modern.

Regardless, I know some people will define Modern by it's banlist, but I do not, and I feel that pining for the tools you don't have rather than looking at the tools you do have is unproductive and does nothing to improve the format.