Comments on: Proactive Control After GP Copenhagen https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/ Play More, Win More, Pay Less Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:09:43 +0000 hourly 1 By: Dominic Rider https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121127 Sat, 18 Jun 2016 20:09:43 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121127 I really liked this article. It helped me, along with the comments, to sort out if my deck I’ve been brewing is control or midrange. While my deck can draw out games really long, it’s not because I’m answering threats, it’s because I don’t have enough to answer their threats and my threats can’t be answered and combine well with Worship. So I’m going to have to say Midrange.

]]>
By: Sheridan Lardner https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121126 Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:19:24 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121126 In reply to Killergoat_389.

My concern with UWR Control-style decks is that their threats just aren’t very good. One huge advantage of Tas/Angler is that they can interact with the board. You can’t just throw creatures at them, because the average creature in Modern either gets walled by them (Rhino, 4/5 Goyf) or dies outright (most everything else). But neither Angel nor Clique can do that, which makes them much better as clocks than they are as giant, recurring “answers” to an opponent’s creatures.

]]>
By: Sheridan Lardner https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121125 Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:16:35 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121125 In reply to Niklas92.

No worries about your English! I totally hear what you are saying and get your points. I agree that Grixis Control and Delver decks (Grixis Delver, for example) do have some similarities. The biggest one is that they can both play a threat early and then commit to defending that threat for the rest of the game, which is a hallmark playline for tempo decks. But the key difference which, to me, separates the decks is what happens if this DOESN’T work out. If Delver doesn’t get its clock out, the deck falls apart. But Grixis Control is totally capable of playing a clockless game. This gets at the core characteristics of control, which include that idea of focusing on stopping your opponent’s gameplan. Grixis Control really is designed to do that, whereas Grixis Delver is more designed to protect its threats. Delver decks are also different from Grixis Control style control decks in the number of threats they run. Grixis Control is at 5 creatures and 2-3 manlands. Delver is running at least 12 creatures and no manlands. That threat imbalance alone is enough to keep the decks separate.

]]>
By: Niklas92 https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121124 Mon, 29 Jun 2015 09:05:08 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121124 In reply to Sheridan Lardner.

Maybe I was unclear. Im not saying this is a tempodeck like delver. I just wanted to outline that these decks are similar. For me this deck is a tempo-control hybrid deck while the tempo plan is more important because of the mass of linear decks. Delver is not a good option right now because of the rise of grixis and jund decks bolt ist really everywhere. This deck is better than delver because of the interactive match ups.
Yes this deck is prepared for the long game but it doesnt solve the problems control had in the past with a control answer but with a tempo/proactive answer. If u are really able to shot down your opponent why wasting 5 slots on creatures wich cant control the board? Because u need a clock because your answers are limited and the meta is wide open.
Calling this deck a control deck is like calling tarmo twin or grixis twin combo decks. Yes they are combo decks somehow but if u want to understand how these deck work u are missing very much if u just say these decks are combo decks.
PS: Sry for my english and thank u for your answers.

]]>
By: Killergoat_389 https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121123 Sat, 27 Jun 2015 00:15:34 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121123 In reply to Sheridan Lardner.

Can a deck like uwr flash have any success moving forward? I know alot of it boils down to restoration angel vs tasigar but flash does complicate my decision

]]>
By: Sheridan Lardner https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121122 Fri, 26 Jun 2015 14:17:19 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121122 In reply to Anonymous.

A few things on this.

1. It’s a bit of a misevaluation to count cantrips against threats, because cantrips both draw in to threats and also let you run fewer lands to run more threats. In the case of Scour, the cantrip is also instant-speed, which plays into the reactive draw-go plan that control decks are participating in.

2. You really can’t call a deck with just 5 delve threats a tempo deck. Tempo’s whole gameplan is to stick a threat on turns 1-3 and then run away with it . All historical Modern tempo decks run at LEAST 12 threats to ensure this consistency. This deck is running only 5. That clearly suggests a difference to me: this deck has no need to drop that early threat because it is geared for the long game and can shut down an opponent with its cards even if it’s not winning with a clock. You would never really play a tempo deck like Delver and then not play a threat until turn 6. This deck, however, is geared to do that, both in its construction (e.g. 5 creatures) and its philosophy and supporting cards (e.g. the draw-go, reactive control elements).

3. I firmly disagree that being proactive is the best and most important part of the deck. If that were true, Grixis Delver would be the Grixis deck of choice, something with way more early-game threats to ride to victory. But we don’t see that here, and yet Grixis Control is the Grixis deck getting all the playtime. This strongly points towards the control elements of the deck being the thing making this version strong, not the aggressive, tempo-oriented pieces in Delver.

]]>
By: Sheridan Lardner https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121121 Fri, 26 Jun 2015 14:10:25 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121121 In reply to Valanarch.

I would argue that UWR Midrange is neither geared for the long game (it’s geared for the midgame) nor focused on shutting down its opponent (it’s focused on clearing the path for its own creatures to win the game). On the former point, the deck just has too many creatures and burn spells to really be geared for a long game. It might be ABLE to go to a long game, but that’s not how it’s built or geared. In that sense, UWR Midrange does probably pass the third criterion for control more than most decks would.

On the point of shutting down the opponent, that’s really not something UWR Midrange aspires to. It’s willfully running too many burn spells to do this, knowing that all those burn spells don’t really shut down a lot of creatures or strategies in this format. The deck is also not running enough countermagic options to have a gameplan that is truly reactive to an opponent’s gameplan. It’s running just enough to protect its own dudes (and, for burn spells, enough to clear a path and finish off an opponent), but the objective of those cards isn’t really to shut down everything an opponent does. They happen to shut down some things, but they a) don’t shut down enough and b) are only shutting things down incidentally to their main purpose of killing an opponent or clearing a path for stuff like Geist.

]]>
By: Anonymous https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121120 Fri, 26 Jun 2015 08:41:47 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121120 In reply to Sheridan Lardner.

Thank you for your answer.
Your saying that killing early or be proactive early is just an option for this Deck. I think its the rule and controling your opponent out is an option. Let me explain this. Why do regular controldecks before disappered? There are a number of reasons but the most important one is the meta. Its full of linear Decks with different strategies. You needed to have the right answer at the right time – or lose. So why does this Deck survive? Has this Deck the answers the old Decks had not? No. Against most parts of the field this Decks changed the gameplan from control to tempo. In fact this Deck has less answers than controldecks before because u need the cantrips and the threats. This deck is only able to survive because its NOT control. This Deck can´t handle the linear decks for long. It needs an early clock + disruption. Thats about the same plan as delver and GBX. There are only a few match ups where grinding out is really the thing – most important GBX. U can see that real endgame (for a controldeck) is not important for the Deck if u look at the endgame cards (Command & Command). Both come down early (not like sphinxs rev for example). The synergies with snapcaster mage are just OPTIONS – you can also play bolt snap bolt. Playing a tempo game with an early threat (not dying to deacy and bolt) is what this deck makes so strong. Because of this its in the meta – not like the old control decks. Being proactive is the best and most important part of the deck – being control is just an option.

]]>
By: Valanarch https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121119 Fri, 26 Jun 2015 04:29:14 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121119 How does Grixis count as Control while Jeskai Midrange does not? They both are geared for the long-game (Cryptic Command, manlands), they both focus on shutting down their opponents, and they both can win the game later at their own convenience.

]]>
By: Richard Carlton https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121118 Fri, 26 Jun 2015 01:00:21 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121118 Great article and analysis. As a long time modern control player only recently dabbling in linear combo, I agree with this entire article. Perhaps I will try my hand with a Grixis control list at some point in the future.

]]>
By: Sheridan Lardner https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121117 Thu, 25 Jun 2015 17:39:11 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121117 In reply to Niklas92.

Although I hear what you are saying about Delver having some similarities to control, that’s really not the case with Grixis Control. It really does fit all the criteria for a control deck as I outlined at a few points in the article. The only place where we could disagree is this distinction between WHEN control decks win. If people are willing to believe that control decks must win in the late game period, with no option at all to win in the early game, then I guess we have to agree to disagree. That would be like saying aggro decks have no way of winning in the late game because they must win early, which we know isn’t true. Just as aggro decks have late-game options, so too can control decks. In this case, Grixis Control fits not only all the control benchmarks, but also preserves an earlier win route than other control decks.

]]>
By: Niklas92 https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121116 Thu, 25 Jun 2015 17:09:42 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121116 First of all – I really like the deck and the philosophy behind it. But ist is NOT a control deck. The term proactive control is a paradoxon. proactive is jut another word for aggressiv and reactive for control. So by replacing one word its an aggro-control Deck. At the last to GPs we saw people dying against this Deck with seven Cards in Hand. We saw grixis control outracing most of the other Decks. For me this Deck plays more like a DELVER Deck. You try to land a threat eraly and protect it till opponent is dead. The threats dont die to Bolt an decay and lategame is better -thats the difference.
Not every Deck with Cryptic Command is a control deck.

]]>
By: Galerion https://www.quietspeculation.com/2015/06/proactive-control-after-gp-copenhagen/#comment-2121115 Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:50:44 +0000 http://34.200.137.49/?p=2789#comment-2121115 A very good article.
It captures the exact view that I always had on the matter and that I stated in multiple topics on the matter on MTGSalvation.
But apparently there are still people out there who think that the only Control decks are the ones which win on turn 30 with a single copy of Flying Men or something silly like that.

The mix of reactive and proactive elements(along with my love for black) is exactly what drew me to the BG/x decks in the first place after starting my Modern journey with UWR Control. I can grind people out with those decks. That’s what they are designed to do and what I like doing but I also have the ability to close out a game quickly if I have to and this new Grixis Control deck is taking the same approach on the matter but mixes it with the power of blue instead of green.
That’s a far better plan then sitting there with open mana all the time doing nothing until you can activate Celestial Colonnade with Cryptic Command backup. The results of hundreds of tournaments clearly show this.

Play to win and not play to not lose

]]>