Standard (T2) Deck lists: Mono-B Vampires, UWb Control, Jund Blightning

by NanoWar on 2009-10-21 19:14 EST

<3 Disfigure

by slore on 2009-10-21 19:26 EST

removal ftw eh?

by cmc on 2009-10-21 20:10 EST

disfigure kills creatures that are played in this format?

by Spyx on 2009-10-21 20:14 EST

BBE and PL in response to the pump

by cmc on 2009-10-21 20:26 EST

so 1 creature in their deck and another vs bad players. Seems like a great choice.

by Kytep on 2009-10-21 20:26 EST

Wow, Congratulations, Llowle! You beat:

R1 - Boros Aggro
R2 - WW (w/4 White Knights)
R3 - UWr Control (w/4 Celestial Purges and 4 Pyroclasms in SB)
R4 - MWC w/4 White Knight, 4 DoJ, and 4 Purges MAIN(!)
R5 - Bye
R6 - Jund
R7 - UW Control

I have to say, some of those wins are a bit counter-intuitive to me. How did you beat Jund and MWC w/4 Knights, DoJ's, and Purges MAIN?

Thanks,
Kytep

by Mastikor on 2009-10-21 21:01 EST

Obviously there is Malakir Bloodwitch for white decks

by Easy_ on 2009-10-21 21:33 EST

Mind Sludge probably

by rafaruggi on 2009-10-21 21:45 EST

UWr >>> UWb Control.

by Zeph on 2009-10-21 22:01 EST

Mono B vampires is a great deck against Jund. Nonetheless is its hardest match. White is not a problem for the Bloodwitch, some Duress, Mind Sludge. Remember Tendrils + Deathmark are very effective removals. Gatekeeper of Malakir, if well used, is a very good option. I added some Black Knights in my version. But well, that's other story.

by Kytep on 2009-10-21 23:18 EST

by Zeph on 2009-10-21 21:01 CDT

Mono B vampires is a great deck against Jund. Nonetheless is its hardest match.

***************************

It is a "great deck" against its "hardest match"?? Are you suggesting that it has greater than 50% vs. Jund, and even greater than that vs. everything else? If so, then Vampires would absolutely dominate the format. Not place well most of the time - DOMINATE, like Necro did in the summer of 1996. It's not doing that.

I would suggest you re-think the Jund matchup, as well as how that matchup compares to matchups with other decks.

by MuTiLaTiOn_X on 2009-10-21 23:19 EST

wow u/b/w came 2nd unbelievable.

by Spyx on 2009-10-21 23:26 EST

cmc you're saying if you as the jund player went turn 2 leech and I went turn 3 hexmage with b open you wouldn't attack?

by braveghost on 2009-10-22 00:36 EST

i might bolt the hexmage first?

by Eldariel on 2009-10-22 02:08 EST

Disfigure is correct to only use after their pump. Same with burn vs. Leech; force a trade with a 2/X and if it's pumped, kill the creature and trash them. That's why you play instant removal.

by styx^ on 2009-10-22 05:40 EST

Well MuTi it's only unbelievable since it's such a bad variant of Esper Control... 3 Mind Spring and 2 Martial Coup in this Format Oo... that should be too slow already by definition...

by Eldariel on 2009-10-22 05:47 EST

Eh, Mind Spring is amazing. The deck obviously makes games pretty slow. It's not like turn 3 kills have ever stopped control from playing 4-5-mana card draw.

by cmc on 2009-10-22 05:51 EST

Against a Hexmage the situation is more interesting and depends on what's in my hand. Against a 2/x without first strike, I would gladly trade if you chose to block, leaving you with a useless disfigure in your hand.

The real question is why would I be playing Jund ever?

by styx^ on 2009-10-22 06:03 EST

In a fast environment slow carddraw is good? Since when is that logical?

by wilier on 2009-10-22 06:31 EST

"Mono B vampires is a great deck against Jund."

LOL

Come on... ml isnt that bad... DONT turn it even more BAD!

by Eldariel on 2009-10-22 06:49 EST

styx: Control-deck makes the game slow which in turn enables the card draw to function. That's the whole point of control; if you start trying to play "fast control", you'll just hurt yourself.

by dwarfas on 2009-10-22 08:19 EST

moomoo VAMPIRES ARE WIN!

by jonproject on 2009-10-22 09:13 EST

I love how everyone in the chat room was claiming how bad Jund is and how it won't make top and how their decks all beat it.

by Markwerf on 2009-10-22 09:38 EST

the WUB control deck is better then it looks. I lost twice to the 'combo' of eot esper charm on me followed by baneslayer. Im not saying the list is great as I'd probably change about 10 cards but it shouldn't be dismissed either.

by styx^ on 2009-10-22 10:10 EST

Mind Springing means most of the time tapping out... unless you wanna draw 1 card for 3 or 2 for 4... which you never want... therefore i don't see when it's good to play it against any matchup other than any other counterless or counterlow controldeck...

Especially since i'm playing/testing different variants of Esper Control for the last 2 weeks now...

by Ludz on 2009-10-22 12:00 EST

Styx: Common scenario for those typ of spells starts with you wrathing the board. Your aggro player opponent will then drop a creature next turn. If you're not in any immediate danger, you can play Mind Spring here. If you are, just play a removal spell on his creature, and preferably have a counter/removal for his next threat. Then you're free to Mind Spring next turn.

Of course, this is the "dream scenario", but the raw power of drawing 4+ cards is so good. With so few good ways to gain +CA in todays standard, except for cascade, it becomes better.

by styx^ on 2009-10-22 12:16 EST

Well... as i said i tested it a lot and a lot of times the aggromatchup has some plan after a day of judgment...

by Eldariel on 2009-10-22 14:31 EST

Sure. You generally have a turn or two though, in which you can Mind Spring for 3-4 leaving perhaps W open for Path. Then you start dropping wincons and take the game. Mind Spring is invariably better than any other draw in this format.

by aldaryn on 2009-10-22 14:40 EST

I have a hard time believing Mind Spring is better than maxing out on Jaces...

by Finntroll on 2009-10-22 15:57 EST

Identity Crisis, Jace and Cruel Ultimatum > Mind Spring

by mr_thompsom on 2009-10-22 16:21 EST

I usually try to not post here cause %50 of the comments are trolling product of boredom. Nevertheless ill try to express some thoughts.
Identity crisis actually IS in the deck, jace x4 as many list ive seen is just incredibly difficult to keep alive vs jund (which tends to be at least 40% of the field) and cruel ultimatum just fucks your mana base. Obv its a preliminary list and im pretty sure there is always a better config up there, also pretty sure that config would still plays spring, the card prove to be awesome every time ive played.
Now for the ones who take the deck and are willing to adjust it to what they may think is optimal, take into account many of the comments that have been posted by the good players.You can always distinguish the good player by this : "X deck/card is good/bad because i like/dislike it" well the previous statement is usually told by bad ones, just pay attention to the other ones.

by Zeph on 2009-10-22 18:36 EST

@Kytep and wilier: look kids, if you were trying to troll don't be obvious. If you didn't then take some reading lessons: I was saying Vampires has a RELATIVE GOOD MATCH against Jund i.e.: it has good chances of winning to be its worst match.

by Kytep on 2009-10-22 22:24 EST

by Zeph on 2009-10-22 17:36 CDT

I was saying Vampires has a RELATIVE GOOD MATCH against Jund i.e.: it has good chances of winning to be its worst match

*******************************

Relative to *WHAT*? If Jund is Vamp's worst match, then it is a relatively *BAD* match (compared to its other matchups) - in fact, the "worst"...

Not trolling; rather pointing out apparent unclear thinking and/or unclear writing, in the hope that you will clarify (and perhaps improve your thinking/writing in the future). The things you have written here just don't make sense.

Or am I not seeing something in "Mono B vampires is a great deck against Jund...[Jund is Vampires'] worst match"?

by Zeph on 2009-10-23 20:39 EST

???
Dont you get the word relative?

Ok, even more basic for you:

* Deck A has a 20% chances of winning against its worst match

* Deck B has a 35% chances of winning against its worst match
_______

Therefore, deck B has a relative good match against its worst match. is it clear now or do you need a power point presentation?

Maybe the proper word was relatively... anyway, it was understandable unless you wanted to be an ass.

by Kytep on 2009-10-24 13:16 EST

by Zeph on 2009-10-23 19:39 CDT

???
Dont you get the word relative?

*********************

Yes. I'm wondering if YOU do. "Relative" means "in comparison to something." You can't just throw the word "relative" around to let yourself off the hook when your original statement was "Mono B vampires is a great deck against Jund." That statement obviously implies that Vamps has a greater than 50% chance of winning vs. Jund (probably MUCH greater - to be "great" instead of just "good").

Then, you go on to say, "*Nonetheless* is its hardest match" (emphasis added). You also might want to look up the word "nonetheless" - it means "However" or "*Despite* the previous statement"

The way you wrote your initial statement, you were saying that Vamps has a much greater than 50% matchup against Jund; but despite this, Jund is Vamps' worst matchup. Not "FOR its worst matchup, it's good", but "DESPITE being its worst matchup, Vamps is great vs. Jund". (The logical conclusion to this is that Vamps has a much greater than 50% matchup against EVERYTHING.)

As I mentioned in my first response, that statement can be true - for DOMINATING decks (which usually lead to quick bannings and/or printings of powerful hate cards). Very few decks in the history of MtG have dominated like this, and Vamps today is clearly not one of them.

You can't just say that and then when someone calls you out say, "I meant RELATIVE; don't you understand what relative means??!!". Dude - your writing was unclear at best, wrong at worst. Maybe you didn't write what you meant, but that's my point: Please try to improve your thinking and/or writing for next time, rather than getting so defensive. (Besides, your defensiveness is hurting you more than it's helping; anyone can read what you wrote. The more defensive you get, the more weak/immature you look, and the less people will take you seriously.)

Please. I'm trying to help you here. For your own sake, just drop it, think things through a bit more, and write better next time.

Thanks,
Kytep

by Durango on 2009-10-24 13:57 EST

So what exactly was banned from Necro?

by Kytep on 2009-10-24 17:09 EST

by Durango on 2009-10-24 12:57 CDT

So what exactly was banned from Necro?

*****************************

You mean besides Necropotence itself? :)

I haven't yet found a good source of B&R history, but I recall Zuran Orb being restricted in response to Necro dominance. On the other hand, Sligh's rise tempered Necro's dominance, so that perhaps less B&R was needed than if Sligh hadn't emerged.

Which is further evidence to my point: Truly dominant decks - i.e., decks which have greater than 50% win percentages against EVERYTHING that sees significant play - are extraordinarily rare. Perhaps even Necro 1996 doesn't even rise to this level (let alone today's Vampires).

What does? I'm not sure I trust my memory 100%, but Affinity, Trix, and Academy/High Tide come to mind, and those all saw significant bannings.

And, again, even if they didn't - even more evidence of the rarity of truly dominant decks.

Kytep

by crewrunnin on 2009-10-25 05:59 EST

i like long posts on ml, they look cool. but i dont read them. it would be like slowly killing myself. i love the hate for jund on ml, half despise and half play it. cascade cards are still good. yep. o, and reif is good. doj=3x 2/2's? idk im bad.

by crewrunnin on 2009-10-25 06:09 EST

by wilier on 2009-10-22 06:31 EDT

"Mono B vampires is a great deck against Jund."

LOL

Come on... ml isnt that bad... DONT turn it even more BAD!

lol also. vamp has to get nuts. jund has to get horibble draw. maybe vamp wins.