Hey all,
I get the chance to play this deck in a tourney, and it would be nice to get some comments about this decklist:
4 Goblin Guide
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Snapcaster Mage
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Rift Bolt
4 Thunderous Wrath
4 Price of Progress
4 Lava Spike
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Volcanic Island
4 Mountain
4 Scalding Tarn
4 Arid Mesa
4 Leyline of Sanctity
4 Surgical Extraction
4 Smash to Smithereens
3 Anarchy
First of all, i like it, to build quadlazer lists. ( Everything as 4-off )
This is Burn with blue with brainstorm/ponder/snapcaster/delver
I came to the conclusion, that it is better to be more agressive and play without counter. That is also the reason i play Leyline of Sanctity in my Sideboard against combo.
K1w1
My colors are... ZONK!
You haven't any colors. You play Dredge.
You love games, which are unfair. You hate Reanimator & NicFit.
At good days, you destroy everything. At bad days,
you draw Narcomoebas. But the most important thing:
Everybody hates you!
I like 4-ofs and it looks good, but if you specifically want to go aggressive, you perhaps shouldn't play Ponder. It would be the perfect slot for Daze because that one doesn't slow you down at all, I would say. Or how about Vexing Devil in that slot? No matter how you look at it, the card is cost effective. By replacing Ponder you don't have to think of the dilemma regarding whether you should put it into the burn or creature slot, also.Originally Posted by K1w1
Some of my friends sell records,
some of my friends sell drugs.
I play Ponder in addition, due to Thunderous Wrath. I want more cards, which put the Wrath on top of my library. I think Vexing Devil is bad. If you play him first turn, the opponent will take the damage. If not, they have swords to plowshares or other removal for it.
In addition, imagine you are in the mid to lategame, and you opponent has three life, you wanna more likely draw a burn spell or a ponder/brainstorm to search for it, instead of vexil devil. Imo!
I also think that daze isn't that great in this deck. Maybe Spell Pierce, but that's again the thing i don't like. I think U/R Delver is better without counters. Show me the opposite.
K1w1
My colors are... ZONK!
You haven't any colors. You play Dredge.
You love games, which are unfair. You hate Reanimator & NicFit.
At good days, you destroy everything. At bad days,
you draw Narcomoebas. But the most important thing:
Everybody hates you!
It just doesn't work like that. If you start by saing "I think.." you might as well stop right there because the rest is either uninteresting or based on nothing :)
What bothers me, is that by ditching Daze you basically play U only because of Delver, cantrips and Thunderous Wrath. That means you are dead to most combo, a postition that is usually not typical for blue decks.
If it works after your extensive experiences and in your meta, then by all means. On the paper it just doesn't look that much better than Magma Jet Burn.
Some of my friends sell records,
some of my friends sell drugs.
It's called "results". http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/tip...&format=Legacy
You are playing 16 lands in combination with Snapcaster, I am not sure how you want to make use of him with a land count that low and making yourself super vulnerable to combo and lifelink by cutting counters.
Leyline of Sanctity doesn't protect you as much from combo as you believe it does. It's actually much better against discard, which isn't that much of a problem for your deck. Against most combo decks it reads like "use your bounce and combo anyway" and against others it does nothing (e.g. Sneak Show).
Your deck is pretty much Burn with cantrips and completely ignores the access to counters, which makes it more explosive (in terms of deal 20), but at the same time weaker (in terms of answering threats and hindering the opponent from killing you first).
Oh, and before you are able to cast Anarchy the enemy's own Leyline or whatever you want to destroy has done a good job of keeping you from playing burn to the face for at least four turns (IF you hit all your landdrops, which is highly unlikely).
Show you the opposite? How about basically every recent high-profile win this deck has had? I already raised this point about 6 pages ago:
I think the biggest thing is the deep seeded emotional understanding that the right play is the right play regardless of outcomes. The ability to make a decision 5 straight times, lose 5 times because of it, and still make it the 6th time if it's the right play. - Jon Finkel
"Notions of chance and fate are the preoccupation of men engaged in rash undertakings."
I'm just going to chime in and reiterate what HellSpawn said above - if you are going to run SCM, you need 18-19 lands, minimum. I would only run 18 lands if you are running all 8 cantrips. You need a minimum of 3 land to use SCM, so I think 19 lands if you keep SCM in.
Kiwi - I went through a very similar thought process as you - I wanted to steamline the deck, cut counters, and just burn people out as quickly as possible. However, the problem with the counterless version of UR Delver is twofold:
1) You improve your already good match-ups, while hurting your less favorable match-ups. Going 'all-in' on burn (and counterless) causes you to win your favorable match-ups 1-2 turns earlier, while harming your ability to fight combo and aggro.
2) You sacrifice the consistency of an all-red burn deck. While it can be amazing to open turn 1 Delver, turn 2, flip, swing for 3, cantrip, bolt, turn 3, miracle, swing for 3, bolt, bolt (yay turn 3 kill), you are basically turning an already favorable match (which you would have won on turn 4-5) into a blowout at the cost of a) potentially mana screwing yourself, and b) really hurting your non-favorable match ups.
The reason the version with counters and grim lavamancers does better is because it places itself in the middle of combo, control, and aggro. The counters can combat combo, it can burn out control, and the lavamancers can pick away at aggro.
Plus, keep in mind, it's a match, not a game. With a good sideboard, you can shift your deck into even better position to combat a number of decks in games 2/3.
I think 4 Thunderous Wrath is too many. I would run 3 at most. 4 SCM is questionable, in certain builds I could see it as working, but in most builds, you don't want to have 2 in your hand. I think 2-3 SCM's is ideal.
The consensus choice of artifact hate for the sideboard seems to be Smash to Smithereens, although there are occasional suggestions of Shattering Spree or Ancient Grudge (with a single Taiga splash).
Mogg Salvage might be a viable alternative. When facing blue-based decks, it will usually be cast for free, which means:
* you can cast other spell(s) in the same turn
* immune to Spell Snare
* less likely to be countered by Daze or Spell Pierce
* less likely to be shut out by Chalice of the Void (although the first CotV will always hit X=1, a second CotV will usually target X=2)
* easier to force through against Counterbalance, both because it is 3CC and because you can use your mana on 'test spells' before committing to the artifact hate
Obviously it's significantly worse against non-blue decks where we need artifact hate (e.g. Maverick with Stoneforge). I also understand that the 3 damage from Smash is very valuable the "race to zero" that the deck has to win before it gets overwhelmed in the late game.
Typically we only run 2 SB artifact hate cards, and they're only brought in when facing a relatively limited number of must-kill artifacts - Batterskull, Jitte, or Chalice of the Void being the main ones (or against heavy artifact decks, e.g. Affinity or Stax, but those are fringe players).
Getting your artifact hate countered is usually game against e.g. Batterskull or Jitte, so I think Mogg Salvage is worth consideration.
I like that Mogg Salvage exists as an option, and I guess that its inclusion will really depend on the meta. Smash to Smithereens is there as the default choice for obvious reasons, but having a "free" spell available whenever necessary is always a good thing.
Cheers,
jares
This is the list I am going to test for GP Ghent over the coming weeks:
Creatures (11)
4 Goblin Guide
4 Delver of Secrets
3 Grim Lavamancer
Countersuite (9)
4 Spell Pierce
3 Daze
2 Force of Will
Burnspells (14)
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
3 Price of Progress
2 Thunderous Wrath
1 Fire // Ice
Cantrips (8)
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
Lands (18)
4 Scalding Tarn
4 Arid Mesa
3 Misty Rainforest
3 Volcanic Island
2 Mountain
2 Island
Sideboard (15)
2 Force of Will
2 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Tormod's Crypt
1 Price of Progress
3 Submerge
2 Red Elemental Blasts
2 Smash to Smithereens
Why no Snapcasters?
Last time I played two and never felt like I needed them and they were too slow in my combo heavy meta (and I expect a significant amount of combo). I also like playing 18 lands only and have access to more business spells.
Why no 4th Volcanic Island?
Because I probably won't acquire my 4th before the GP. I'd cut 1 Arid Mesa for the 4th.
The Thunderous Wrath came in quite handy in the last tournament I've played and the Fire // Ice is something I want to test more, although it's what I'd cut first in case I need a slot for something else (I strongly feel like playing another Daze instead of this).
I decided to include 4 Force of Will after all (2MD/2SB), even though I was sceptical about it a few weeks ago. It's just too important against combo and especially Sneak Attack.
There's a GPT on the 9th of June and I will post the results and conclusions afterwards.
After having read through this thread, I have two thoughts to contribute, one of which has been verified by some testing, the other of which has not.
The first is that Snapcaster is a must have with Thunderous Wrath. If I have Snap, Brainstorm, and any number of Thunderous Wrath in my opening hand, that hand is usually an instant keep. For instance, a hand of Delver, Fetch, Fetch, Brainstorm, Snap, Thunderous Wrath, Thunderous Wrath is incredible - very nearly the fastest non-combo clock in the format.
Essentially, Thunderous Wrath can be treated as extra land when considering how to Brainstorm. You are always willing to put it back, so multiple Thunderous Wrath turns Brainstorm into a psuedo Ancestral Recall, much like lands with a fetch out. Snapcaster and more copies of Wrath let you do this more often. Personally, I run three Snapcaster and three Wrath and it tends to work out great.
My other thought, i.e. the one that has not been tested, is that replacing Goblin Guide with Vexing Devil might make a more Thresh-like list workable. Guide drawing an opponent into more lands is no good with Stifle and Wasteland, and Devil is no good when your opponent can easily play removal or just take the four damage. With Devil and mana denial, however, you can run more tax counters, and can waste the opponent's removal color after playing Devil.
I am not at all certain it would play out, but it seems like it could I will have to try a list out when I get some more time.
This approach also brings new problems to the table: Wrath pretty much cannot be flashed back and if you don't draw a Brainstorm your whole plan is rendered useless. There is no point in making up ideal starting 7, when your deck has to be ready to deal with mediocre hands too.
I only play two Wraths because they are bad, if I cannot miracle them. Brainstorm helps, but doesn't completely solve this problem. In addition to the BS I can dig for TW with 4 Ponder, so there is no need to stretch my luck by adding more TW and finding myself mulliganing more often.
As for Vexing Devil: I tested 4 of them before and Goblin Guide did still more damage on average. Plus, pondering into a Guide to have an(other) attacker for this turn is huge.
The whole point is that Thunderous Wrath makes Brainstorm better, Brainstorm makes Thunderous Wrath playable, and Snapcaster allows you to double up on Brainstorm, in addition to being very flexible in most situations. This means running Thunderous Wrath very nearly requires running Snapcaster, not necessarily to make it playable, but because of the excellent synergy.
As for Vexing Devil, I would never argue that he does more damage than Guide. However, Guide is at odds with a Stifle/Wasteland plan. The point there was that running Devil over Guide could allow you to run other cards without them being most useless.
At that point, though, it's probably better to just play RUG. I haven't tested it, but that's my feeling. As stated, it was just an idea I had.
Hey guys,
I'm the one that won the Charlotte and Birmingham opens with U/R delver. Its the only deck I play in Legacy and I've written about it a few times on my friend's site. I've skimmed though the thread and saw a few ideas I disagreed with as far as how I think the deck should work. If you want my take on the deck give these a read.
U/R Breakdown: http://roxiecards.com/magic/legacy-ur-delver-breakdown/
U/R Sideboarding: http://roxiecards.com/magic/sideboar...ith-ur-delver/
Baltimore Invitational Report: http://roxiecards.com/magic/ive-neve...tional-report/
Birmingham Open Report:http://roxiecards.com/magic/sweet-ho...m-legacy-open/
I'll try and check back here but you can get me on twitter @On__the__grind if you have any questions/comments.
-Andrew Schneider-
You double your Brainstorms in theory only, but there is still the same probability to draw your first one, while you increase the chance to have TW in your opening hand. That's what I've meant with "stretching luck". Brainstorm doesn't necessarily get better, you just need it more often.
@Andrew
Thanks for your post and articles! I am going to read them immediately after posting this. ^^
Andrew - thanks for writing down your thoughts and experiences with the deck. I'm hoping you can write at least one more follow-up article, laying out your thoughts on the matchups with the main archetypes. Not just "U/R is favored" or "U/R is a dog", but how to play the matchup, what cards or plays the games tend to hinge on, possible main deck or SB changes to strengthen the matchup, etc.
I played the deck for the first time in a small local tournament (11 people, 4 rounds) and went 4-0 with it. It felt very smooth to me, and I always felt like I had a clear plan and a decent shot at the win - well, except for game 1 against Dredge where he turn he coughed his entire deck on turn 2, but that's Dredge.
When practicing with the deck I toyed with various changes in various combinations (-1 Grim Lavamancer, -1 Price of Progress, -1 Snapcaster Mage, different mix of counters, +2 Vexing Devil, +2 Thunderous Wrath, etc) but I keep coming back to your list. It's very tight.
Hey, welcome to the source and congrats to your results.
I liked the deck from the first time I saw it-so thanks for coming upIt's also good to read your articles.
Do you still play the list you stated there or have you tried some changes lately?
Gobbos: Kings of flavortext!
Thanks for giving the articles a read, and I may do another one with more detail on what is important in the matchup. Yeah, I'm still plan on playing a very similar list in the invitational next week.
4 Goblin Guide
4 Delver of Secrets
3 Grim Lavamancer
4 Snapcaster Mage
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
3 Price of Progress
4 Brainstorm
3 Ponder
3 Force of Will
4 Spell Pierce
4 Volcanic Island
2 Mountain
2 Island
4 Red Fetches
4 Blue Fetches
4 Scalding Tarn
Side:
1 Force of Will
3 Red Elemental Blast
2 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Crush :/
3 Submerge
4 Surgical Extraction
I cut the 1 daze from the main for the 4th spell pierce. Spell pierce is almost always good, daze is 50/50 in my experience. In the sideboard I cut the extra price for a 3rd red elemental blast. Probably important for these to not be pyroblasts with all the show and tell decks having misdirections. I'm also thinking about playing crush over smash to smithereens. I wish smelt would be legal by then. Smash to smithereens has been getting spell snared to often. Also, you rarely have 4 mana when you cast it so it just gets spell pierced. I'm hoping crush will work better.
Also, you probably read it in the article but i'm pretty against thunderous wrath in this deck haha.
What do you guys think of fork bolt? I've been thinking about it and I'm pretty sure it will always be a bad bolt. When does that ever say 2 for 1?
Exactly, Brainstorm is already the most important card in the deck. The last thing you want to do is rely on it to do even more. I'd rather shuffle away 2 extra lands every time then use it to set up my situational slightly better lightning bolt.
I will probably go back to the Snapcaster build by cutting the Fire // Ice, 2 Thunderous Wrath and a Daze for 3 Snapcasters and another land, because it adds more flexibility to the deck than those other spells do. I don't know what to cut except for a Ponder, if I decide to go for 4 SM/20 Lands. I feel like this list is already pretty tight and I was satisfied with my countersuite. I love to Daze, but they make Snapcaster weaker, so probably down to one Daze.
As for the sideboard, Misdirection was the reason I chose REB over Pyroblast and there is no advantage for us with Pyroblasts possibility to target something non-red.
The fourth PoP is something I am considering removing and adding a Phantasmal Image for the Sneak Show matchup or another Crypt/Extraction. I'd prefer the grave hate, because the Image pretty much only helps when I draw it immediately after not being able to counter a Show and Tell, which is too situational. I guess it would work better against Reanimator, but then I could just play GY-hate. So, Crypt/Extraction it is. ^^
Smelt sounds awesome, but it doesn't help against Chalice@1 and I haven't seen much Spell Snares around lately. Then again, you have much more experience and will know better, if the MUD/Stompy MU is something to invest SB slots in or not.
With that much good Burn I don't feel like Forked Bolt is necessary and I wouldn't want to remove anything for it. In which MUs do you think it would be that relevant and what would you cut for it?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
