I went with my own Colorless Eldrazi deck as an example because it's a purer stompy deck. For those wondering, Eldrazi Tron also qualifies, but it straddles the line between stompy and ramp-some recent builds even relegate Chalice to the sideboard, and pack just two copies. ![]() Modernites have since wizened up to the bad-assness of Chalice of the Void, and together with other highly capable lock pieces like Relic of Progenitus and Blood Moon, the archetype has made a name for itself in the format. Stompy's a relative newcomer to Modern that rarely saw competitive success prior to Eldrazi Winter. Until recently, Jund has policed the format with an iron fist today, the more consistent, more proactive Death's Shadow Jund has arisen to take its place. Rock is historically one of the strongest archetypes in Modern. Modern examples: Skred Red, Colorless Eldrazi Stompy Since that means fewer attackers, stompy’s threats have to pull double-duty when it comes to closing out games and they’re frequently more expensive. Thorn of Amethyst over Thalia, Guardian of Thraben). Stompy decks sometimes play similarly to fish decks, except the disruptive effects are more powerful and not on bodies (i.e. Stompy: Disrupts opponents with noncreature permanents, then ends the game with high-curve threats.Modern examples: Death's Shadow Jund, Abzan Rock: Disrupts opponents with noncreature spells and planeswalkers and accrues card advantage with favorable trades, then takes games with its few, individually powerful threats.The two subdivisions of midrange are defined by the type of disruption they employ: spell-based or permanent-based. By the time they're ready to play threats, they have multiple mana sources available, giving the archetype access to some of the most impactful creatures in the game ( Siege Rhino, Reality Smasher). Midrange decks spend their early turns disrupting opponents. Tempo: Establishes a clock, then disrupts opponents. Midrange: Disrupts opponents, then establishes a clock. Whether an aggro-control deck falls under one category or the other depends on the order in which it tends to deploy its threats relative to its disruption. They are also fair, meaning they don't cheat on resources and do win over multiple combat steps. There are two types of aggro-control decks: midrange and tempo. In my eyes, aggro-control decks are interactive creature decks that disrupt opponents with either spells or permanents. These definitions awkwardly exclude midrange decks from the archetype triangle, despite the fact that midrange decks clearly employ elements of aggro and elements of control. I disagree with the popular school of Magic thought that uses the terms "aggro-control" and "tempo" interchangeably. Aggro-control, though, is a trickier beast to pin down. Aggro-combo decks are aggro decks containing turbulent combo elements (Infect, Affinity), and combo-control decks are control decks boasting a combo finish (Temur Scapeshift). The triangle's sides, then, represent hybrid archetypes: aggro-combo, aggro-control, and combo-control (aggro-combo-control, the G-Class of Magic archetypes, is rarely seen and smugly occupies the center of the triangle). ![]() Magic strategy consists of three universally-accepted super-archetypes: aggro, combo, and control. Picture the three archetypes as occupying corners of a triangle. *Disclaimer 2: I may self-plagiarize a little. ![]() That said, feel free to pick bones/brains in the comments. Success will inform my future articles, giving me a linkable piece to explain what I mean. My goal here is simply to clearly articulate my own definitions. *Disclaimer 1: Archetype discussion can prove tricky and controversial, so some readers may disagree with the theory laid out in this article. in addition to being a mostly-unrelated in-game mechanic! Confused yet? In this article, I'll do my best to clear the smoke hanging over the murky waters of tempo and midrange. As I see it, tempo is one of two subsets of aggro-control. The aggro-control archetype in particular merits further discussion, and even a comprehensive text of its own. I've touched on archetype theory before ( a few times, in fact), and have since crystalized my vision. Part of the reason for this change is the deck's splintering into distinct BGx and UBx variants, with Grixis Shadow leading the charge for Snapcaster Mage aficionados. The success of Grixis Shadow-or more specifically, Shadow's occasional adoption of soft permission and cantrips-has led many to wonder whether the deck falls under the ever-misunderstood strategic umbrella of "tempo." The explosion of Jund Shadow onto the paper scene at roughly 10% has since cooled, with the deck taking a more reasonable 8% share when lumped in with Abzan Shadow builds. Immediately following its mainstream introduction to Modern by Josh Utter-Leyton and his crew at GP Vancouver, Death's Shadow gained significant footing in the metagame.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |