Thanks for clarifying the mystique of the Leagues to someone who never got the chance to play them. I suspected they weren't as flawless as people tend to remember.
The new ones look good. I hope constructed leagues will have an increased sideboards, to allow transformations there, too. Like, maybe you can bring a pool of 90 cards total, so you can play two different decks with the same base. It would be nice.
Appreciate the well thought out response, in the end we will just have to agree to disagree. In my experiences I have found survey's very helpful for corporations and you can point to any and all surveys as having some bias or some issue leading you to quickly discard it as not useful. That would be a mistake in my opinion.
I also disagree that WOTC can learn nothing from this survey or the view that feedback isn't a gift. Those companies that listen to all their customers and take any and all feedback as a gift are the ones I look to invest in as an investor.
Because we are just so far apart in our beliefs I think we will just have to agree to disagree Kuma!
I don't mean to disparage your work, as you clearly put a lot of effort in this. But, alas, these data are almost entirely meaningless. And not just the way you said they are in the introduction. But because they're also biased data. Look at the question about the favorite format: do we really think that Vintage is the most popular format on MTGO? Of course it's not, but you're a well-known Vintage player, so among your readers there are many Vintage players as well, and those took your survey. This makes the entire survey mostly meaningful only where that specific subset of players is concerned. It's like trying to extrapolate data on the state of all sports in the country based on the opinions of the patrons of a football pub.
We also have to take into account basic human psychology. Especially two elements: 1) Old people like old things, and 2) Complaints always outweigh praises. We know the human mind is opposed to change, because change requires effort and shakes up the status quo. As a result, there will always be people who BELIEVE they were better off back in the good ol' days. They weren't, actually. But they'll remember it that way. Over time, this segment becomes more and more irrelevant (more about relevance below). As for number 2, we also know it's more frequent for people to speak their minds when they're angry or unsatisfied. Nobody organizes a parade to tell the government what a great job they're doing. Satisfied people are mostly silent. Unsatisfied people are loud. It's how humans work.
Now, I could easily build another survey, feed it to a different segment of users, and say it helps validate some of my assumptions on the current state of the game. Because chances are, I'll reach people who already agree with me. But this is where it would become dangerous.
I disagree that feedback is always a positive factor. I mean, it is in the abstract, but you have to purge it of every "political" value, which isn't easy to do with a poll. It's not by chance that polls are some of the most powerful instruments available to politicians. They can be so easily manipulated. Hell, they don't even need to be actively tampered with, because readers will automatically use them as a confirmation of their own opinions. Like, you clearly write (being completely honest) "this survey was not perfect and is only a small subset of the player base and therefore potentially not representative of the whole". But many readers will skip that part and jump directly to the numbers, or forget about it by the end. The numbers have a powerful effect. And even if you're honest, the effect of the numbers may have unintended consequences.
It's been proven. A popular newspaper once made this experiment: it published a fake survey where a large number of answers complained about the unseasonal bad weather. There was no particular bad weather that season. Yet, a few weeks after the fake survey, a real weather survey was taken among the readers, and they had assimilated the bad survey so much, that they had started complaining about nonexistent bad weather, even citing specific days that they "remembered" as bad weather days, but were perfectly sunny days instead.
What does all this mean? It means that the more we radicalize the different opinions, widening the gap between those who think "V4 is the worst" and those who think "it's not true that V4 is the worst" (which is different to say "V4 is the best", or even "V4 is good as it is"), the harder will be to discuss serenely what the hell V4 is and how we can help it. So as media operators, we have responsibilities: to bring serenity, and to avoid saying and doing anything that will exacerbate the conflict.
Also, to be constructive and help Wizards understand what's wrong. Honestly, the data from this survey tells nothing to Wizards, except "there's 118 people, and many of these are unsatisfied". But unsatisfied how? What do they want? If you just say you don't like something, but you don't specify what exactly you don't like, how are the people in charge supposed to help you? This way, we're making ourselves more and more like babies who can't articulate to their parents what's their pain. They can only cry.
Finally, a word about relevance. If we examine MTGO as a system, the only relevant players are, in order of relevance:
1) those who regularly buy items from the store, as they directly pay for the system's existence;
2) those who play in a lot of official events, as they put some money in the system as well, plus they provide traffic and data (favorite formats, cards, tournament structures) that help shape the system;
3) those who play a lot of casual games during the week, as they also contribute to the overall traffic.
These 3 categories make for nearly the 100% of the required users. The system is healthy as long as the data from revenues and traffic is not decreasing. We don't have any data from store revenues available, but we can deduce the trend by looking at the price of the cards on the secondary market and applying economics principles. And traffic can be measured directly, by looking at the counters in the rooms. I admit it never occurred to me to mark them down (via screen cap) in order to compare them later, but I might do it from now on. If the system's health is faltering, we should witness clear phenomena, like mythic rares available in fewer and fewer numbers, and traffic in the rooms decreasing month by month. In addition, we can measure the ancillary traffic from Internet forums and websites devoted to MTGO.
These are the only objective factors of health. All the rest is just subjective impressions from particular standpoints. Which is precious and meaningful to single players, but not really indicative of anything at the macro level.
Me too. I made some adjustments to the deck since I already had some pricier cards from my Yisan, the Wanderer Bard deck (Avenger of Zendikar, Garruk, Lotus Cobra, Azusa, Chord of Calling, GSZ, etc). It's been working splendidly. Yet to play a full 4-for-all but it seems like I'll draw a lot of hate. XD Still, a super fun deck.
@Fred - I can agree with you to some extent if it's about aggro deck(still I would rather run another creature or different burn spell), but not in control deck. I only run Arc Lightning in KTK block decks, because of lack of a better alternative. However if it works for you, then I'm happy.
The thing I like about Arc Lightning is its versatility. You can have one, two, or three targets.
It also serves as three to the face. In an aggressive deck I want the option of "three to the face."
I won a game last night with a topdecked Arc Lightning to finish them off. Anger of the Gods would have led me right into the scoop phase.
I don't worry overmuch about Hornet Queen. It costs seven mana, three of which is green, and I'm hoping that by then I have the game well in hand.
@Fred - about Arc Lightning vs Anger - I'd rather have a card that will kill Hornet Queen and all her tokens, than a card that leaves 3 bees behind. And so on with any creature wide board state.I see myself playng Arc only if it was an instant.
But usually only when it was accompanied by some overwhelming combo or particular deck list (Draw Go, etc). Memory Jar was in a combo deck, Necropotence, several combo decks, Skullclamp was inherently insane and in a combo deck (but that part was irrelevant).
I can see the argument for Treasure Cruise because at 1 mana you can set up situations where you win without interaction (though I still think that is a fragile premise) but Dig requires UU at the minimum. Still awesome and still powerful but I don't see how it is broken on the level of the above mentioned cards. At least not yet.
I am not saying it should NOT be banned but I am saying I don't see why.
I run two Resolutes. It's backbreaking for some decks to see you undo all their work just to go back to 20.
I've done this: play Resolute and go from 2 life to 20 and then drop a Radiant Fountain to go to 22.
As for Arc Lightning I definitely like that as a maindeck card. There are a lot of one-toughness dudes out there, mainly goblin tokens, and Arc Lightning is great value there. Kill two dudes and dome the other guy for one is still as strong as it was in Urza's block.
I agree (again) with Paul: repeatable life gain is a good answer for burn. Nyx-Fleece Ram is still a good card that gives you that repeatable life gain and at 0/5 is a pretty darn good wall to hide behind.
I agree. When cards get to the point that people warp their decks just to include them then it's not healthy.
I think one thing that really works against them is the fact that they are blue. They are just two more reasons to avoid playing non-blue decks. If they had been any other color they could put up a good argument against banning. I could definitely see Treasure Cruise as a black card and Dig Through Time as a green card (or vice versa). Just change the names and voila! you are good to go.
Yes, I feel as if both will be banned in non rotating formats. Card Draw/selection on the cheap is something that wotc has in the past been in favor of removal.
Repeatable life gain is probably the short answer for Burn. The etb tapped lands do waste a turn so you don't necessarily want to be fully loaded on them but you do want some and being able to go etbt land etbt land flooded strand anger is really a great play against that kind of deck because either they start playing their guys more cautiously (and thus slow your bleed) or they try to do too many things and fall prey to your superior card advantage.
Also Deflecting Palm may be an interesting (read surprising) sideboard choice against Craters's Claws, Master the Way and the like. (Or even just against a creature beating on you or something you own.)
On that track I've been playing around with Pearl Lake x3 + Master the Way x4 in a control deck. That has lead to some fun end games. (Activating PLA x2 after floating mana for MTW and then hitting for exacties at 12+ for example.)
In addition to adding as many Angers as you can fit definitely ditch the inferior Arc Lightnings. Id also ditch something for +2 more jets. That card is so good against the field and even sans a creature target gives you something to scry with at the end of turn by burning them.
The point AJ made that the leagues will be in beta is a good one and means progress. At least something we can hang our hats on until the day comes when you have to pay to play leagues :P I have a question for you guys though: Do you really thing/feel Dig through Time is all that? I mean people are making noises about Treasure Cruise and Dig being banned but what if the next set brings out something that makes delve painful or a less great idea? What if that "answer" is good enough to play in all formats?
Also welcome to the podcast experience Andrew, next time speak up a bit more and louder too. :)
Yea I think the creature plan + Negate is a great idea for Jeskai Aggro. If you bring in Ram, Brimaz, and Roc it will almost stop them from being able to burn you out. I would test out a second Brimaz though he is pretty good against Jeskai (I ran him in my main for the mirror when it was more popular)
on the tournament subject, it is possible to give a price structure more concentrated? i mean for each person less sponsor but more tix of that sponsor?
with bot is not that much of a problem, but on the physical store product could be really an issue for people like me live far far away (Chile for me), shipping cost dilute a lot the price.
specially in the case of Face to Face Games and Cape Fear Games could they be only for the top 4 people (even better is only for top2 or top3)?
something like:
winner 40 Face to Face
2nd: 35 Face to Face
3: 25 Face to Face
4: 25 Cape Fear Games
anyway, lets have a great time in a couple of hours :)
I'm not losing so much to the creatures in Jeskai Aggro, I'm really losing to some combination of burn spells. I can kill all their threats just fine, it's the fact that once I tap mana to do so, they start sneaking in burn that will kill me unless I draw my 1 Archangel. Postboard is where they try to play draw go against you except that they have access to their own counters + EOT burn.
Perhaps a better strategy is to bring in creatures in that matchup that they have to point burn at or else they'll die? I know when I was playing Abzan vs Jeskai Aggro, I would always win on the Abzan side since I had ways to pressure them to the point where they couldn't burn me out (not to mention Siege Rhino is dumb).
Marcos, I would highly suggest turning those Arc Trails into Angers. I know you mentioned the red splash being minimum but you can take out the Radiant Fountains and Swiftwater Cliffs and put in Temples of Epiphany. Anger is just very well positioned right now and would help if you said you were losing to Jeskai aggro and Mono Red. (I play both of those and never want to see anger) Also Deicide might be better as an another Erase. I think its rare when nuking all copies of their gods would matter as much as having a 1 mana answer for an enchantment so you can leave up counter or other removal. Also perhaps take out Jace and put in a 3rd Dig? I just know that I always want to draw that card when its in my deck.
I'd like to see your list at some point. The Fountains were a holdover from UW Control, but maybe they have no place in a Jeskai deck. They could probably become untapped blue sources so that Nullify could find its way back into the deck. I'll message you on MTGO sometime tomorrow/Thursday
I'm no expert - just till today thought Jeskai control was my idea :)
I don't plasy them at all, got 4 KTK tapped lands - with 26 it's so crucial to have 2 untapped islands on turn 3, so I can't afford colorless mana (it's 3 color deck after all). Maybe it's not suitable for control, but I like to be on a play, so turn 2 Nullify or turn 3 Dissolve is possible. After that u get your card drawing engines going and you can steal the game. Banishing light or burn spell to deal with smaller threats, that would slip through early. But unless I'm really pressured I hold it till I have mana for them + counterspell ready.
Every time I play against Jeskai Aggro I always seem to lose, so maybe I'm just unlucky or playing it wrong? Game 1 always seems to be turn 3 Rider, I tap to deal with it, they play another one or a Rabblemaster, I have to tap out again to deal with it, then they start burning me enough that unless I draw Archangel I'm too far behind to win. Then postboard they kinda morph into a counterburn deck that is so hard for you to deal with because if you tap out to counter on your end step, that leaves them a window to resolve a Mantis Rider or Rabblemaster.
I've been very happy with Jace, he fuels Delve and makes sure you have a better chance at drawing a relevant card when you need it. His -3 to bounce something isn't irrelevant, and can buy you a turn to set up End Hostilities. And sometimes you ultimate him and just win the game.
Question: Do you think the Radiant Fountains are too cute? Should I make them into actual colored mana sources?
Pre-board is 80% win for me, as I have 2 Lightning Strikes + 2 Nullify + 4 Banishing light to take care of Mantis Rider and +2 Magma Jet for Rabblemaster. Postboard i swap 2 End Hostilities for 2 Angers, Disdainful Strokes out - Negate in, Rams in, Resolute in, 1 Sarkhan out. Rarely they even lower the curve to go wide, but there's nothing I can do about it. BTW I play full set of Digs + 2 Steam Augury. After your list I'm considering Jace, as he fuels graveyard for Digs as well. Apart from some weird Altar of the Brood brew I never decked, but few times it was close, so I'm also considering Cranial Archive in SB.
They were never flawless, but they were fun.
Thanks for clarifying the mystique of the Leagues to someone who never got the chance to play them. I suspected they weren't as flawless as people tend to remember.
The new ones look good. I hope constructed leagues will have an increased sideboards, to allow transformations there, too. Like, maybe you can bring a pool of 90 cards total, so you can play two different decks with the same base. It would be nice.
I'll be in too. How cool would a Commander league be?
Appreciate the well thought out response, in the end we will just have to agree to disagree. In my experiences I have found survey's very helpful for corporations and you can point to any and all surveys as having some bias or some issue leading you to quickly discard it as not useful. That would be a mistake in my opinion.
I also disagree that WOTC can learn nothing from this survey or the view that feedback isn't a gift. Those companies that listen to all their customers and take any and all feedback as a gift are the ones I look to invest in as an investor.
Because we are just so far apart in our beliefs I think we will just have to agree to disagree Kuma!
I don't mean to disparage your work, as you clearly put a lot of effort in this. But, alas, these data are almost entirely meaningless. And not just the way you said they are in the introduction. But because they're also biased data. Look at the question about the favorite format: do we really think that Vintage is the most popular format on MTGO? Of course it's not, but you're a well-known Vintage player, so among your readers there are many Vintage players as well, and those took your survey. This makes the entire survey mostly meaningful only where that specific subset of players is concerned. It's like trying to extrapolate data on the state of all sports in the country based on the opinions of the patrons of a football pub.
We also have to take into account basic human psychology. Especially two elements: 1) Old people like old things, and 2) Complaints always outweigh praises. We know the human mind is opposed to change, because change requires effort and shakes up the status quo. As a result, there will always be people who BELIEVE they were better off back in the good ol' days. They weren't, actually. But they'll remember it that way. Over time, this segment becomes more and more irrelevant (more about relevance below). As for number 2, we also know it's more frequent for people to speak their minds when they're angry or unsatisfied. Nobody organizes a parade to tell the government what a great job they're doing. Satisfied people are mostly silent. Unsatisfied people are loud. It's how humans work.
Now, I could easily build another survey, feed it to a different segment of users, and say it helps validate some of my assumptions on the current state of the game. Because chances are, I'll reach people who already agree with me. But this is where it would become dangerous.
I disagree that feedback is always a positive factor. I mean, it is in the abstract, but you have to purge it of every "political" value, which isn't easy to do with a poll. It's not by chance that polls are some of the most powerful instruments available to politicians. They can be so easily manipulated. Hell, they don't even need to be actively tampered with, because readers will automatically use them as a confirmation of their own opinions. Like, you clearly write (being completely honest) "this survey was not perfect and is only a small subset of the player base and therefore potentially not representative of the whole". But many readers will skip that part and jump directly to the numbers, or forget about it by the end. The numbers have a powerful effect. And even if you're honest, the effect of the numbers may have unintended consequences.
It's been proven. A popular newspaper once made this experiment: it published a fake survey where a large number of answers complained about the unseasonal bad weather. There was no particular bad weather that season. Yet, a few weeks after the fake survey, a real weather survey was taken among the readers, and they had assimilated the bad survey so much, that they had started complaining about nonexistent bad weather, even citing specific days that they "remembered" as bad weather days, but were perfectly sunny days instead.
What does all this mean? It means that the more we radicalize the different opinions, widening the gap between those who think "V4 is the worst" and those who think "it's not true that V4 is the worst" (which is different to say "V4 is the best", or even "V4 is good as it is"), the harder will be to discuss serenely what the hell V4 is and how we can help it. So as media operators, we have responsibilities: to bring serenity, and to avoid saying and doing anything that will exacerbate the conflict.
Also, to be constructive and help Wizards understand what's wrong. Honestly, the data from this survey tells nothing to Wizards, except "there's 118 people, and many of these are unsatisfied". But unsatisfied how? What do they want? If you just say you don't like something, but you don't specify what exactly you don't like, how are the people in charge supposed to help you? This way, we're making ourselves more and more like babies who can't articulate to their parents what's their pain. They can only cry.
Finally, a word about relevance. If we examine MTGO as a system, the only relevant players are, in order of relevance:
1) those who regularly buy items from the store, as they directly pay for the system's existence;
2) those who play in a lot of official events, as they put some money in the system as well, plus they provide traffic and data (favorite formats, cards, tournament structures) that help shape the system;
3) those who play a lot of casual games during the week, as they also contribute to the overall traffic.
These 3 categories make for nearly the 100% of the required users. The system is healthy as long as the data from revenues and traffic is not decreasing. We don't have any data from store revenues available, but we can deduce the trend by looking at the price of the cards on the secondary market and applying economics principles. And traffic can be measured directly, by looking at the counters in the rooms. I admit it never occurred to me to mark them down (via screen cap) in order to compare them later, but I might do it from now on. If the system's health is faltering, we should witness clear phenomena, like mythic rares available in fewer and fewer numbers, and traffic in the rooms decreasing month by month. In addition, we can measure the ancillary traffic from Internet forums and websites devoted to MTGO.
These are the only objective factors of health. All the rest is just subjective impressions from particular standpoints. Which is precious and meaningful to single players, but not really indicative of anything at the macro level.
Me too. I made some adjustments to the deck since I already had some pricier cards from my Yisan, the Wanderer Bard deck (Avenger of Zendikar, Garruk, Lotus Cobra, Azusa, Chord of Calling, GSZ, etc). It's been working splendidly. Yet to play a full 4-for-all but it seems like I'll draw a lot of hate. XD Still, a super fun deck.
That is definitely something to consider for future events. :)
@Fred - I can agree with you to some extent if it's about aggro deck(still I would rather run another creature or different burn spell), but not in control deck. I only run Arc Lightning in KTK block decks, because of lack of a better alternative. However if it works for you, then I'm happy.
The thing I like about Arc Lightning is its versatility. You can have one, two, or three targets.
It also serves as three to the face. In an aggressive deck I want the option of "three to the face."
I won a game last night with a topdecked Arc Lightning to finish them off. Anger of the Gods would have led me right into the scoop phase.
I don't worry overmuch about Hornet Queen. It costs seven mana, three of which is green, and I'm hoping that by then I have the game well in hand.
@Fred - about Arc Lightning vs Anger - I'd rather have a card that will kill Hornet Queen and all her tokens, than a card that leaves 3 bees behind. And so on with any creature wide board state.I see myself playng Arc only if it was an instant.
But usually only when it was accompanied by some overwhelming combo or particular deck list (Draw Go, etc). Memory Jar was in a combo deck, Necropotence, several combo decks, Skullclamp was inherently insane and in a combo deck (but that part was irrelevant).
I can see the argument for Treasure Cruise because at 1 mana you can set up situations where you win without interaction (though I still think that is a fragile premise) but Dig requires UU at the minimum. Still awesome and still powerful but I don't see how it is broken on the level of the above mentioned cards. At least not yet.
I am not saying it should NOT be banned but I am saying I don't see why.
Awesome! Xenagod is pleased!
I run two Resolutes. It's backbreaking for some decks to see you undo all their work just to go back to 20.
I've done this: play Resolute and go from 2 life to 20 and then drop a Radiant Fountain to go to 22.
As for Arc Lightning I definitely like that as a maindeck card. There are a lot of one-toughness dudes out there, mainly goblin tokens, and Arc Lightning is great value there. Kill two dudes and dome the other guy for one is still as strong as it was in Urza's block.
I agree (again) with Paul: repeatable life gain is a good answer for burn. Nyx-Fleece Ram is still a good card that gives you that repeatable life gain and at 0/5 is a pretty darn good wall to hide behind.
I agree. When cards get to the point that people warp their decks just to include them then it's not healthy.
I think one thing that really works against them is the fact that they are blue. They are just two more reasons to avoid playing non-blue decks. If they had been any other color they could put up a good argument against banning. I could definitely see Treasure Cruise as a black card and Dig Through Time as a green card (or vice versa). Just change the names and voila! you are good to go.
Yes, I feel as if both will be banned in non rotating formats. Card Draw/selection on the cheap is something that wotc has in the past been in favor of removal.
Repeatable life gain is probably the short answer for Burn. The etb tapped lands do waste a turn so you don't necessarily want to be fully loaded on them but you do want some and being able to go etbt land etbt land flooded strand anger is really a great play against that kind of deck because either they start playing their guys more cautiously (and thus slow your bleed) or they try to do too many things and fall prey to your superior card advantage.
Also Deflecting Palm may be an interesting (read surprising) sideboard choice against Craters's Claws, Master the Way and the like. (Or even just against a creature beating on you or something you own.)
On that track I've been playing around with Pearl Lake x3 + Master the Way x4 in a control deck. That has lead to some fun end games. (Activating PLA x2 after floating mana for MTW and then hitting for exacties at 12+ for example.)
In addition to adding as many Angers as you can fit definitely ditch the inferior Arc Lightnings. Id also ditch something for +2 more jets. That card is so good against the field and even sans a creature target gives you something to scry with at the end of turn by burning them.
The point AJ made that the leagues will be in beta is a good one and means progress. At least something we can hang our hats on until the day comes when you have to pay to play leagues :P I have a question for you guys though: Do you really thing/feel Dig through Time is all that? I mean people are making noises about Treasure Cruise and Dig being banned but what if the next set brings out something that makes delve painful or a less great idea? What if that "answer" is good enough to play in all formats?
Also welcome to the podcast experience Andrew, next time speak up a bit more and louder too. :)
Yea I think the creature plan + Negate is a great idea for Jeskai Aggro. If you bring in Ram, Brimaz, and Roc it will almost stop them from being able to burn you out. I would test out a second Brimaz though he is pretty good against Jeskai (I ran him in my main for the mirror when it was more popular)
Hi blipply, first HAPPY Birthday!!!
on the tournament subject, it is possible to give a price structure more concentrated? i mean for each person less sponsor but more tix of that sponsor?
with bot is not that much of a problem, but on the physical store product could be really an issue for people like me live far far away (Chile for me), shipping cost dilute a lot the price.
specially in the case of Face to Face Games and Cape Fear Games could they be only for the top 4 people (even better is only for top2 or top3)?
something like:
winner 40 Face to Face
2nd: 35 Face to Face
3: 25 Face to Face
4: 25 Cape Fear Games
anyway, lets have a great time in a couple of hours :)
I'm not losing so much to the creatures in Jeskai Aggro, I'm really losing to some combination of burn spells. I can kill all their threats just fine, it's the fact that once I tap mana to do so, they start sneaking in burn that will kill me unless I draw my 1 Archangel. Postboard is where they try to play draw go against you except that they have access to their own counters + EOT burn.
Perhaps a better strategy is to bring in creatures in that matchup that they have to point burn at or else they'll die? I know when I was playing Abzan vs Jeskai Aggro, I would always win on the Abzan side since I had ways to pressure them to the point where they couldn't burn me out (not to mention Siege Rhino is dumb).
Marcos, I would highly suggest turning those Arc Trails into Angers. I know you mentioned the red splash being minimum but you can take out the Radiant Fountains and Swiftwater Cliffs and put in Temples of Epiphany. Anger is just very well positioned right now and would help if you said you were losing to Jeskai aggro and Mono Red. (I play both of those and never want to see anger) Also Deicide might be better as an another Erase. I think its rare when nuking all copies of their gods would matter as much as having a 1 mana answer for an enchantment so you can leave up counter or other removal. Also perhaps take out Jace and put in a 3rd Dig? I just know that I always want to draw that card when its in my deck.
I'd like to see your list at some point. The Fountains were a holdover from UW Control, but maybe they have no place in a Jeskai deck. They could probably become untapped blue sources so that Nullify could find its way back into the deck. I'll message you on MTGO sometime tomorrow/Thursday
I'm no expert - just till today thought Jeskai control was my idea :)
I don't plasy them at all, got 4 KTK tapped lands - with 26 it's so crucial to have 2 untapped islands on turn 3, so I can't afford colorless mana (it's 3 color deck after all). Maybe it's not suitable for control, but I like to be on a play, so turn 2 Nullify or turn 3 Dissolve is possible. After that u get your card drawing engines going and you can steal the game. Banishing light or burn spell to deal with smaller threats, that would slip through early. But unless I'm really pressured I hold it till I have mana for them + counterspell ready.
Every time I play against Jeskai Aggro I always seem to lose, so maybe I'm just unlucky or playing it wrong? Game 1 always seems to be turn 3 Rider, I tap to deal with it, they play another one or a Rabblemaster, I have to tap out again to deal with it, then they start burning me enough that unless I draw Archangel I'm too far behind to win. Then postboard they kinda morph into a counterburn deck that is so hard for you to deal with because if you tap out to counter on your end step, that leaves them a window to resolve a Mantis Rider or Rabblemaster.
I've been very happy with Jace, he fuels Delve and makes sure you have a better chance at drawing a relevant card when you need it. His -3 to bounce something isn't irrelevant, and can buy you a turn to set up End Hostilities. And sometimes you ultimate him and just win the game.
Question: Do you think the Radiant Fountains are too cute? Should I make them into actual colored mana sources?
Pre-board is 80% win for me, as I have 2 Lightning Strikes + 2 Nullify + 4 Banishing light to take care of Mantis Rider and +2 Magma Jet for Rabblemaster. Postboard i swap 2 End Hostilities for 2 Angers, Disdainful Strokes out - Negate in, Rams in, Resolute in, 1 Sarkhan out. Rarely they even lower the curve to go wide, but there's nothing I can do about it. BTW I play full set of Digs + 2 Steam Augury. After your list I'm considering Jace, as he fuels graveyard for Digs as well. Apart from some weird Altar of the Brood brew I never decked, but few times it was close, so I'm also considering Cranial Archive in SB.