Resounding Thunder and Banefire have been VERY useful in the games I've played with this deck. I played against three control decks in a row, and all of them were blue draw-go decks. One was mono blue, one was Grixis, and one was Jeskai, and they all had Negate, Dissolve, and the one that counters only creatures (can't think of the name atm). The third game was the closest. I would have lost had I not drawn Resounding Thunder off the top. He had out two Sphinx-Bone Wands and got me down to four life on his last turn by playing one Shock followed by another Shock. He was at 12, I cycled Resounding Thunder at his End Step, and Banefired him for the win on my turn.

In my experience, this deck has no problem against most creature decks. The only close games I've had were against blue decks that also run a lot of counterspells. I think adding the second Banefire would seriously benefit this deck. Maybe take out a Traumatic Visions? High damage, uncounterable burn is what this deck needs against other blue control decks.

It is a meta call I think, it depends on the matchups you are facing. You can add an extra tribute or an extra banefire depending on what matchups you are seeing. You can't take out visions though as the mana fixing is important. I am happy with the deck as it is as you only want banefire late so 1 is fine, resounding thunder does a great banefire impression in the late game.

Thanks for all the testing help and support, guys, I can't wait until multiplayer is back online so I can play some real matches.

With that said, I've been jamming the list in single player and there are a couple of changes I would make. Obelisk is amazing in this deck and multiples are actually good so I think I would cut Kozilek for the second copy. The Obelisk is an amazing card for a control deck, it just does everything. Kozilek is the cut because, as monk said in our brewing session yesterday, the looting mode can require you to sandbag lands in hand to discard. This deck can operate on eight mana.

I think Tribute could be the second Banefire, I rarely want to draw the Tribute but Banefire is good all the time.

I also think that we'll never be spending more than one green mana per turn so if we draw a forest naturally we'll never need to search for more. Rune-Scarred is so I think I'd replace a Forest with a Swamp. The white mode on Obelisk is insane, though, we could add a basic Plains instead. Drawing it would feel absolutely terrible but the ability to tutor up a white source could be worth it if we go up to two Obelisks. What do you think?

EDIT - Now that I think about it, if we cut a green source (and I think we should) then it's probably correct to trim one Ground Assault and that Tribute to Hunger for two copies of Auger Spree and stick with the singleton Banefire.

So my thoughts are:

-1 Forest
-1 Ground Assault
-1 Tribute to Hunger
-1 Kozilek

+1 Swamp or Plains (TBD but I think Swamp is better)
+2 Auger Spree
+1 Obelisk

I will give it a test, not sure if cutting ground assault is correct

Ground Assault is the answer to big stupid stuff, and a sufficiently large Banefire can do it too. It's not ideal, but I think a lone Tribute is bad more often than it's good.

You think we can play Ground Assault at three copies with six sources? Okay I'll try it. We'll go with the cuts you suggested that you just edited out!

We're definitely cutting a Forest for a Swamp and Kozilek for the Obelisk. Tribute should get cut and that's the slot we have to fill.

What are your thoughts on a single void snare, great vs any resolved threat especially mycoloth or sphinx bone wand which I think are our 2 of our toughest cards to deal with?

I think I'd rather Voyage's End, the Bone Wand isn't a card that's played a lot. If Obelisk becomes a thing, though, the Snare could have the edge.

A sufficiently large Mycoloth is a huge threat that Ground Assault possibly can't even touch, so we do need an answer to a resolved one that's good in other matchups. I don't think Snare is good enough right now but that may change.

I think I will test void snare and voyages end where we currently have the second augur spree, I think we can get away with 1 augur spree as ground assault and banefire can also kill 4 toughness guys.

I will start with void snare and let you know if the sorcery speed is an issue or whether the flexibility is worth it.

Being 1 mana might be the biggest upside as you can use it on 4 mana with dissolve up or use it on 8 mana after fetching it with demon.

We can stay away from Spree and stick with three Ground Assault if you think the mana is good enough. It's the better spell. From the list above, I did the following:

-1 Forest
-1 Tribute
-1 Kozilek

+1 Swamp
+1 Voyage's End
+1 Obelisk

If the play testers are saying the deck is weak vs weenie rush, maybe Guard Gomazoa could have a place here.. as an infinite killer of 1-toughness creatures, and who can also kill Baneslayer with the Obelisk out (using the green pump). With Augur Spree and the green pump, Gomazoa could kill just about anything not named Kozileck.

It does nonbo with Anger of the Gods though.. and it's usually a bad to awful late game topdeck.

To be honest if we are not running tribute or augur then the extra forest may be correct. We only need black for treasure find and rune scarred. We should be fine by the time we need then. I do like the 1 bounce spell but think void snare will be better.

I thought I was onto something with my original thought on tribute here.

Looks like you were, if the meta goes more ramp and fatties I could see bringing it back but there are to many token strategies for it right now.

I have updated the OP with my cutting deck list. I have a few hours spare so will see how it goes.

When this deck is finished in its development I wonder what it’s win rate will be relative to say Monk’s latest RDW deck?

The reason I ponder this question is after some testing I find myself agreeing with Yondar when he describes the process of playing this deck (optimally) as verging on the tedious.

I understand what the community is doing with this deck – enjoying the process of discovering the boundaries of the game’s control archetype similar to the process of discovering the most optimum rush deck. This is totally legitimate and praise worthy.

My point though, I suppose, is if the win-rate between Monk’s RDW deck and this Monkeem Project deck is in anyway comparable then the former might arguably be considered superior if only for the reasons Yondar raises? Subjective I know, I in fact prefer the control archetype myself, still, I suspect you can perceive my underlying point.

Also, full disclosure: something niggles my OCD about 4 colour decks, especially those containing just ‘splashes’ of certain colours. It’s as if I give extra ‘points’ for simple or rather more precisely ‘elegant’ decks.

Anyway, I enjoy watching this build evolve so keep going.

It's not weak vs weenie rush, it's weak vs Young Wolf . A second Obelisk can certainly help with that, but still the wolf is pretty scary. Gomazoa is a no go: being creatureless is essential for the deck, it renders the opponent's removal useless.

The tediousness is a function of how Duels taps your mana for you and how hard it is to be precise with it. That's not a failing of the deck, but it certainly is a concern if you're not in the mood to waste time on mana-tapping.

Anyway, I like the idea of a basically creatureless control deck, it's the way I like to play. Titan is just removal on a stick and Demon is the Demonic Tutor we have access to. Other than that, it's just removal, permission, and card draw. It has tremendous game in the control mirror because of all the uncounterable damage you can present, which is excellent.

Regarding "four-color", this is basically an Izzet deck with a very light green splash and a very light black splash. If it weren't for the trilands and Traumatic Visions, you wouldn't be able to get away with it but why not stretch your manabase if you get to choose from a wider range of spells?

I agree, it's a failing of the game not the deck's design.



Absolutely, I like that style of play too.



Absolutely, there's nothing wrong with splashing, at most it's a pragmatic compromise on the thematics of the deck.

Personally though, I consider this splashing concept and my internal monologue says: 'yeah, but however much you justify it to yourself by calling what you're doing splashing, really, it's a four colour deck with a splash of denial. It's hard for me to draw anything but an arbitrary line about how many mana symbols represent a 'splash' and how many the out-right inclusion of a colour.

But again, my mental demons are my own cross to bear -- carry on.

I feel like red/white/blue and potentially black does what this deck trys to do but better.

So after playing 10 games against a variety of decks in practice mode I am happy with the current set up. 2 obelisk is absolutely the correct number, you get to see it more often and if you ever get 2 you can't lose.

I have liked void snare over the ten games I drew it 3 times and it bounced chasm skulker, an Angel token and a mycoloth. I even searched it up with demon to bounce my opponents obelisk then counter it on the way back.

Thanks for everyone's input on the deck, it is nice when we work as a collective. There are so many good players on this forum. In particular thanks to anyone who had tested this online, it helps for us that can't.

The problem with white is that the cards you want are not easily splashed, if the mana could do it I would have cleansing in a heartbeat but you can't. Also ground assault is the best removal spell in the game. It is the reason to play this deck.