Say you're building a control deck in constructed. How do you decide if you want to run a Wrath (instead of just stacking up on single-target removal)? If you do run a Wrath, how do you decide how many to run?

I see e.g. UW control decks in Modern with 1 Supreme Verdict in the maindeck, and also with 2 or 3; I am wondering what goes into this decision. (And also why not 0? It's not like UW is short on quality single-target removal in Modern.)

Before I get started on the Why Fors: A control deck will never work if it only utilizes 1-for-1 removal. You will need some 2-for-1s or better somewhere in your deck or you will just run out of control cards. That's why not 0.

I dont really know the current Modern meta so this is all general info. It really depends on your meta. For example, last time I played standard I was running Steam-Kin RDW which puts down attackers down T1-4. In that kind of meta you need your 4 mana sweeper on T4 so white control decks were running 5 sweepers. Is there a deck like that RDW? Or are there any decks that can generate a large amount of non-haste tokens in one turn? Does green ramp quickly and then pump out big guys every turn? White weenies also play a part in sweeper determination.

Based on your description it sounds like there is not much of that going on, but maybe one or two creature decks to be concerned with. OR, the creatures in said decks are so potent they require immediate attention, and waiting for your opponent to build a board presence of two or three creatures is not viable.

Well that's why control decks also run card advantage right? I could see a deck with 10 Swords to Plowshares and then several copies of Divination or something. Your spot removal trades 1-for-1, and the Divinations make sure you have enough of them.

Also are you saying the number of sweepers you run is completely determined by the metagame? In that case, if you expect the meta to be creature-heavy, do you ever cut spot removal for sweepers?

Spike magic is about efficiency. You don’t play card advantage to recover from card disadvantage. You play card advantage to accelerate you to more card advantage.

Basically, you play sweepers if they are better than your spot removal. You play spot removal when it’s cheaper than the most likely things it will be used to remove.

None of these things are rules.

You have an example decklist? Would probably be easier to work backwards

Assuming modern deck probably has a lot of filtering/tutoring so they probably run 1 maindeck and more in the sideboard because they can dig pretty deep for it if they need it in a pinch, snapcaster as well if the control has self mill

1 Verdict: https://mtgtop8.com/event?e=44911&d=531568&f=MO
2 Verdicts: https://mtgtop8.com/event?e=44895&d=531435&f=MO
3 Verdicts: https://mtgtop8.com/event?e=44907&d=531517&f=MO

All three decks have 25 lands, 4 Solitude, 4 Archmage's Charm.

In addition first deck has in the maindeck:

Sweeper: 1
Spot removal: 8
Counterspells: 5
Card draw: 3 (Memory Deluge)

Second deck has:

Sweeper: 2
Spot removal: 6 (7 if you count The Wandering Emperor)
Counterspells: 4 (5 if you count Subtlety)
Card draw: 4 (6 if you count Snapcaster Mage)

Third deck has:

Sweeper: 3
Spot removal: 7 (8 if you count The Wandering Emperor)
Counterspells: 4
Card draw: 2 (Memory Deluge)

I looked at the modern breakdown, and it says Aggro is approximately 50% of the metagame at the moment, and combo is 40%. Granted i dunno where they pulled those numbers from.

Not looking through all the different decks and i haven't looked at modern in a good few years now but assuming that sweepers are good vs aggro and bad vs combo (gets more complicated with stuff like death and taxes ect)) you can probably see why people don't want the full four just to get combo'd out, and modern aggro decks are so quick that you can't just rely on a turn 4 sweeper to save you hence the earlier interaction - solitude is nuts in general as it can disrupt a lot of combo decks as well as keeping you alive vs aggro for example.

They probably run one or two because they can did deep via memory deluge, but i bet most are packing at least one more in the sideboard because it does have it's uses, but not universally

The first deck is proactive rather than reactive. The Chalices probably outperform any sweepers. Know what’s better than a sweeper? Keeping the cards from ever even leaving your opponent’s hand.

The next two are more reactive. I get why they’d do it. The existence of the first deck will make some aggressive players overcommit, which will run straight into the hands of the other two.

To get back to the original question. The correct amount of sweepers will depend the most on the likelihood of ever being able to two for one the opponent. If, for example, there are single creatures that can kill you all on their own (definitely the case in modern), sweepers stop looking so great. It’s hard to sit back and wait for the two (or better) for one when your opponent can never put another creature down, and still kill you before you can stabilize. And if you will never get the card advantage, spot removal will generally outperform.

Mostly this. Sweepers are fantastic catch-up mechanism, but only if decks go wide that you are need them in order to catch up. And sweepers also look bad if you have creatures yourself. Sometimes you still need to blow up everything when they have 4 bodies and you have one, but you're obviously losing something in the exchange as well. That's why decks like Grixis rarely run sweepers, except out of the sideboard, because they typically play to the board much more than classic Azorius Control. The tension in Modern is that just every deck usually plays to the board alittle bit.

Definitely listen to this guy, Banedon. He's the control player that pays some attention to this site. While I have a viewer's knowledge of control strategies, I'm much more of an agro, or agro-control player. Thanks for weighing in Divinevert.

Nah Verts a dumb dumb, listen to me instead who hasn't played a game in 2 years

Tbf, we didn’t listen to you WHEN you played.

I didn’t even know nighthawk ever played