wickeddarkman

Looks good, though it might be too slow for aggro.

I play a lot of proxy topdecks because I'm training a pro, who've won championships in Denmark and Sweeden, which means that I play a lot of games with very different decks. I also test the same decks against my own pet project, a mill-deck, and the dangerous part of grixis is it's ability to discard from your opening hand, then following up by sweeping what you get into play and then it plays it's heavies.

I do not doubt that you have played 200 games with your deck, but considering the large number of decks in modern I do doubt that you have played through all aggro sufficiently enough.

I'd also say that your estimate of grixis not being in a lot of top 8's are a bit of. I constantly track the modernmeta for anything out of the ordinary and have my own %'s nailed down.

There's a difference in how many % of people playing a deck, and what place the decktype get's when it is brought to a tourney, and compared to %'s present (4%) the deck actually often gets a high place, so at a tourney with 100 people only 4 may bring such a deck, but if you win games your chances increase in meeting it later.

What are the skills of your playtesters?

Village is a tapland as well, so stalls you down. Not many loam decks have more than 2 of these, probably for that reason.

I've started playing testgames with a modern aggroloam against a friend, so I expect to learn a bit from it.
Here's the input on ravens crime:

In many games when you have 1 raven's crime the other crime's you draw are sort of obsolete since discarding lands is usually not a problem. During one of my testgames I played a single ravens crime 4 times in a row and killed of any chance of being comboed by my opponent. Most decks are build to avoid having dead cards in your hand, so 4 crimes is a bit on the silly side, especially since you can dredge and increase your chances of getting one into the grave.
Playing only 2 ravens crime will give you a moderate chance of it being on your openinghand and a nice chance to dredge one of the two into the grave after some turns.

The imps will be well defended from gravehate by your many draw-effects, so that's a nice idea.

Grixis can get a 5/5 in play on turn two, and follow up with a 4/5 on turn 3 (I've played into this situation myself when testing it against a friends deck). It may also bolt your token generators or discard your path's to exile. It qualifies as aggro, so how do you deal with it? (Especially with sb pyroclasms)

I'm more interrested in knowing what your bad matchus are (With more specification) which may be where we can give you advice :D

Heh!
In multiplayer people always gang up againsts me, so I usually play decks that sweep everything so I'll survive their onslaught.

I do have friends that play "neutral style" and it's pretty often that they end up winning most battles while the more "alphaplayers" fight it out.

With that in mind, if you prefer to remain neutral, then abyssal gatekeeper and braids are NOT the style to perform with, players will either attack you to kill someone elses big critter, or they will kill it before they have any creatures themselves, getting everyone else anoyed at you. Braids is a true "thou shall be the enemy" so she definitelly has to go.

Perhaps go with some walls instead.
Something like wall of spears or wall of junk.

I have not played with aggro loam that much, and mainly legacy type versions.
I do however study a lot of decklists and for at least two years printed out every legacy decklist to get a top 8. It's a rather large archive.
Here's my input:

First of all, you do not lock down your black mana!!! You absolutely will need black mana at your first active turn so that you may discard something relevant immediately. The same goes with your green part. Loam is already a slow kind of deck, so you cannot afford to play with that many taplands.

Too many raven's crime, go with 2.
Cut one tree village.
worm harvest, 1 main 1 sideboard.
use 2 darkblast in main.

I agree with DRAKERAENES that your killcard needs protection.
However, since you have 4 turns to get rid of it, you might exploit it while it's there,
so I would add a few discard-cards instead.

The whole setup seems a bit random though, so you might want to try out finding the most powerfull aspect
in the theme and build on it as a soft-combo and build up a propper deck around it!
Perhaps go B/W with oblation and demonic pact. Go with stuff like vindicate, discard and sinkhole, sort of pox-like, and when both parties are low on resources you drop the bomb!

And surgical extraction interacts nicely with remand!

And now I got to my post number 1200! More yayness :D

Yay! I get to be "liker" nr 100!!!

I "liked" it, but was pretty sure I'd liked it in the past, but turns out I haven't liked it before, even though I like it.

I like it!!!

Not a bad try!
Replacing mesmeric orb with jace's erasure may just about work with the draw spells you've put into it all.

However, within my experiences you will be absolutely punished by aggro, and modern is currently about 52% aggro, so you will be punished in more than half of your games for not having a way to deal with aggro.

GOTHY:
Well infect is on a whole other sort of combo where you cannot either counter their turn 1 glistener or their inkmoth nexus, and they can play several spells for 1 mana to kill with, so they actually walk through counterspells.
Zoo uses a similar slip, as their first critter usually cannot be countered, and once the counterspeller uses removal zoo will have enough mana to cast another cheap critter AND pay to bypass a counterspell or simply casts 2 small critters.

Village bellringer does not walk through the same way these decks does, and splinter certainly doesn't either.
The burn part is fine, but the combo needs to slip through counters...

SORIN:
You need to slip through counterspells!

And Apostle's Blessing in sb, it will protect the deathtouchers, guildmage and crank.

KJSJ3:
I build longterm, so when suggesting stuff like the above I asume that others might be able to test stuff enough for it to show if something works or not. Even if Caverns of souls only produced colorless all the time, the fact that the above deck has 21 ways of getting red mana means that there is plenty of space for even up to 4 caverns. Cutting 4 mountains out will reduce it to 17 ways of getting red mana which is still overkill compared to how many islands a deck like merfolk or burn plays. The room is there for a change which occasionally will produce the right mana. In a few cases it even improves the white manabase a little. So it's a logical decission to start out with 1-2 caverns to see the effect in reallife :D though I doubt it would only backfire in the cases where you draw all caverns at the opening.
So essentially a minimum of 1 cavern can only improve the deck.

GOTHY:
The deck has been marked as competitive, so I treat it with competitiveness in mind. Competetive decks needs a gameplane for just about everything, so comments like "dies to removal/counterspells" points out fatal flaws that are unwanted in a competitive environment! No deck can have "Well I might not meet a counterspell deck" as an argument for taking it to a competitive environment because YOU WILL FACE EVERYTHING!

OKAY!!!

Serious question to a competitive design...

The deck has no way to deal with counterspells, so the combo is likely being stopped everytime they get one.
With goblin guide and village bellringer being scouts, why not have 1-2 cavern of souls against counterspells?
At the very least consider boseiju, who shelters all...

First time I ever build a deck around it I got a top-place in vintage with no power. I played a white deck with evasion and lifegain at a time where the most played vintage deck was goblins.

Later I also held some contests where people could base decks on 3 different manacurves and win a mox if they got a topplace, I had an extensive banning list and I've been told that my contest was the indirect cause in creating death and taxes in legacy.

Many of my own projects with these mana solutions have ended in winning an average of 3 out of 6 matches, but only after extensive building and redesigning.

There is a lot of power in the right amount of lands and spells, but it is a hell of a puzzle to stay within the frame when designing something based on it. If you aren't a solid deckdesigner these recipies might not cut it for you, but try them out anyways.

Once you build a deck that works within your area of play people will adapt to it within short time, so once that happens build a new one and work on it until it is defeated, then start picking which of your decks to play at random.

take out the 2 fireshrieker. The only card they really interact with is consuming aberration, and even if you played 4 aberration it would be to loose as a combo. Either those or duskmantle guildmage which belongs more in a crank-deck :D

I once build a milldeck based around hardcasting archive trap as a finisher, and did a lot of effort to find out how much mana would be needed for that. I ended out on exactly 25 lands. If you want to stay close to your concept of large cost stuff paired with cheap defence go with 25 lands and stay within a max cost of 5 mana.
If you can manage to stall other players long enough, 5cc creatures may rule the board.

No problem.
Another thing about the deck is that you have 14 cards costing 5+ which is a huge problem with only 20 lands.

A lot of players fall into the "1 third must be land" trap originally founded by someone in the past.
Pro players know this ain't true, but why bother telling newcommers?

During iceage I was told I was the worst player in the world, so I looked it up and saw that it was true, so I decided to do something about it. The next 10 years or so I gradually perfected a manaoptimization program and used it to improve my game. I'm currently the number 324 best lifetime player in DK, so the program worked.

I produced a manacurve consisting of 22 lands, 12 cards costing 1, 12 cards costing 2 and 14 cards costing 3 and it was extremely solid (Still is if you want to try building a creatures only deck around it).

Now if a computer tells you that you need 22 mana to reliably play spells costing 3, then logic dictates that 20 mana will never cast spells costing 5+ at a reliable pace :D

By the way I spent years trying to find the perfect build using curves it generated.
The goal I gave it was to beat a "goldfish" (A player that does not play anything) as fast as possible, and only using creatures with a power equal to their castingcost, which had no abilities at all.

It provided 2 solid solutions that I used over the years, one faster than the other, but from play experiences I ended up using the deck with 14 3-costs because it had 2 creatures more, and magic usually hates aggro with a lot of removal.

In the case you want to test the fastest solution it's 24 lands, 12 cards costing 1, 12 cards costing 2, 8 cards costing 3 and 4 cards costing 4. You won't find many manacurves that can kill reliably at turn 5-6 with creatures without specials.

In that case you would need 4 crypt ghast to get them reliably, and 20 mana does not generate 4 lands very fast, I know because I played 22 lands for years to drive a deck with 14 cards costing 3 mana and it was exactly within it's limits because the mana was computer-generated. 20 does not drive this deck, even if you have 4 ghasts for ramping it.

But it may be that I am just too competitive :D

Is it casual?