Lantern merfolk hybrid v2.1

by wickeddarkman on 16 July 2021

Main Deck (40 cards)

Sideboard (12 cards)

Creatures (4)

Artifacts (4)

Enchantments (4)

Submit a list of cards below to bulk import them all into your sideboard. Post one card per line using a format like "4x Birds of Paradise" or "1 Blaze", you can even enter just the card name by itself like "Wrath of God" for single cards.

Deck Description

I'm testing out a new way of speeding up my deck creation systems.
In step one I picked two decks that haven't ever had any connection and tested out how well they could be mixed together.

Link to original blend

In this version I'm working at combining both concepts at a deeper level.

Smashing these two decks together turned out to bring more synergy than I thought,
Like when a merfolk is played, merrow reejerey allows you to untap pyxis of pandemonium for an extra mill. Realmwalker is a new addition which may abuse lantern to play more merfolk faster.

I've got other innovative moves for the deck, like exploiting whir of invention to bring in adaptive automation, and I'm also about to experiment with paradise mantle.

The rate at which this can be built is dictated by my new tools, but I got to admit that it seems to happen pretty fast...

Deck Tags

  • lantern
  • Merfolk
  • Hybrid

Deck at a Glance

Social Stats


This deck has been viewed 235 times.

Mana Curve

Mana Symbol Occurrence


Card Legality

  • Not Legal in Standard
  • Not Legal in Modern
  • Not Legal in Vintage
  • Not Legal in Legacy

Deck discussion for Lantern merfolk hybrid v2.1

I've been waiting for lantern to come back now that Urza's saga is perfection incarnate for it.

Posted 17 July 2021 at 21:35


Yeah, urza's saga is really gonna fit into a brew like this :)
But I forgot to mention in this post that my test basis is cards from the 2018 to have a realistic test ground for the overall idea of creating hybrid decks out of nowhere.

The goal is to take ANY two random decks and blend them into one.

It might sound like madness, but there seems to be some obscure math behind it.

You see both halves of the deck (not counting lands) must consist of the half of that deck that is statistically the best performing half of the deck. The other half, the cards that performed statistically less perfect is thrown away.

So when joining the two best performing halves, you get something that on a statistical basis should perform much better than the bad halves. So if merfolk part 1 is +1 and merfolk part 2 is +0 and lanternnpart one is +1 and lantern part 2 is +0, then the statistical hybrid should be +2 in performance.

To test the theory of that I need a stable unmoving meta to test against, which is why I use the 2018 meta of which I have 64 decks to test the theory inside.

So realmwalker is sort of outside the scope of the test panel, but I got carried away at figuring out how to merge the two sets even more which will be a natural part of the second stage.

Merge two totally random decks and then fine tune the result.
Since the process takes very little time, a busy person with a lot of cards may be able to bring the meta into total chaos within a short time period by getting results with hybrids.

Not everyone will know that hybrids must be built based on the individual statistical performance if cards, so they will try to mimic the concept by just trying to build hybrids at random.

It's a meta weapon of destruction.

Muaha ha haaa !!!

If you want me to test another two decks you could pick two from the parts of the 2018 collection that I have already

Decktag is: wdm 2018

Or if you are a very skilled competitive player, choose any two current decks, and I'll measure their performance against the old meta which should still be able to reveal which cards perform best statistically, I'll then produce the hybrid for you and we could work on tweaking it and then you'd manifest it into the world and we would see a direct result :)

What do you say :)

We can still let the first half be lantern, and the second deck can be chosen based on playing with the same colors to ease the merge of the lands.

One demand though, both decks must have an amount of lands as close to each other as possible.

It helps with deciding how many cards each half is going to consist of.

Posted 17 July 2021 at 22:32


Well, I haven't done tournament play in a decade at this point. Just an amateur enthusiast that has to have a project to think about.

Let me make sure I'm correctly grasping your theory. Take 2 random decks that are semi-land compatible, chop out the working parts, squish them together into a supposedly super-synergized homunculus deck that relies on statistical value over connected themes.

First question that comes to mind is how do you establish what cards statistically are the most successful?

Posted 19 July 2021 at 03:50


Glad you asked :)
But also a little disappointed :(

You see for years that's all I've been about in mtgvault, except for a small attempt to unite mtgvault into a sort of learning collective.

I have created a wast number of posts on how to remove the bad cards from a deck, to insert something better.

I have used paperstrips as a sort of statistical computer for exactly that purpose, if you insist on learning the process I can either teach you by writing about it, or I can start linking you to my best posts about the process.

You can also choose to test it out based on trust, I'll design the whole thing and leave enough design space for you to make your own version if you somehow end up getting cold feet about having evolution design your deck for you.

The process I intent to use is...

Play deck A against 64 testdecks to measure the individual performance of each card by placing a paperstrip in its sleeve and give it a point for each time it was played, then after playing against all 64 testdecks, everything but the best performing cards are cut away, then the same thing is done with deck B.

Then all of the obvious synergies will be noted down, the combined result is then tested against the 64 testdecks again, measuring the individual performance of the cards, but during this third test, notes will be taken on possible cards to weave the two halves even closer, and at the end of it, the 9 worst performing cards will be cut out of the hybrid, and those 9 cards can be replaced by anything.

Posted 19 July 2021 at 05:09


Interesting have you looked at Bloodline pretender? I use it as a deterrent for my actual threats when playing tribal or mostly tribal.

Posted 21 July 2021 at 17:48


Nice catch.
I didn't study kaldheim that much, and when searching for changelings I searched for green and blue ones.
Bloodline pretender is the logical pick here :)

This project here is a side experiment of my whole evolution project, that I threatened to teach you :)
I figured out how to use evolution to build decks a long time ago, but only got ambitious about it maybe 5 years ago.
Since I've made posts about this forever, some really big players have started using it at a simpler scale, and a player in here learned or discovered a technique to take evolution directly to the battlefield.

So while my goal is to evolve something from scratch at an insane speed, someone used my idea to build on that system directly on the tables (or at the screen)

You start out with the idea of a deck core, the part of a deck that is the optimal representation of a build.
I use physical testdecks and paperstrips to measure the individual force of the cards, and usually removes the 9 worst performing cards.

Others shortcut this by comparing as many lists as possible and then simply builds the deck based on averages.
At some points you will be stranded unless you include Cards with an average of 0.9 or lower, and these are not included in the statistically built deck. That's how others design a deck core. It's easy and takes up less time than my method, but it's also more simple, but because it can be done with the click of a button and the use of a notepad in 10 minutes it's actually pretty fast.

Once you have the deck core you need to fill your deck with better cards.

While I called this for "blank cards" in my past someone went and named them "flex spot cards"
At the beginning of your project these can be any card you want to use, and for some reason the "deck core and flex slot cards" became a hit in around the 2011's the idea got spread into practically all tradingcard games and insanely enough impacted some industries to develop flex spot concepts outside the gaming world.

Then some couple of years ago a started up a side project with my RW prison core deck, and this caused a revival of the idea because it was clearly visible how many different ways you could develope a solid deckcore.

Then last year the whole thing boomeranged back into my neck when someone told me in here how he developed his "deck core and flex slots" at tournaments with a notepad.

So I researched the whole thing and learned that I had been both copied, but also that my technique had been further

How ?

When this guy is at tournaments he has memorized his flex slot cards that can technically become anything except during the tournament, so when he draws a flex slot card he simply writes down during matches what he wanted that specific card to be. He then keeps track of that specific flex slot card, noting what he wanted it to be during a larger number of games. After the tournament he can then compare his notes and discover which card should really be played in any given slot.

Online at arena, this can be done from game to game, speeding up the time it takes for your deck to evolve immensely.

I do believe that my own technique is superior because it not only reveals the worst cards, but also reveals the absolute best cards in the deck.

It might be possible to create an online hybrid of my version and the other variants of deck core builds.
The first barrier for doing this is that online you cannot identify the individual cards, in the real world, papermagic you can play cards with alternate art or heavily played cards to identify every card.

Then by noting on a block you can measure cards directly during the tournament and adapt the deck when coming home, removing cards that have been bad for 4-5 tournaments.

On arena only this isn't possible because you can't identify the cards.

Except, there is actually one way of doing it...

If you imitate the commander formats and play 1 of each card you can use a notebook to track the performance of all your cards during games.

Each time you play a card, just note down a wedge on the notebook besides that cardname, and during a short number of online games you will collect data on what cards are the best.

During the next series of games you both track the usual performance, but you also keep a special eye on the worst performing cards, and note down during games what you rather wanted them to be instead then you create the changes and reset all points starting all over again.

Evolutionary processes and your eye for details will then come together and create beautiful wonders, never seen before.

This is why I want you to get involved in a pet project :)

Imagine what your opponents will think when your deck of 1 of each suddenly outranks them and reaches mythic.
And noone will be able to copy and play it, because it evolved to fit your specific psyche and playstyle...

Wanna go for it ?

Posted 21 July 2021 at 21:30


I’ll give it a try when I get some extra time.

Posted 21 July 2021 at 22:08


I'd love to see the videos for those :)
Let me know when you try it out.
You can always start with the deck liked by most people
And then tell how you will be tracking some key cards in it as an experiment.
Start out low with perhaps 4-5 cards to track and then scale up when you're more practised with the concept.

Simply keep track of how many times the cards gets cast.
If they don't seem to be cast often, then they are a hindrance and you start searching for what to replace them with.

Posted 21 July 2021 at 22:16