[Deck] It's the Fear - Control in the new Era

[Deep6er]

@Waikiki: Generally, the match against Dragon Stompy (post-boarded) goes something like this (or at least, that's the hope):

1) Use Blasts and Swords to buy time.

2) If they drop Chalice, try to deal with it.

3) Get to Pernicious Deed.

4) If there's a Moon effect stopping you from playing Deed, get to Disk.

5) If there's a Needle on Disk, get to Explosives.

6) I highly doubt there would be a Needle on both Disk and Explosives (because they have to worry about Deed as well), but try to prevent that (with counter magic).

7) Slow them down. The slower the game goes, the better it is for you.

Because you could theoretically board in eleven cards (assuming you're using my board), you have to make sure you keep in enough cards to execute your primary game plan. Just be careful sideboarding. The match should be significantly easier post board because of all the powerful cards you now have access to.

@Morgan Coke: I think that a toolbox effect that goes beyond what I have now would be dangerous. Intuition (and to a larger extent, Gifts Ungiven) both come inherently packaged with the Danger of Cool Things. It's very easy to get carried away and add in cards you like that are strong in certain matchups with the reasoning, "It's fine, I'll just Intuition for it." That's putting too much strain on Intuition. On the deck itself as well. I have a good bit of versatility with my list, and I think that adding too much more would stretch it to the breaking point.

@Hanni: OK, so this is going to be a long one. I'll add the points numerically, and if it's confusing which point I'm talking about, feel free to ask for clarification.

1) What's with the disclaimer?

2) I disagree about basic Swamp. Having access to the color of my removal (and the majority of your removal) in desperate times (Back to Basics, Moon effects, etc.) is drastically important to your continued survival in that game.

3) Thoughtseize does NOT count as removal. There's no way to consider it as such. When your opponent has a Tarmogoyf in play, and you draw a Thoughtseize, that Thoughtseize does NOT destroy your opponent's Tarmogoyf. Thus, it is NOT removal. Counting it as such because you could THEORETICALLY, take it out of your opponent's hand is a logical fallacy.

4) The removal package that I play is: 4 Swords to Plowshares, 3 Pernicious Deed, 2 Engineered Explosives, 1 Vedalken Shackles. I've found this to be very efficient.

5) Your list is boggling. You only play twenty lands, which is far too few. Putting such a strain on Intuition to find Loam every single time should probably mean that you should play more Loams.

5a) You have six(!) lands that don't tap for blue, and yet you still want to achieve Counterbalance/Top as early as possible. That's going to be difficult.

5b) Shriekmaw is inefficient to recur and to play. Also, him countering Force is less relevant because of your own Forces. It's better to have a number of cards higher than zero at the four slot in order to make sure that you can counter things at the four slot that would be dangerous. Things like Fact or Fiction can get your opponent back into the game, and you want to prevent that from happening. Additionally, Mystic Enforcer can sometimes end the game quickly (especially if you're counting on Shriekmaw recursion).

5c) I've found that Counterspell is a bad draw too early. In your list, the problems would be exacerbated. With too many not blue lands, and so few lands in general, combined with the fact that you have to use Top to find lands means that you generally don't have too much mana left over. I've found the card to be better as a two-of.

5d) Wasteland is poor. In a deck where the top of your deck is as vitally important as it is to this one, milling three and skipping a draw (and a land drop) to destroy a single land is the single most inefficient thing I can think of. If you are adamant about playing something as poor as that, then Dust Bowl would actually be better. Only marginally because I think it's a poor strategy, but whatever. I can only offer my opinions.

5e) Two Krosan Grip is too few. A good Threshold draw that drops a Counterbalance (along with a Daze and a Force) will easily screw you right out of the game. You need to be able to deal with Counterbalance. It's a priority.

5f) A singleton Tombstalker is baffling. What would you bring it in against and why? Control? The deck that's guaranteed to have a large amount of removal? It can't be against Aggro decks because you won't be able to play him in time. Combo? I'll assume that's a no. He might be strong against certain Aggro/Control decks, but he's only a one-of. This boggles my mind.

5g) Eternal Witness is insanely good. I think you're missing out on a lot by not playing her.

5h) (I'm going to talk about Extirpate in your sideboard, and then save my comments for Extirpate in general for later.) I think Extirpate is a poor choice in your sideboard. Couple of reasons.

5HA1) Extirpate is poor grave hate against Ichorid.

5HA2) Your plan of bringing it in against control seems poor as well because there are better cards to be playing if you were worried about control.

5HA3) Extirpate is bad.

5HA4) Against Loam, you can't affect the creatures. That's how the deck is going to beat you. With Counterbalance, you should be able to reliably stop Life from the Loam, but you won't always reliably stop the creatures (side note here: you play fewer three drops than I do, so it might be a bigger deal for you). Extirpate deals with Loam, which is a card that you already have answers for. Instead, dealing with Terravore is extremely important. Since he's the creature who's going to be large, and able to get through the wall of Tarmogoyfs, he's the one you have to worry about. Extirpate Loam doesn't really help. Crypt on the other hand shrinks Terravore while also being stellar against Ichorid. Plus, it's not card disadvantage. Which is important.

6) I have had very little problems getting to the four colors that I need to support Etched Oracle with my manabase. Even in the face of opposing Wastelands and such. Twenty three lands is a good number. I'm adamantly opposed to twenty lands. There were a few issues when I was running the manabase at twenty one (although I could work around it), but twenty is entirely too low. Especially for a deck that wants to reliably get to three (at the minimum)

7) You said "the deck has two natural sources of topdecked green for the basic Forests", and yet, I don't see any basic Forests. What do you mean with this statement?

8) There's no need to "lessen the burden on white mana" if you have a basic Plains in the deck. Wasteland can't hit that. I'm telling you man, basic Plains is fantastic.

9) Freakish is right, what's with the pants-wetting fear over combo? Duress, Thoughtseize, Force, Counterbalance, and Counterspell is logically more than enough.

10) On the topic of Extirpate, here goes.

The card is just straight up bad. I want people to recognize that. The purpose of this forum, indeed of this "marketplace of ideas" if you will, is to help other people learn. The better ideas in this free marketplace are the ideas that should be espoused to the general public. I've found that in my extensive testing and playing of the card that it sucks donkey balls. I genuinely want other people to know how abhorrently bad the card is, and to let them know that it's a bad card.

I do it for the same reason why I'll tell anyone that playing Mountain Goat in Enchantress is poor. I feel that if I can legitimately help other people become better at Magic, then I should. Which is why it infuriates me when people stifle discussion.

For example, I grew rather upset at XSivPSI's post. Just dropping a list into a thread doesn't really engender discussion.

It's similar with Extirpate. It's like watching people talk about how effective swords are at killing people when you're using a gun. Why not introduce them to the efficiency of a gun? It's strictly better for it's intended purpose. Sure, it looks cooler, but is that really worth it? I would say no.

Additionally, the fact that Extirpate is card disadvantage is a complete beating against Control decks. You need to make sure that you can keep up with them and voluntarily throwing away cards is not the best way to do so.

I love the Control mirror and would gladly play it every single round (if I was playing It's the Fear). I've done quite a bit of testing and definitely know my stuff about it. I've even used Extirpate in many of the decks that I was testing because I originally thought the card was useful. After testing it for months and months (other people down here can attest to that), I came to the conclusion that it was fucking awful. That's months of testing against a large variety of decks. It's decent about ten percent of the time. That's an abysmally low number for a card that should be competing with some of the best cards that you have in your deck.

I can just keep going about Extirpate, but it doesn't sound like you're open to discussion on the matter. So that's fine. I'm sure sometime down the line you'll realize it. Hopefully, that day will be soon, but that's outside my control.

[morgan_coke]

The reason Dust Bowl is better than Wasteland with loam is because you don't have to loam every single turn like you do with wasteland. Just loam, play and destroy lands for three turns, then loam again. with wasteloam, you have to do it every single turn. also, dust bowl can do something if you draw lots of lands and no loam. wasteland can't. on the mana, dust bowl doesn't have a "sorcery speed" clause. Use it eot.

Sorry, Deep6er, I wasn't clear. (Although I do agree that danger of cool things is a big issue with both gifts and intuition.) No, what I was suggesting was copying some of the gifts plan, like making 4x stp into 3x stp, 1x shriekmaw. I know stp is better than shriekmaw, but it sets up a nice, sometimes useful (like vs. aggroloam) creature lock with intuition (stronghold, maw, loam). Right now you're just using intuition as a whatever you need card, it could be made stronger at a very low cost by simply re-tooling a few of your card selections like this. I also think you still need a basic forest and swamp, but whatever, no one in Legacy seems to like basics very much.

EDIT: I also strongly support a single maindeck Faerie Macabre.

[HammafistRoob]

Well, if your going to being casting Intuition to grab 3x Swords, then your not in a good position to win that game anyways. I think the 1-of Shriekmaw could be of some use against a few decks(Aggroloam, Meathooks) but I can't see it doing any good to help you live something like 2 Goyf's or even a Dreadnought(most decks that play these also play a good counter package).
If they counter it the first time you attempt to play it, you've effectively lost the game(recursion or not).

I also agree with Dave about the Wasteland. It seems like, well, a waste of a land(pun intended). I would much rather have another blue source to reliably get to a turn2 Counterbalance(which gets hard in, say, Hanni's list).

On a side note, Dave have you made any recent changes to your list? If so would you mind posting up your list 4me(plz buddy). Thanks man.

[Deep6er]

You see, here's the thing. Shriekmaw is bad.

That's a real big problem.

Unlike Gifts, Intuition will find you the cards you need. If I wanted to get Swords recursion, a better pile would be Witness/Stronghold/Swords (if I didn't already have one). The reason being that Witness will block which makes it that much more difficult to get through on an attack. Plus, you give your opponent a conundrum. Attacking and killing the Witness means that I can get any card that is in my graveyard back. That could be devastating.

While all this is happening though, I'm free to continue with my game plan unlike using a large number of resources to fuel Shriekmaw recursion. Plus, Swords is WAY better than Shriekmaw, and there's no reason to play bad cards when you can just play good cards.

Why Faerie Macabre? That's baffling. I can answer just about every recursion engine with the use of Counterbalance, which is WAY more efficient and doesn't require me to play a bad one-of that I would need to waste an Intuition on. Sure, there are times where I won't have the Counterbalance, but if I have to use an Intuition to get the Macabre, then shouldn't I instead just get Counterbalance?

Intuition and Gifts are dramatically different cards. Don't get me wrong, I like Gifts a lot, but forcing an Intuition deck to mirror a Gifts deck is a bad direction because of their differences in how they play out.

EDIT: Here's my most recent list. I didn't see while you were posting, because I was posting, but here you go:

4 Flooded Strand
4 Polluted Delta
4 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Tundra
2 Island
1 Plains
1 Volrath's Stronghold
1 Academy Ruins

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Brainstorm
3 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Counterbalance
4 Tarmogoyf
2 Counterspell
1 Life from the Loam
4 Intuition
3 Pernicious Deed
1 Vedalken Shackles
1 Eternal Witness
1 Etched Oracle
4 Force of Will
2 Engineered Explosives

Sideboard
4 Tormod's Crypt
4 Blue Elemental Blast
4 Krosan Grip
3 Nevinyrral's Disk

There you go man.

[HammafistRoob]

Does everyone agree on Counterspell? I think it looks bad, I'm not sure what card could go in it's place as a 2-of though. Maybe 3 Ponders could fit in here? I'm not really sure, I probably just need some convincing on the inclusion of Counterspell.

Thanks for the list man, I really appreciate it.

[Deep6er]

I like Counterspell as a two of. It's a great safety net should you need it, and it definitely helps keep the blue count solid while also maintaining the mana curve for Counterbalance.

I'm not a huge fan of Ponder for this deck. It's not powerful enough. It helps dig, sure, but Top and Brainstorm do that rather nicely. I just don't think it has enough impact to be played.

Also, no problem about the list, happy to help out.

Incidentally, when are you guys going to start playing it? Seriously, Roodmistah saw how good it was. :)

[Waikiki]

About the DS boarding plan,

I see there are 11 possible cards to board in. And I have been using the list you posted for a while now (with great result after alot of bad plays and much learning)

Yet the cards I'd take out would be:

4 CB
2 CS
1 Shackles (unsure)

What other cards go out for this?

Also in the ichorid matchup I've been boarding out the 4 CB yet I wonder if thats the correct play since they are able to stop the opponents therapys.

[Deep6er]

I usually board like so for Dragon Stompy:

-1 Vedalken Shackles (it's a little too slow)
-2 Counterspell (you're replacing it with cards that are more efficient)
-1 Etched Oracle (it doesn't help if you're down)
-4 Counterbalance (you're going to be spending most of the time blowing the shit out of the board)
-2 Force of Will (because you're boarding out so many blue cards)

I usually bring in three Grips, three Disk, and four Blast.

I think boarding out the Forces is bad, but the blue count post board is pretty abysmal (a paltry fifteen), and I just can't really justify any other card.

After all, you're strategy post board is to blow everything the fuck up. Repeatedly. Seems to me that they don't have many options for you to need to Force if that's your plan. Deed, Disk, Explosives, and Grip seems like pretty bad times for them.

I could be wrong though, I'm going to continue tinkering around with the boarding plan for Dragon Stompy. When I have something that feels like it's better, I'll let you know.

[URABAHN]

Remember the last time Deep6er was this excited about a deck? I seem to remember this little deck called Solidarity. If you look back in the early pages of that thread, people were very unsure on how to properly play that deck, but Deep6er was there to help. There should be no question as to who knows more about the deck than anyone and who's made the most Top 8s with the deck (the first Top 8 came with very little time spent with it). While Deep6er may be an expert, he's not always 100% right, so I think challenging him is something everyone in this thread should effort to do. Posting a unconventional decklist with no rhyme or reason as to those decisions does nothing to further the discussion on the subject and challenge Deep6er.

Speaking of which, Hanni, I'm not convinced that 20 lands is correct for any Control deck. Control decks are always mana hungry and using one of those 20, Wasteland, doesn't fix the problems you're going to have finding 3 by 3. This isn't U/B Fish, ITF spells can be expensive. While Exirpate is cheap I'm not convinced it's worth playing in ITF.

I tested Extirpate when the card was spoiled and found it lacking I'll expand on my results and tell you it's not very good against Ichorid. nitewolf9 considered it in the Eva Green SB and I all but begged him to reconsider. Stubborn as a mule, he wanted to see it for himself and found it lacking against Ichorid. While Extirpate targeting Bridge from Below, according to you, "slows them down rediculously" and "Now they need Narcomoeba and Ichorid beats unless they can Dread Return into a Golgari Grave-Troll before you can Counterspell it." it won't matter because all the dredging and Ichorid recursions are going to kill you. 7 Ichorid beatings (without the help of Zombie tokens and Narcomoeba) are going to kill you, 6 if you're playing Forces and Fetches. I want to know where you play that the Ichorid players are that slow in killing you! You claim that Extirpate is improved with Thoughtseize, that removing a card from the opponent's hand makes Extirpate better.

If Extirpate is so good, why does it need help from Thoughtseize? If you see Thoughtseize as some sort of creature removal spell, why not play Hymn to Tourach--that dumps two cards into your opponent's yard, which should make Extirpate even better! You could play Sinkhole and then pull off the most dangerous, most feared combo in all of Legacy! If you don't believe me, search the forums! People are scared straight of

"Extirpate targeting Tropical Island"

overlord95 briefly touches on the idea of running Duress in a control deck and the same can be said of Thoughtseize. It seems like a great idea on paper, removing whatever non-land spell from your opponent's hand, but it doesn't work very well in a control deck. 4x Thoughtseize or 4x Duress just gets worse and worse as the game continues.

Hanni, you were the same person who argued until you were blue in the face that Dark Confidant belonged in Red Death. You were wrong then, and you're wrong about Thoughtseize and Extirpate in ITF. Claiming that Deep6er is somehow misleading people about Extirpate, suggesting that he's underhyping the card so he and other ITF pilots won't lose to it makes you look small and jealous.

On a lighter note, where have you been since GP Flash? I've seen very little of you in these forums and wonder if you're still playing.

[Hanni]

1) You flipped out on someone who posted a decklist and I figured that anyone posting a decklist that wasn't 100% the same as yours would result in flames, especially one with Extirpate. So I put the disclaimer up.

2) I think basic Swamp does more for you. You have more black spells and those black spells are more important to your gameplan.

3) With 10 removal spells, some of which are recurable or have long lasting effects, I would think that you wouldn't need more. The fact that Thoughtseize can sometimes grab a Tarmogoyf makes it a strong disruption piece. Turn 1 Thoughtseize is a power play.

4) Our removal packages aren't that much different, just a card or two.

5) I personally haven't had any issues with the total number of land drops right now. The deck only needs to ramp up to large amounts once it has a recursion engine going, which almost always includes Loam anyway.

5a) I agree with you on this and I will work on fixing that.

5b) Shriekmaw is spot removal for 1B and recurable spot removal for 3BB. EE is mass removal (on opposing Tarmogoyf's) for 4 and recurable mass removal (on opposing Tarmogoyf's) for 6U, which is not only more expensive but also blows up your own Counterbalances. Sometimes, all you wanna do is just kill a lone Tarmogoyf. This is where Shriekmaw is the better play. The fact that it can be a 2-for-1 card advantage once you ramp up to 4B is also relevant. Being 5cc is just a small perk that allows Counterbalance to counter Force of Wills. If you want a 4cc spell, you can replace Tombstalker in the sideboard with Etched Oracle and bring it in vs Landstill, which is the only match I'd want to see Etched Oracle in anyway.

Recurring StP costs 3BGGW; GG itself is extremely restrictive and 4 colored mana symbols vs 2 is still relevant to me.

5c) Point taken, I just don't know if I want to drop to 18 blue spells for FoW. You're probably right, I'll drop 1 and see how it works... probably adding another land.

5d) Wasteland is bad in that it stops you from making land drops. Wasteland is good in that some games, it auto-wins you the game. Since it still taps for mana and you have the ability to tutor for it, why not run it as a 1-of and win some games you have no business winning otherwise?

5e) Well, I was figuring that with 3 Deed and 1 EE, 2 Krosan Grips were probably all I would need against opposing Counterbalances. Being mostly 3cc, don't you find that Threshold's Counterbalances are less effective against you?

5f) The Tombstalker is meant to come in against Extirpates. There are pros and cons of running him, take it as you will. Like I said, drop him for Etched Oracle and voila.

5g) I don't like Eternal Witness. If I'm not going to run Gigapede because the manabase cannot support GG, I'm not going to run Eternal Witness for the same reason. I think Gigapede > Eternal Witness.

5h) I think Extirpate is very strong in this format.

5HA1) I think Extirpate is strong against Ichorid.

5HA2) I think bringing it in against control is huge.

5HA3) Extirpate is good.

5HA4) Against Loam, you have alot of spot/mass removal to stop creatures. Recurring Wasteland is how this deck is going to beat you. Counterbalance is a 4-of and your manabase will be destroyed before it comes online more often than you think. Extirpate deals with Loam, which is a card that you already have answers for but does not necessarily mean you will answer it. Loam is their engine; without it, they are just another midrange aggro deck. I'm still running Crypt too.

6) With alot of experience playing 4c Landstill, which has alot more draw power than this deck, I've had alot of problems assembling all 4 types of mana in a relevant timely fashion, especially if the opponent drops a Wasteland. I actually play UWb Landstill over 4c now and that is one of the reasons why.

7) Disregard that. I had originally wrote that but changed my mind and forgot to delete it, sorry.

8) Maybe I'll add a basic Plains too. Basic Swamp still needs to be in here, IMO.

9) Duress isn't just for combo, it's also for Burn and Goyf Sligh, which are bad matchups when you don't draw Counterbalance. Maybe just BEB is sufficient, it's something I'll look into.

10) On the topic of Extirpate, here goes.

The card is just straight up good. I've found that in my extensive testing and playing of the card that it is very strong against so much of the format.

I can now understand why you were upset with XSivPSI's post. Sorry about the disclaimer then.

You use an analogy explaining that Extirpate isn't effecient, yet the card costs B, has split second, and entirely removes up to 4 copies of a single card from the game.

Extirpate being card disadvantage while Tormod's Crypt still being card disadvantage is puzzling. How is this an argument against the card. Against control, even if you lose -1 card from hand and it doesn't change the board state or do anything with the opponent's hand, who cares. You now know there hand, which in itself is almost worth it. Now, the opponent has no more of that win condition left. Your deck, for example, being hit by Extirpate on Goyf; now you only have a few cards left that can win you the game. StP/Extirpate hurts. Losing all of your Counterbalances or Pernicious Deeds hurt too. In the control mirror, the game is going LONG; you'll almost always feel the effects of Extirpate on the game at large.

It's not that I'm not open to discussion on the matter. It's that I've been playtesting with the card since it came out and I disagree with you on pretty much everything you've said. However, it's better to just give up on this topic; it's been exhausted by the both of us throughout this thread and you're right, neither of us are going to agree with eachother. I'm fine with that.

---------

Speaking of which, Hanni, I'm not convinced that 20 lands is correct for any Control deck. Control decks are always mana hungry and using one of those 20, Wasteland, doesn't fix the problems you're going to have finding 3 by 3. This isn't U/B Fish, ITF spells can be expensive. While Exirpate is cheap I'm not convinced it's worth playing in ITF.

I'm gonna try 21 lands by cutting a Counterspell. The deck doesn't run too many expensive cards, like Landstill does, until it gets into the recursion engines. I'm counting on having Loam if I have the recursion engines going, so that's probably why I think the deck can run less land. I never said this deck was U/B Fish, how was that comment even relevant?

I'm not going to exhaust the Extirpate topic any further. All I want to say is that I never said it needed Thoughtseize, I said Thoughtseize improves it by giving you information about their hand. If the opponent has 2 spells in hand (let's say Counterbalance for now) and you Thoughtseize them, you know that Extirpate on [Counterbalance] is a good play. Doesn;t even have to be the card you discarded, it could be something you destroyed/countered. That's all I was getting at.

Hanni, you were the same person who argued until you were blue in the face that Dark Confidant belonged in Red Death. You were wrong then, and you're wrong about Thoughtseize and Extirpate in ITF. Claiming that Deep6er is somehow misleading people about Extirpate, suggesting that he's underhyping the card so he and other ITF pilots won't lose to it makes you look small and jealous.

You. Are. Hilarious. So what you're telling me is, because I was wrong about 1 card choice in 1 deck that was an archtype I was not as familiar with, that I suck at deckbuilding. Laff. That was like 2 years ago, wasn't it?

This deck has problems with Extirpate. I've seen David bash Extirpate countlessly in like 10 different threads. I wasn't even being completely serious. I completely disagree with him about Extirpate and coming to that assumption wasn't even that much of a stretch. Small and Jealous? LOL, because I disagree about Extirpate. Nice.

[Deep6er]

1) I'm glad that you understood me about this. Huzzah for us!

2) I'm still uncertain about Swamp. It doesn't help you cast Deed under a Moon effect, nor Tarmogoyf (to help block) under a Moon effect. Since there are two reasonably popular decks that are more or less based around Moon effects, it seems that this is a stronger comparison. Swords helps you get rid of the Moon effects sometimes which is exponentially better.

3) Turn one Thoughtseize is powerful for some decks. Eva Green for example. I don't think the same can be said here. I would much rather play a first turn Top than any other card in the deck (if I had to make a play, that is). The reason I think it's bad is because you're rarely in a position to take full advantage of the card. Thoughtseize is great at setting up tempo positions, but I don't think It's the Fear can fully utilize that purpose. Thus, that makes the card weaker.

4) True, I was just relating what mine was.

5) If it's been working for you, then I can't really argue with it, except by saying that it is outside the statistical norm. Which could totally bite you in the ass during a long tournament.

5a) I would hope that you start doing that by adding more lands and cutting lands that started with "Waste" in the title. But hey, that's just me. :)

5b) The important part is that if I needed to wipe out two (or more) Tarmogoyfs in a single turn, then Explosives will do that better than Shriekmaw can. Additionally, I rarely use Explosives to wipe out Tarmogoyfs because I have Swords aplenty. I mainly use that card to wipe troublesome permanents off the table (like Counterbalance). Plus, if I have to wipe my own Counterbalance off the table to not die, I'll do that no problem. I'd rather not die and not have a Counterbalance, than die with a Counterbalance in play. I guess that could be personal preference though.

5c) I heartily agree with more land.

5d) Against what deck would I be so far down that Wasteland of all things is the one card that could pull it out? 40-X Lands? I don't see a single Wasteland helping all that much. I highly doubt any scenario will come up in actual game play that demands that Wasteland is the trump card. Additionally, even if that situation comes up, I don't think it will come up enough times to change how awful it is in other, more commonplace, matchups.

5e) You DO know that they're bringing in Krosan Grips against you, right? Additionally, a smart Threshold player will float their Grip on top to keep you from playing things like Intuition and Deed, right? That's going to be a problem real quick if you can't find your grip to deal with his Counterbalance.

5f) But, the thing is, I'm not worried about Extirpate. I'll say it again, I haven't lost to Extirpate at all. That's a pretty good track record if you ask me.

5g) Not liking Eternal Witness is a bad reason to deprive yourself of such an amazing card. Seriously, that card is stunningly good in quite a few matchups.

5h(and so on)) We'll skip talking about Extirpate. It's clear to me that we will never convince each other about our sides and have already made our points abundantly clear to any who read this thread. Seems fair to me.

6) I'm absolutely boggled. From my experiences with 4c Landstill, that deck has fewer problems than this one establishing a manabase (which is to say, infinitesimally small because I rarely have issues with the manabase as is). It generally took upwards of three Wastelands and two Ports in order to insure that I couldn't access a SINGLE color.

7) Disregarded.

8) I think we're going to have to disagree here as well. Having access to the color of your removal (the majority of it, at least) is drastically more important under a Moon effect. The reason being that some Moon effects are creatures. Which are susceptible to removal. That's a good combo right there.

9) Burn? Seriously? Blast and Counterbalance are pretty nutty against them already. Plus, I never seriously consider Burn in any of my testing gauntlets. That deck hardly ever puts up serious numbers. It seems that Duress would actually be trash against Goyf Sligh because it does nothing to stop the creatures on the table, and is an awful top deck the later the game goes.

I find it mildly humorous that you say "It's not that I'm not open to discussion on the matter" followed by the statement "neither of us are going to agree with each other". I just thought that was humorous.

However, I will respect your request and not talk to you about Extirpate. It should be made clear though, that this doesn't imply tacit approval. Moreover, I still think the card is abhorrently awful and will tell other people as such should they ask. But, in the spirit of honorable accords, I will not discuss the card Extirpate with you.

However, should you take it upon yourself to convince others, about your beliefs in the card, or it's place in the sideboard to this deck, I will step in. I will also step in to ensure that my thoughts about the card are known. So, know that in the future, my thoughts about Extirpate will not be directed towards you.

How does that sound?

[morgan_coke]

I don't think Extirpate targeting Tropical Island is a feared combo, but it is one that beats ITF, hard. It only really comes up against Black Thrash though I believe.

The reason I argue for the inclusion of a singleton Macabre is because this deck just has absolutely no maindeck way to deal with graveyard based threats at all. I have less faith in counterbalance than you appear to, if for no other reason than that EVERY deck in Legacy has to be able to deal with counterbalance or it is simply not viable. The defining trait of Legacy isn't "Can you deal with 1st turn Lackey, t2 LD?" anymore, it's "can you deal with CounterTop?" If the answer is no, your deck isn't really viable. People still ran lackey because it still won games, people still win countertop for the same reason. But simply assuming you'll be able to indefinitely hold some recurring threat off with it... is mistaken.

Swords has the following advantages vs. Shriekmaw
-Costs 1
-Removes from game
-Instant speed
-Hits any creature
-Can gain you life in a pinch

Shriekmaw has the following advantages
-Costs 2/5
-3 power to kill Mongeese
-Evasion
-Interacts with Stronghold/Genesis etc.
-Doesn't give life to opponent

Shriekmaw is significantly more likely to kill a 'Goyf in the face of CB than a Swords is, and doesn't need two separate one-of cards including a dead witness to recur.

I'm not advocating cutting swords for shriek, just saying a 4th swords 1st shriek is a move that would frequently be a wash, sometimes slightly worse, and sometimes significantly better. Given those outcomes, which numerically could be expressed as -1, 0, and +3, it's a net positive to run it unless the -1 comes up exceptionally more often.

And on an entirely unrelated note, has anyone looked at Glittering Wish in this deck? It grabs removal (Deed Vind, Mortif, etc.), win conditions (Grave-Shell Scarab), grave hate (Wheel), swarm hate (Dueling Grounds), combo hate (Teeg), and now, Planewalkers too. Could very well turn out to be awful and too slow, but then again, maybe not. Wishing for Deed t2 for a t3 play seems the best reason to include it.

EDIT: One more advantage of Dust Bowl over Wasteland, against opposing Wastelands, any land they target you can sacrifice in response to hit one of theirs, which is a nice 2-1 for you.

[Hanni]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is Shriekmaw's stength against Ichorid; for 1B, you can kill a Narcomoeba while simultaneously removing all of the Bridges in their graveyard. I remember David was worried about this matchup before and I know that Shriekmaw is a bomb against them.

How does that sound?

That's fine with me.

[URABAHN]

Against control, even if you lose -1 card from hand and it doesn't change the board state or do anything with the opponent's hand, who cares. You now know there hand, which in itself is almost worth it. Now, the opponent has no more of that win condition left.

Hanni, I'm not sure what kind of Magic you play, but playing a card that doesn't change the board state or do anything with your opponent's hand, but lets you see their hand isn't worth the paper on which it's printed. If you really think there some value in a card like that, play Glasses of Urza. It costs mana, so you don't need and you can activate it as an instant to look at your opponent's hand! I know it's been a long time since anyone looked at this thread, but since you've been away for awhile, I think you should look over all the points made in this thread. Are you of the school of thought that that card (not gonna say it!) gives you some sort of tactical card advantage? Not only do you get to look at your opponent's hand, you get to see what's in their deck! The position you're taking that you can remove a win condition from your opponent's deck is so weak because a) it almost never happens and b) doesn't guarantee you the "W". If it's so strong in the format, if it's so strong against Ichorid and control, why aren't more people playing a card released Feb 2, 2007? If that card is that good, I would think everyone playing Black would be packing it somewhere in their 75.

I invite everyone to provide Hanni with some anecdotal evidence about that card targeting your Tropical Island or Tarmogoyf. What's your experience with said interaction? How many times has it happened to you in testing or tournament play? How many times have you lost the game because of it?

[raharu]

First turn Thoughtseize is even better than first turn Brainstorm sometimes and is far stronger than first turn StP.

First turn Brainstorm

This is where you fail. First turn Brainstorm is shit.

Also, StP is almost always better than first turn Brainstorm when it's relevant. I mean damn, handling a first turn Lackey is always better than drawing 3 and stacking two turns of shit on top of your library. Come on now, the "better than first turn Brainstorm" argument is possibly the worst argument ever.

To address the other side of the question, at what point in time will a late game Thoughtseize ever be better than a Brainstorm or a Swords to Plowshares? Never? Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I'd take a Thoughtseize or a Shriekmaw out for the 4th Swords, but maybe that's just me (also note I dislike the thought of playing Shriekmaw when you don't have a full set of StP in the deck. It's just seems like rather poor principle. Feel free to prove me wrong).

[HammafistRoob]

Incidentally, when are you guys going to start playing it? Seriously, Roodmistah saw how good it was. :)

Dude, I will play this deck in every tournament for a really long time if you build and send it to me. My team just doesn't have the cards anymore with Tom at college and stuff.(I'll be more than willing to play it at the 5th anniversary tourney)

[Deep6er]

Wow, that totally ranks as a complete beating.

Fair enough. :(

Is that why he was selling various duals? I remember him doing that at Kadi's place. Paying for college seems like it's good though.

[Hanni]

URABAHN, give it up dude, I'm done discussing Extirpate. The only reason I even said anything to David was because I've read so many posts in the last week from him dissing the card that I just wanted to chime in. I've discussed the pros and cons, comparisons, and everything else about that card way too much to repeat myself. You can go back several months on most of the threads with decks with black, you'll find my discussions on it, if you're that interested in my position. As good or as bad as your arguments are against the card, I'm not going to bother defending it. I run the card, it pwns face for me, you do what you want.

/end discussion

[Rood]

Incidentally, when are you guys going to start playing it? Seriously, Roodmistah saw how good it was. :)

I'm more or less good with any control deck with FoW, Brainstorm, and Counterbalance. It's a severe lack of cardpool to play this deck, plus I love Dreadstill very much.

[freakish777]

Is that why he was selling various duals? I remember him doing that at Kadi's place. Paying for college seems like it's good though.

Nah, $30,000+ (still) of student loans is where it's at.


So, has anyone tested Voidmage Prodigy? Yes, I know the card isn't good. Just seemed like since Counterspell was one of the weaker cards in the deck, why not test out some creatures with counterspells on them that play nicely with Voltrath's Stronghold.