Primarily because Deed destroys non creatures permanents, as opposed to just holding them for awhile.
Vedalken Shackles also requires more mana than Deed to operate continually, which is important.
Shackles and Deed fulfill different objectives in this deck. Deed destroys Counterbalance, or resets a board.
Shackles is a source of card advantage that also helps stall the opponent's creature plan giving you time to answer problems on the board.
I'd say that they're about forty per cent the same card because Shackles is a bit more limited in it's approach (it can only target creatures that aren't, for whatever reason, untargetable) while Deed cannot be reused.
I would never switch the numbers on them because Deed is so much better than Shackles. However, Shackles as a one of allows you to have a tutor-able way to control the board effectively that also serves as a blowout strategy to things like Eva Green (as long as you can deal with Seal). Not that I'm saying Eva Green is a good match up or anything, because it's not. But it allows you to play a card that is so mind bogglingly powerful against some match ups where Deed is less than stellar.
For the foreseeable future, expect to see less of me. I've lost my internet connection, and so I'll only be able to get on by siphoning free Wi-Fi from the surrounding areas. Which isn't always consistent.
Plus, the guy that I used to leech off of has now instituted password protection. This means that I effectively do not have internet at home. :(
What would be your weakness against a deck like UGW ThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh? (Im curious :))
In my actual tournament plays, i found ITF to be incredibly strong when it is able of casting Intuition (which usually happen in the long game). I am always torn when facing ITF. Should i counter the mass removal (Deed, EE) or should I counter Intuition (once recursion are up, i can't win)? I usually win against it because of speed (by over committing), so i believe that mass removal are to be countered.
To receive thoughts from the creator would be appreciated.
Robert
I note that no where in this article do you explain why your deck loses to Extirpate.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
@Omega: Supposing you were playing Threshold, I'd say that your best plan would be to resolve Counterbalance, and try your damn best to keep both Intuition and Deed from resolving.
If it's one or the other, then I would recommend keeping Deed off the table and winning as quickly as possible. One of the flaws with Intuition is how mana intensive it is. So, if you counter Deed, it might buy you enough time to keep Counterbalance active to stop my other spells. It's a bit difficult given how many spells It's the Fear has that are bad for Threshold, but it seems like the best plan.
@Jack: Funny.
For the foreseeable future, expect to see less of me. I've lost my internet connection, and so I'll only be able to get on by siphoning free Wi-Fi from the surrounding areas. Which isn't always consistent.
Plus, the guy that I used to leech off of has now instituted password protection. This means that I effectively do not have internet at home. :(
Team Info-Ninjas: Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
My Videos: Chiron Beta Prime, Flickr, Re: Your Brains
Originally Posted by Slay
Did you know that Hanni accused me of that? Well, not outright accused, but definitely implied it.
Check this out:
The best part is that I blew up at Alix for accusing me of intellectual dishonesty not three pages before that. Intellectual dishonesty is infuriating to me, and that somebody would accuse me of that is ridiculous.
For the foreseeable future, expect to see less of me. I've lost my internet connection, and so I'll only be able to get on by siphoning free Wi-Fi from the surrounding areas. Which isn't always consistent.
Plus, the guy that I used to leech off of has now instituted password protection. This means that I effectively do not have internet at home. :(
Enjoyable read!
I learned some new words without having to mire my eyes through the interview.
Thank you for the time invested by both of you!
Rock on.
Interesting and in-depth analysis, with the bonus of involving the primary player of the deck in the article to answer questions in, and out of it.
The one subject I found lacking was detail involving the aerodynamics of the It's The Fear deck.
It doesn't actually have much in the way of aerodynamics if you recall. It definitely has quite a bit of unexpected impact resilience. Not going to lie, it bounced quite a bit more than I thought. :)
For the foreseeable future, expect to see less of me. I've lost my internet connection, and so I'll only be able to get on by siphoning free Wi-Fi from the surrounding areas. Which isn't always consistent.
Plus, the guy that I used to leech off of has now instituted password protection. This means that I effectively do not have internet at home. :(
Enjoyed! One of the better Legacy articles that I have read in a while. It was really nice to read something like this rather than speculation or just decklists filling up the page. I actually learned a lot about a fresh archetype. PLease do more.
I don't remember seeing a Gearhart interview in a while. About time, I suppose. Interesting insight into the deck too. It's definitely a solid pile even though it appears like yet another "Beach House Control". Glad to hear some actual thought went into building it instead of just picking up the best card for each type, slamming them together and calling it a deck.
Best article in a long while. Thank you!
The idea is great, but I'd like something more in depth, a bit longer. However, if there's a time issue, keep going this way, it's already good as it is.
I'd like an interview with Bryant and one with Brandon with some particular questions about
- What's the specific role in the meta the deck takes, especially what are the upside and downsides versus other combo decks.
- What's good against what. I mean, everyone knows combo has a good matchup against aggro, but how the deck would change if the meta was more aggrocontrol or control or combo oriented?
- Combo is a particular archetype which has a good mathup against everything but decks playing a small range of cards (counterspells, discard, CotV, Meddling Magi and so on). What are the cards the deck fears most, and what are its' answers.
- Combo decks are puzzles that needs to be solved to win the game. What's the most challenging situation you were on that you did win against?
Currently Playing: Nourishing Lich.DeckOriginally Posted by Tacosnape, TrialByFire, Silverdragon mix
Current Record: 1-83-2
I have been running 7 basics, 7 duals, 7 fetch, 1 waste, 1 ruins, and 1 stronghold and I can say that wasteland nor how many basics I run, has screwed me out of a color before.
Against Frogboy at the Mirkwood side event, Wasteland/Loam won me game 2 by a lot. Because I had waste-lock I was able to establish a very strong board position while he was trying to recover. I also won game 1 against 43-land.dec because I had wasteland, and without it and Gigapede I definitely would have lost (Maze of Ith).
Besides the fact that you run quite a few cards that I disagree with, I think that the scenario that you posited is flawed in some way.
Sure, he had Maze, but you couldn't play more creatures?
Sure, you had Waste-lock, but wouldn't Counterbalance have been better?
My point is that while you may beat opponents with strategies that I personally dislike occasionally, it brings down the deck as a whole because they are rarely consistent.
What I try to do is make my deck as consistent as possible at executing the strategy that I've laid out for it. Wasteland does not help that strategy enough to earn a slot in an extremely tight deck list.
For the foreseeable future, expect to see less of me. I've lost my internet connection, and so I'll only be able to get on by siphoning free Wi-Fi from the surrounding areas. Which isn't always consistent.
Plus, the guy that I used to leech off of has now instituted password protection. This means that I effectively do not have internet at home. :(
No, actually, not in that game.Sure, you had Waste-lock, but wouldn't Counterbalance have been better?
Also, you keep harping on how Counterbalance is better. That's certainly true, but it's not like you're running Wasteland at the exclusion of Counterbalance, and sometimes you just don't get there with the lock.
When in doubt, mumble.
When in trouble, delegate.
So in game 1 he drops an exploration (no FoW /cry) and goes crazy. Within 3 turns he had Ith, 2x Factory, Monestary, Wasteland, and a Taiga (Heath & Loam in the yard). Without wasteland (and ee@1 to shut off exploration), there's no way I could have kept up... Your list only runs 6 creatures and 1 hardly counts since it dies to all their creatures and you expect to have more than 1 creature on the board to attack for the win before his manlands kill you? In game 2 he dropped manabond on turn 1 (no FoW, but a solid hand) and dropped a lot of land - starting with his turn 2, he attacked for 5 per turn (it's a good thing I got lucky w/ a 2x Goyf, 2x Swords hand).
What you've got to understand is that wasteland has won many more games than it has lost. The marginal risk is definitely worth the reward in the case of Wasteland. With Intuition, waste-lock can be very consistent if you need it. I think you're putting too much weight on counterbalance. Yeah, counterbalance is good, but you shouldn't stake the entire game on being able to counter most of their spells since that rarely happens. Sometimes the opponent will get their counter-top before you and what do you do to that, just fold?
Also, like frogboy said:
IMHO, it's much better to adapt your strategy based on what deck you're playing against and what they've got on the table. Going for counterbalance against Ichorid is silly (I know, an extreme example) and you would never do that. My point is that if you have a flexible strategy then why not have waste-lock be one of the available strategies as it can be game-breaking and some times better than counterbalance at preventing your opponent from playing magic (that's the point, am I right?).Originally Posted by frogboy
Actually, given the board you've told me, Swords and Deed would have held up just fine as long as you found Tarmogoyf to block and stabilize. After that, finding Shackles and an extra Deed means that he can't attack any more. Win after that. Simple.
The game two scenario proves this. Multiple Tarmogoyfs plus multiple removal spells.
My point is that Wasteland has lost you games. That part's extremely important. Since Wasteland is only good if you happen to draw another one of, or blow an Intuition and then a bunch of draw steps on it, it's rare to have it be at maximum efficiency. It's not like your just wasting mana and land drops with it. You're also screwing your draws. You're milling yourself to keep a board that is doing nothing. With the mana curve in most of today's decks (especially Threshold) they only need one or two lands to operate. Sure, some need more, but they are the exception rather than the norm. So, instead of developing your board position, you're trying to have an impact on the future without being able to prevent you from losing in the present.
The deck requires a fair bit of mana to operate optimally, and Wasteland doesn't help that. The deck is rather flexible, but you can't take it too many directions before it starts to shut down.
The goal isn't just to stop your opponent from playing Magic. If that were the case, other cards would be in the deck. It's a question of disrupting the opponent with an extremely powerful combination of cards, and using the time it gains you to develop your resources. Once you have enough lands, it's extremely unlikely that they will win. It's not tempo, it's stalling. Stalling to get lands into play. Wasteland does not get lands into play. In fact, it does the opposite by wasting one of your own land drops. Thus, not worth it.
@Frogboy: Sure, sometimes you don't get there with Counterbalance. You're right about that. However, Wasteland isn't all that helpful in today's meta game. Think about it.
TES (not effective as a one-of)
Ichorid (not effective as a one-of)
Threshold (not effective unless you Waste-lock them, even then, it's arguable)
Landstill (it's good here, sure, but Landstill hasn't been seeing as much play in the States anymore)
Aggro Loam (fucking terrible here)
Random Aggro (pretty awful here too, especially as a one-of)
Do you see my point?
For the foreseeable future, expect to see less of me. I've lost my internet connection, and so I'll only be able to get on by siphoning free Wi-Fi from the surrounding areas. Which isn't always consistent.
Plus, the guy that I used to leech off of has now instituted password protection. This means that I effectively do not have internet at home. :(
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)