Miracle Control

[twndomn]

I have finally acquired all the cards for Miracles (both builds)

What would be the best build for a meta game that is primarily Omnitell, BUG (delver and shardless), and Lands?

Clique wrecks combos, pressure Liliana, and you can Clique away Loam in Lands. I would start with the Legend-Ponder build without Wastelands from GP Kyoto winner, then gradually work toward Lossett's Legend build if I were you.

[Hrothgar]

I feel like I'm a copy-paste machine. Just follow that miracles guy:

The UWR dilemma:

In recent time there has been an enormous upswing in UWR colored decks. Previous to Treasure Cruise there were practically two UWR colored decks, being Miracles and Patriot with the MU between these two being hilariously lopsided. Miracles was favored by a huge amount of percentage points. Things have changed, however. Despite URs prevelance in numbers it appeared to be UWR that was best suited for TC, not only due to its kind-of-edge in the kind-of-mirror against UR. So now we have UWR dominating the numbers, and nobody can tell you whether this will stay or not. Maybe it's just a popularity issue and the decks aren't that good? Well, that's not the point now. We now have the following decks that utilize Volcanic Island and Tundra.

1) Miracles
2) Gold Digger
3) Stoneblade
4) Pyromancer Midrange
5) Patriot


These are the 5 general directions that you can take in the modern metagame, each and every giving you a distinct advantage in one special field. I will not talk about how to play the Mirror nor will I touch on Patriot, as these approaches didn't really change and are still rather easy to execute. This leaves us with Gold Digger, Stoneblade and Pyromancer Midrange to talk about. These decks differ greatly on the surface, but aren't that much different when it comes to actually playing them. Let's see what they share before developing sideboard ideas:


....
....
....

This is a very good analysis.
I quote your post.

The plan

So how do you board against any of these UWR decks? Well, I am not going to give you a plan for these three decks, because they don't exist in a nutshell. What I will give you are my opinions on how to board when you see something. You should then be able to put together a decent boarding plan against the UWR opponent that you will encounter.

1) Counterbalance
Is good against any of these decks as it will allow you to do two things: a) Generate card advantage to combat Delve spells. b) Slow down the game. This is all we need and synonymous with winning.
Don't board this card out.

2) Swords to Plowshares
The card is a necessary evil if your opponent plays more than just Stoneforge Mystic plus a handful of Snapcaster Mage, Vendilion Clique and/or True Name Nemesis. Should they go with these cards above you are fine with 4 Terminus 1 EE and 1 Pyroclasm. If you are, however expecting Young Pyromancer alongside these cards you need to keep Swords to Plowshares in. All of them because Terminus would work overdue if you didn't.

3) Blue Elemental Blast
While bringing in Blue Elemental Blast in order to counteract Red Elemental Blast is no bad idea it's not what we want to be doing in this very match-up.

4) Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Can be trimmed to 2 if you suspect the opponent to have Daze. Other than that, keep all of them.

Okay, changed my mind, I'll try to give a very basic idea on how to board vs UWR.

-4 Force of Will
-2 Swords to Plowshares
+1 Red Elemental Blast
+1 Pyroblast
+1 Engineered Explosives
+1 Pyroclasm
+1 Wear//Tear
+1 Council's Judgment

If it's Gold Digger, cut the Swords and the Plains for Counterspell and Flusterstorms. Also make Room for Cliques by not bringing in Pyroclasm and trimming Terminus.

If it's Young Pyromancer based, don't cut the Swords. Cut the Counterspell and one Jace, the Mind Sculptor instead.

If it's Stoneforge Mystic Control based you might decide to leave it at that (and as I see this version as the most popular one I posted the plan above). If it's controlled Stoneblade you can cut the Plains and the Pyroclasm for 2 Cliques. Depending on whether you expect Young Pyromancer or Counterbalance.

If you think that they'll bring Counterbalance, make sure to include Vendilion Clique.

I know it's tough, but I hope that these guidelines help you board correctly as soon as you've taken a decision on what the opponent is. If unsure, go with the boarding plan above.

- Imho Counterbalance is one of the best cards in all this UWR matchup: mirror, patriot, digger, pyromancer plays low mana curve (CC 1 or 2). Blade have much CC3 maindeck (Vendilion, Nemesis, Judgment). In every situation if we resolve Counterbalance, we can take the time to get the right cards to make our plan.

- Swords to plowshares is a good card. Some gold digger play maindeck Monastery Mentor in g2 and, waiting Terminus, if we don't remove it, we lose the game?

- BEB: i don't play it

- Jace: i normally play 2 copies ad it's a win-con vs control deck.
I don't like to cut it but if they play a Pyromancer.deck (Young, Delver and friends), Jace have some trouble....too much difficult to defend it?

[exallium]

Using Ein's 75, here are the cards I would consider taking out:

-4 Terminus
-X Plow
*-1 CJ
*-2 Counterspell
*-1/2 DTT

The cards I would like are:

+1 FOW
+1 Disenchant
+2 RIP
+1 EE
*+X Clique

Game plan:
0) Not die to Marit Lage
1) Establish CounterTop with cmc 2 on board
2) Resolve Jace/Entreat

* denotes I am not sure. Admittedly, it is for most of the cards.

Sideboarding out thoughts:

Removal - We definitely don't need 8 pieces of removal postboard to handle their Marit Lage. Terminus is substantially weaker than STP in that it requires us to have Top in play and also makes our CounterTop lock (if established) vulnerable. Also, Terminus loses to Wasteland-fetch shenanigans (ie they Waste a fetch in response to tapping Top). Four swords are not necessary because we are not planning on casting it that frequently. More likely than not, the opponent will cast Marit Lage at most twice due to CounterTop locking them out of recurring Loam. We don't need four copies of STP to kill 2 or 3 of their dudes, especially since we have Snapcaster to flash them back if needed. It should be noted that some Lands sideboards include cards like Dark Confidant or Thalia. In this case, we want to keep some extra removal - board accordingly.

*Council's Judgment - I spoke with lots of Lands players and they said that generally Council's Judgment is subpar because they will be actively porting our more limited color - W. It is not necessarily correct, but in my testing I have found that I am unable to cast the card as reliably due to the WW burden. Additionally, postboard the Lands player will be bringing in lots of Sphere effects, making the card even harder to cast.

*Counterspell - I feel very mixed about this card. On the play there's a potential argument to it, but it seems that the "crucial" turn for the Lands player is t1. From Exploration to Manabond to Sphere in G2, they are usually gunning these cards in their very first turn (potentially with the aid of Mox Diamond). On the draw it seems kind of silly to leave yourself susceptible to this, and even on the play it's not necessarily guaranteed to work. But perhaps it is naive to think of the matchup in terms of only worst case scenarios, so I could definitely see leaving this in.

*Dig Through Time - We're boarding in RIP. Not sure how many copies of this you want postboard as there's conflict. Can leave one or none in, depends on what you decide to bring in.

Sideboarding in thoughts:

*Vendilion Clique - I think the only card that requires discussion is Clique. There are several advantages to Clique, of which are most important are sniping Loam and blocking Marit Lage. Earlier I said Clique was the weakest of the cards you were bringing in, but I definitely think it is still strong enough to have in some numbers. Being able to block Marit Lage is crucial because it gives us a chance to untap with white mana. Note that even if we have CounterTop out, we can still lose to them naturally drawing Dark Depths, which I think they board an extra copy of against us.

So concluding everything, here's what I would recommend you start testing with:

-4 Terminus
-1 Plow
-1 CJ
-1 DTT or -1 CS

+1 FOW
+1 Disenchant
+1 EE
+2 RIP
+2 Clique

If you think Council's Judgment is strong enough to keep, then you would probably want an additional copy. So your boarding might look like this:

-4 Terminus
-1 Plow
-3 DTT/CS

+1 FOW
+1 Disenchant
+1 EE
+1 CJ
+2 RIP
+2 Clique

So here are the questions I leave for discussion:

a) How do we the strength of Council's Judgment, Counterspell, and Dig Through Time postboard?
b) How do we rank the power of these cards to determine which to take out?
c) What do you guys disagree with in what I've written and why?

This is a good write up. Counterspell has the upside of being a 2 drop for loam but the downside of being really really slow in this matchup. I am inclined to keep 1 dig in. This is a long game, and gys are going to fill. DTT is very good at helping you find a rip or a cb, whichever you are missing or value more, but because of rip we definitely don't want both.

I agree with ww for CJ. Against a good lands opponent you'll never see it. You gave as good of an answer at instant speed in disenchant.

I agree with what you've said. I think there is nothing we can remove with other cards that make cj a requirement.

My thought with clique were the same, a blocker and disruption, given so much of their game plan relies on loam.

I'll carry this forward with me in my testing.

[Trei_gamer]

Clique wrecks combos, pressure Liliana, and you can Clique away Loam in Lands. I would start with the Legend-Ponder build without Wastelands from GP Kyoto winner, then gradually work toward Lossett's Legend build if I were you.

Legend-Ponder? So the GP Kyoto build but maybe without the Wastelands?

[YamiJoey]

http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=83956

This looks like what was being talked about.

[TheArchitect]

I have been playing a Ponder/Legends hybrid list for a while now. Pre-GP NJ I played 2 ponder and legends (well clique at least) for about a year, I played traditional 4 ponder list for the cruise era and now I am back to 4 ponders 2 snaps, 2 cliques and its been awesome again. I dont travel to SCG sized events often but the deck has definitely payed for itself by placing at local 30-50 man 1ks, and the few large events I have been to with miracles so I would say its been working pretty well for me.

Its really the best of boast approaches.

Here's the list I have been running lately:
1 Arid Mesa
4 Flooded Strand
4 Island
1 Karakas
2 Plains
4 Scalding Tarn
3 Tundra
2 Volcanic Island

4 Brainstorm
1 Council's Judgment
4 Counterbalance
2 Counterspell
1 Dig Through Time
2 Entreat the Angels
3 Force of Will
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 Ponder
4 Sensei's Divining Top
2 Snapcaster Mage
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Terminus
2 Vendilion Clique

Sideboard:
2 Containment Priest
1 Council's Judgment
1 Disenchant
1 Force of Will
2 Meddling Mage
1 Pyroblast
2 Red Elemental Blast
1 Supreme Verdict
2 Spell Pierce (Could be flusterstorms, but I like pierce more right now)
1 Venser, Shaper Savant (I don't always play him)
1 Blood Moon (this works as Lands/Jund hate much better than RIP, it also happens to be good vs infect or shardless)

[Dragonslayer_90]

Well guys, my report will probably be a little longer coming down the pipe line than I thought. I just emailed a pitch to Eternal Central to publish my report since Ein recommended I do so. If my pitch gets approved I will make another post once the article is up. That might be a while too since I'm quite busy with the end of school atm...

[Malakai]

the 14th place Miracles deck went deep -- 3 Monastery Mentor, 1 Cavern of Souls, the legends package in the board, as well as a Magus of the Moon in the sideboard!

It's not a Miracles deck; it's Mentor Control.

Dragonslayer:
Why did you slam a Snapcaster Mage against Sean game 1, and why did you then dig so hard to protect it from Swords to Plowshares?

[RogueMTG]

...
<hybrid list>
...
Sideboard:
2 Containment Priest
1 Council's Judgment
1 Disenchant
1 Force of Will
2 Meddling Mage
1 Pyroblast
2 Red Elemental Blast
1 Supreme Verdict
2 Spell Pierce (Could be flusterstorms, but I like pierce more right now)
1 Venser, Shaper Savant (I don't always play him)
1 Blood Moon (this works as Lands/Jund hate much better than RIP, it also happens to be good vs infect or shardless)

I was looking over this list wondering how you had room for everything in the board, and then realized you don't have a single piece of graveyard hate... how has that been working out? Is it a local meta thing or do you think this is okay with the current state of legacy?

[PhyrexianLibrarian]

I was looking over this list wondering how you had room for everything in the board, and then realized you don't have a single piece of graveyard hate... how has that been working out? Is it a local meta thing or do you think this is okay with the current state of legacy?

I guess the idea is that Containment Priest and Blood Moon between them handle most of the matchups that you'd otherwise bring in Graveyard hate against; Jund, Lands, Re-animator, Dredge, etc. The fact that it pseudo-shuts down a bunch of other decks like BUG, and that people are likely to board out any removal for your Priests, is just gravy.

Edit 2: Answered my own question

[TheArchitect]

I guess the idea is that Containment Priest and Blood Moon between them handle most of the matchups that you'd otherwise bring in Graveyard hate against; Jund, Lands, Re-animator, Dredge, etc. The fact that it pseudo-shuts down a bunch of other decks like BUG, and that people are likely to board out any removal for your Priests, is just gravy.

Edit 2: Answered my own question

Pretty much. Honestly the moon isnt even needed. Theres basically no lands in my area but it kinda helps vs jund, infect, deathblade and shardless which I do see. Since GP NJ I have just been playing the containment priest and no moon or GY hate. The combo decks I have played against most since then have been elves and reanimator by a very large margin. Priest is way better than RIP in both of those matchups.

Rogue MTG, you should read back the past few pages as we have been discussing this. Here is my post on the matter:

I have just been playing containment priest over RIP since it was released and have not missed RIP. Vs every GY combo matchup, having a RIP with flash, that doesnt mess up our snaps and digs AND attacks for 2 is a godsend. Also, this card hoses S&T and elves. Its really a no brainer.

The matchups where you want to bring in RIP is lands, RUG and jund. All the other decks, having priest is better. Vs RUG or lands you can win without GY hate, its just nice to have. Both matchups are totally winnable without GY hate. Vs jund answering pfire is a must and CB is not reliable. That is pretty much the only downside of RIP over priest.

If you really want GY interaction vs lands or jund that doesnt mess up our own cards, play 1-2 surgical or blood moon in addition to 2 priests. Honestly though, I don't think that is even needed.

To reemphasize, no offense to players I do infact respect, but playing RIP over priest is a big mistake.


MTGRogue made me think about something that is worth discussing though. Its a more board topic that specific to miracles, but as a control deck it definitely applies a lot here: Be open minded and think critically about all your card choices. If you are unwilling to do this, just copy/paste some experts 75 since he/she probably did all the work for you. But if you want to actually improve the deck, for your own meta or in general, you need to critically evaluate all card choice, and not rely in preconceived notions. There is not some rule that says "you must play 2-3 GY hate cards", "Red blasts are only SB cards", "all your counterbalances must be in your maindeck", or "you must play over 16 cards and 4 FoW in your blue deck". Most of the time the preestablished way of doing things is popular for a reason: its the best way to do it. But this is not always the case.

It is very important that you do not misconceive this as meaning you should throw whatever cool stuff you want into your deck. Yes, Ruination hoses 12 post, and Keranos is hard for BUG to kill, but how much do these cards actually help your chance of success overall? Are there cards that could fill those slots that could give you a better chance of success? Probably.

[PhyrexianLibrarian]

Must be a regional thing. In my area, there is a lot of Jund, Lands, RUG and BUG, and the combo decks of choice are Elves and ANT/TES/Spanish Inquisition. I haven't seen anyone playing Sneak & Show or Re-animator in a long time. For me personally Containment Priests are a lot less relevant than RIP, but I can totally see the meta shifting to where that would be reversed.

I'm sticking with my 1/2 split of Keranos/Clique, though, I can't help myself :P

[skyout]

So, there is a lot of MUD and one or two 12-post players in my area, what do you guys recommend putting in the board to assist with the matchup. I know the matchup is not so great, but anything to help would be greatly appreciated.

[presquepartout]

Back to Basics is the most devastating sideboard card you can have for decks playing Cloudpost. However, it is extremely narrow, and probably not recommended for a field wider than just you, MUD, and 12 Post.

[TheArchitect]

So, there is a lot of MUD and one or two 12-post players in my area, what do you guys recommend putting in the board to assist with the matchup. I know the matchup is not so great, but anything to help would be greatly appreciated.

If you read back through this thread you will find that someone asks this basically every other week and we have the same arguements every time.

Ruination is the best card against 12 post. Back to basics and blood moon rarely work as well as you think they would. Playing fast creatures like mentor or giest help too. Against MUD, stuff like council's judgment, counterspell, terminus help and the matchup is not too bad if you play well. Unless "your area" consists of like 10 people your best bet is to just ignore the 12 post matchup. Even adding hate cards does not significantly improve the matchup and any hate cards you are super narrow and lower your rate vs everything else.

[Dragonslayer_90]

Dragonslayer:
Why did you slam a Snapcaster Mage against Sean game 1, and why did you then dig so hard to protect it from Swords to Plowshares?

Hi there. I apologize in advance if some of the details of my response are fuzzy. I didn't take any notes so I'm doing this strictly from memory: Game One Sean mulled to 5. Then he Force of Will'ed my Turn One Top to further mulligan his hand. Granted, there might be an argument to be made for doing that (though I think I ultimately disagree with that play), but he quickly got punished for doing so since I just drew another Top on my first draw for the game (I was on the play since I was the higher seed). At the point where I had gotten my snapcaster down I am pretty sure I had gotten counter top established so it was a matter of me trying to close the game out. Me "digging so hard to protect it" seemed fine because I had counter top so it's actually not so hard to protect it. If I did not have that setup I would have not dug so hard to protect snapcaster. In short, because I started with such a huge advantage early on I played more aggressively than usual to push my advantage because there was not much card trading to be done in the early stages of the game.

Now, this is something that's hard to discern over the internet, but If you've made a judgment about me as a player for making a play that seems fundamentally wrong without all sufficient context of game state and such, I'd request you reserve your judgment instead. Not only is this act just relatively shallow, but it shows an unhealthy inflexibility in playing the game. For pretty much any deck, there are certain principles to be said about them. But these principles are just guidelines, not absolutes. Sometimes you need to make counter-intuitive plays contrary to what you've been taught to win certain games. I don't mean to come off high and mighty, but I just really hate when people jump to conclusions about players based on plays they think are wrong but might actually be right because it's ultimate not fair when you are not actually playing the game and probably have more perfect information than either opponent. If you have any other questions or thoughts about my plays in that tournament do let me know.

[BioEBear]

A number of decks in recent weeks (mostly slower, legends-style builds) have been packing some number of Spell Snares, Spell Pierces, and Pyroblasts in the MD either in addition to or in lieu of Counterspell and Council's Judgment. Is the idea here that because these decks play more 3- and 4- drops in Clique and Venser (in addition to JTMS), they simply can't afford to also play Counterspell and Council's Judgment and need to play more situational answers? I ask, because I am playing a list with five MD creatures (2x Snap, 2x Clique, 1x Venser), 4x WinCons (2x JTMS, 2x Entreat), and 2x Digs as my large spells, and have between 2 and 3 slots to dedicate to some number of these "answers." What split makes the most sense to combat the legends build's weaknesses?

[twndomn]

Must be a regional thing. In my area, there is a lot of Jund, Lands, RUG and BUG, and the combo decks of choice are Elves and ANT/TES/Spanish Inquisition. I haven't seen anyone playing Sneak & Show or Re-animator in a long time. For me personally Containment Priests are a lot less relevant than RIP, but I can totally see the meta shifting to where that would be reversed.

Priests: GSZ, NO, Vial, Lackey, Reanimation spell, Show and Tell, Dreaded Return, Ichorid

RiP: Reanimation spell, Dreaded Return, Ichorid, PFire, Loam, Past in Flame

I would attempt to draw an analogy to the Venn Diagram, with graveyard being the left Circle. Naturally, RiP would cover the entire left circle. Priest would cover the right circle. Hence, cards they both hit would naturally be the intersection. They are different tools, with occasional interchangeable purpose.

A number of decks in recent weeks (mostly slower, legends-style builds) have been packing some number of Spell Snares, Spell Pierces, and Pyroblasts in the MD either in addition to or in lieu of Counterspell and Council's Judgment. Is the idea here that because these decks play more 3- and 4- drops in Clique and Venser (in addition to JTMS), they simply can't afford to also play Counterspell and Council's Judgment and need to play more situational answers? I ask, because I am playing a list with five MD creatures (2x Snap, 2x Clique, 1x Venser), 4x WinCons (2x JTMS, 2x Entreat), and 2x Digs as my large spells, and have between 2 and 3 slots to dedicate to some number of these "answers." What split makes the most sense to combat the legends build's weaknesses?

Personally I feel you're mixing up lots of things together. MD Red Blast effect has been done in a long time, more so during Treasure Cruise era. Long story short, Red Blast and StP are competing for the same slots. The same competition occurs for the Snapcaster vs Clique slots. The recent trend coming from GP Kyoto is that people have been trying both instead of leaning one way or another. When you lean on Snapcaster, you want more Ponder. When you lean on Clique you want less Ponder and you can replace the slot with cards like more Dig, more SS/SP/Red Blast/Venser. This all depend on where you stand in a broad spectrum.

I've been saying that you can do both for months. Since Miracles can be highly customized, just run the build that works for you. For me, if I don't MD Clique, I cannot defeat Blade decks. If I don't run Ponder, the clunky openings would just get me. I run something very similar to TheArchitect's latest list but with 22 lands.

[winglerw28]

After seeing the top 8 list playing two Wasteland in Kyoto, I'm very tempted to play some Wastelands at my local at some point given the high percentage of post-based decks. It may not be good, but I will win at least a single game against post, damn it! One time dealer!

Back in the world of reality, how does everyone feel about the Terminus numbers floating around? I've seen anywhere from two to four, sometimes supplemented with a Supreme Verdict in the main deck. I feel as though Terminus is definitely one of the least impactful cards when it isn't useful, but I'm not sure how I feel having only three against some of the more aggressive creature-based decks in the format. I'm trying to solidify a list to start testing for SCG Worcester and am a bit rusty having not played a real legacy deck in... quite a while.

[Zodiac_Dragon]

I prepare my deck for a local tourment on next saturday.

What do you guys think: Is Moat a valid option for the SB in the current Meta? If so: What card should I replace with it? (Using Ein's list) 3. Clique? CJ?