Miracle Control

[Lemnear]

Unfair and unfun are the words that destroyed Standard for me and made cards like Mana Leak too powerful to be ever reprinted in a Standard set. In every competitive game it is kind of hilarious to think that everyone should be having fun....

I don't want to sound like a dick, but i never heard any really good player (i don't consider myself to be among them) say "Woah that Legend build with Karakas& Clique &Venser is such a great way to build Miracles, it's really good".- that's something to think about.

If you're open minded and play a lot, you'll find out that the legend version is just an inferior way to build miracles. I really want it to be better, because it's more fun to play, because Venser is such a cool card and doing cool tricks is fun, but sadly it is not.

Venser + Clique + Karakas is clunky as hell, that's the whole Problem. It does absolutely nothing in the first 4 turns which are the most important ones to stabilize. Ponder builds shine here but lack the toolbox character of the Legends build late in the game, which doesn't even need Entreat to close out the game.

The deck has already enough bricks to draw in your opener, and Venser + Clique doesn't improve the deck in that regards, which is the same reason why I hate DTT. For me it is questionable to include plenty of good lategame cards if I struggle to stay alive long enough to use them.

[YamiJoey]

I think it's a good sign of a healthy format that Joe did well with it. It shows that you can play a complete pile incredibly well and still win.

EDIT: This is mostly a joke. I have a lot of respect for Joe, and have played builds very similar to his before porting over to Ein's lists. I think it's worse, but I also think every deck is an objectively worse choice than the Miracles build I'm playing at this point in time, or else I wouldn't be playing it. His build is very reasonable, but I don't see why you'd fuck about with a 5-mana "Counter one Spell per turn" on a 2/2 when we have 3-mana "Counter all Spells your opponent plays forever" in the same deck. It is marginally more stable as an individual card, but just putting CB on the table with no backup causes people to either answer it immediately under threat of you having Jace, Brainstorm, or Top, or risk just having their Spells countered at random for the rest of the game.

[Hrothgar]

Thanks for the feedback, guys!

@Hrothgar: Disenchant is only worse vs Miracle but takes a lot of strains off the manabase in MUs where we either do not want to rely on red at all or where the Volcanics are taxed with casting the REBs and flashing them back. It's a more stable and easier to cast / flashback version of Wear/Tear and what I feel to be the superior variant right now.

Thank you for the feed, Ein.
Yesterday i have some problems vs MUD for the flashback cost, 'cause a Sundering Titan destroy my 2 Volcanic and at this point my 2nd Wear Tear in the deck (and a Pyroclasm but ok) are deadly card...
Well...today i will test with a split (1 Wear Tear and 1 Disenchant - I try to maintain 1 Wear Tear vs Maverick, Junk and Mirror, for the presence of this archetype in my metagame) and i post my impressions tonight.

Thanks a lot for your advice....Improve how to correctly sideboarding is fundamental.

:)

[drocker23]

I believe the reason Joe Lossett gave that made Venser good was that it was really good vs Stoneblade decks. Most people will attack with batterskull and stoneforge mystic for 5 damage on an empty board on turn 4 after putting it into play the turn before. The concept he proposed was you flash in venser, bounce the token, and block the stoneforge mystic. and the reason for the vendilion cliques was to have a flash creature with evasion that could attack a liliana of the veil since she wrecks us if left unchecked. Clique was also really good at stripping equipment from the opponent's hand after a stoneforge mystic activation. I believe at the time he built the legendary build of miracles, stoneforge mystic was the most played creature in legacy. Also, if I remember correctly, Sneak and Show was played in very high numbers then as well. Venser is extremely good to put into play when they cast show and tell, and clique can try to strip a card from their hand before it resolves either by taking whatever they were going to show and tell, or by eating their force of will so you can counter the show and tell. If all else failed, drop venser and bounce whatever they put into play.

[Quasim0ff]

I believe the reason Joe Lossett gave that made Venser good was that it was really good vs Stoneblade decks. Most people will attack with batterskull and stoneforge mystic for 5 damage on an empty board on turn 4 after putting it into play the turn before. The concept he proposed was you flash in venser, bounce the token, and block the stoneforge mystic. and the reason for the vendilion cliques was to have a flash creature with evasion that could attack a liliana of the veil since she wrecks us if left unchecked. Clique was also really good at stripping equipment from the opponent's hand after a stoneforge mystic activation. I believe at the time he built the legendary build of miracles, stoneforge mystic was the most played creature in legacy. Also, if I remember correctly, Sneak and Show was played in very high numbers then as well. Venser is extremely good to put into play when they cast show and tell, and clique can try to strip a card from their hand before it resolves either by taking whatever they were going to show and tell, or by eating their force of will so you can counter the show and tell. If all else failed, drop venser and bounce whatever they put into play.

Actually, I think it was due to SnT being so dominant in the US, at that time. Don't remember him actually mentioning Venser regarding Stoneblade decks.

Anyhow, I think Swords and snapcaster is better than venser vs. stoneforge.

[Cipher]

Venser is far better against Stoneforge. It's also far better against BUG and every other midrange value deck. Of course, Snapcaster should be ran in some number as well, just not as a 3-of if you don't have a full playset of Ponder. Never once heard Joe mention running Venser for Show and Tell, though it's an obvious thing to board in.

Venser is just a singleton. Highlighting a weak singleton, which he admits is somewhat of a pet card, and using it to characterize his entire list is ridiculous. If you love Ponders, feel free to extol the virtues all you want. But please don't mis-characterize other list so blatantly. It isn't "Ponder Miracles" vs. "Venser Miracles" as the competitive options.

[Adryan]

Lemnear said everything of importance and explained why the Legend build is not good. As long as you don't live from grinding on Magic Online or want to Top 8 some Legacy GP's running an inferior version is ok, but if you really want to play the best list, Einherjer's list is a good way to start.

Venser + Clique + Karakas is clunky as hell, that's the whole Problem. It does absolutely nothing in the first 4 turns which are the most important ones to stabilize. Ponder builds shine here but lack the toolbox character of the Legends build late in the game, which doesn't even need Entreat to close out the game.

The deck has already enough bricks to draw in your opener, and Venser + Clique doesn't improve the deck in that regards, which is the same reason why I hate DTT. For me it is questionable to include plenty of good lategame cards if I struggle to stay alive long enough to use them.

Although i completely disagree on the DTT part. That card is completely awesome, and you need a very good reason not to play at least 1 copy of it. With 10 fetchlands, an abundance of cantrips casting DTT for UU consistently on Turn 4 is great. Miracle also lacked non virtual card advantage outside of Jace, which is of course more powerful than DTT, but difficult to resolve and benefit from it against Combo& Delver decks.

[Quasim0ff]

Venser is far better against Stoneforge. It's also far better against BUG and every other midrange value deck. Of course, Snapcaster should be ran in some number as well, just not as a 3-of if you don't have a full playset of Ponder. Never once heard Joe mention running Venser for Show and Tell, though it's an obvious thing to board in.

Venser is just a singleton. Highlighting a weak singleton, which he admits is somewhat of a pet card, and using it to characterize his entire list is ridiculous. If you love Ponders, feel free to extol the virtues all you want. But please don't mis-characterize other list so blatantly. It isn't "Ponder Miracles" vs. "Venser Miracles" as the competitive options.

If it came across as a flame towards his list; I'm sorry. It wasn't meant it like that. I find it impressive, with him performing so well with his list.

[rickster]

Lossett doesn't like 4x swords since they are dead in the match ups he cared about (storm, show and tell, reanimator, the mirror). He justified the 1st and 2nd blast over the 3rd and 4th swords because of blasts utility in the match ups he cared about. Blast is still removal against delver, and it kills true-name on the stack. He was willing to give up being weak to dark confidant, but he thought that card wouldn't be that popular since true-name pushes some of those dark confidant decks out of the meta.

Lossett likes main deck cliques because of the planeswalker/legend rule change last year. Since you can no longer kill your opponent's Jace by casting your own Jace, you're going to need creatures to kill Jace. Also blasts kill Jace too.

[lordofthepit]

this is one of the worst comments i have read in a long time. Fair and unfair things? are you kidding me?
Joe's list has much more upside and requires much more skill (experience) than the ponder list. the ponder list is much more straight forward whereas the legendary built can get little edges with every instant/flash creature.
However the ponder list is obviously much more consistent and easier to pickup.
In the end it all comes down to philosophy.

Sounds like you're disagreeing about semantics with respect to "fair" and "unfair". The post you're replying to was quite accurate.

Having played both variants of Miracles, I do think that the variants play out quite differently: Einherjer's list is one in which I'm much less hesitant about tapping out.

I don't believe either version is significantly more difficult to play than the other, but I do agree that the Ponder list is more consistent but lacks the random 1- or 2-ofs that are awesome in specific matchups.

[wtfzero]

Just one question, what is you guys plan when you face decks with turn 1 chalice such as MUD and UB Tezzeret? I feel really difficult to play against these types of decks, especially at game 1 . Any suggestions?

[Quasim0ff]

Just one question, what is you guys plan when you face decks with turn 1 chalice such as MUD and UB Tezzeret? I feel really difficult to play against these types of decks, especially at game 1 . Any suggestions?

counter the chalice, find Entreat/Resolve jace on empty board ASAP

[JediCheese]

Sorry for the basicness of my question, but I'm looking how to use Jace correctly. I get counter-top with fetchlands and when to Miracle something, but when to Jace -0 vs +2 always gets me.

If it's mid-game and I'm not under any threat (and no top/brainstorm), should I -0 to dig through my deck further to find an Entreat? Should I +2 my opponent to keep them off threats? If I have a top with Jace out, should I be fatesealing my opponent or getting rid of dead weight off the top of my deck? If my opponent has a top out, I feel using the +2 fateseal ability on them useless and then should I be +2 myself or -0 brainstorm (assuming no other top/brainstorm action is present)?

I would love either a primer on Jace or example situations and how to deal with them correctly.

Thanks!

[Bobmans]

Sorry for the basicness of my question, but I'm looking how to use Jace correctly. I get counter-top with fetchlands and when to Miracle something, but when to Jace -0 vs +2 always gets me.

If it's mid-game and I'm not under any threat (and no top/brainstorm), should I -0 to dig through my deck further to find an Entreat? Should I +2 my opponent to keep them off threats? If I have a top with Jace out, should I be fatesealing my opponent or getting rid of dead weight off the top of my deck? If my opponent has a top out, I feel using the +2 fateseal ability on them useless and then should I be +2 myself or -0 brainstorm (assuming no other top/brainstorm action is present)?

I would love either a primer on Jace or example situations and how to deal with them correctly.

Thanks!

Personally i always +2 Jace, unless i need something specific. Ie find a Entreat/Terminus or bounce a Marit Lage token or whatever. Worst case you fateseal yourself getting rid of useless cards. The thing is with +2ing Jace, it gets you closer to actually win.

[JediCheese]

Personally i always +2 Jace, unless i need something specific. Ie find a Entreat/Terminus or bounce a Marit Lage token or whatever. Worst case you fateseal yourself getting rid of useless cards. The thing is with +2ing Jace, it gets you closer to actually win.

On an open board vs an aggro deck, no cards in either players hands, would you +2 yourself or +2 your opponent?

[Bobmans]

On an open board vs an aggro deck, no cards in either players hands, would you +2 yourself or +2 your opponent?

Opponent, unless he has a Top, Library or fetch (sometimes i bluf them to force to break the fetch). Mostly letting him keep stuff like lands, removal with no targets or stuff for which i have answers online like Counterbalance or Plow/Counterspell. Being able to control what your opponent draws is so powerful.

[TheArchitect]

Sorry for the basicness of my question, but I'm looking how to use Jace correctly. I get counter-top with fetchlands and when to Miracle something, but when to Jace -0 vs +2 always gets me.

If it's mid-game and I'm not under any threat (and no top/brainstorm), should I -0 to dig through my deck further to find an Entreat? Should I +2 my opponent to keep them off threats? If I have a top with Jace out, should I be fatesealing my opponent or getting rid of dead weight off the top of my deck? If my opponent has a top out, I feel using the +2 fateseal ability on them useless and then should I be +2 myself or -0 brainstorm (assuming no other top/brainstorm action is present)?

I would love either a primer on Jace or example situations and how to deal with them correctly.

Thanks!

I basically brainstorm with Jace till 1) the board is clear of threats, 2) I find 1 form of protection for the Jace (counterspell, swords, CB+top, etc.), and 3) I have more cards in hand than my opponent (or CB+top) . Once I have those 3 things, then start fatesealing. So if I cast jace on an empty board with more cards than my opponent and protection in my hand, I immediately start fatesealing.

I almost always fateseal my opponent unless they have top/library. I don't care if they have fetches. I am also a pretty aggressive fatesealer, basically if the card is better than the average card they could draw, it goes to the bottom. Cantrips always go to the bottom (unless you have CB lock). I'll fateseal myself if my opponent still has a bunch of library manipulation. And I will fateseal the turn the play jace if my opponent has between 3-4 power of creatures in play, or has instant speed dues (vial, clique, etc).

If both players are in topdeck mode and empty hands/boards and my opponent doesn't have many draws that just wreck jace (punishing fire, red blast, bloodbraid elf, etc) I will sometimes ignore my "have 1 form of protection" rule and just immediately start fatesealing, and brainstorm later if needed.

[Lemnear]

Although i completely disagree on the DTT part. That card is completely awesome, and you need a very good reason not to play at least 1 copy of it. With 10 fetchlands, an abundance of cantrips casting DTT for UU consistently on Turn 4 is great. Miracle also lacked non virtual card advantage outside of Jace, which is of course more powerful than DTT, but difficult to resolve and benefit from it against Combo& Delver decks.

The reason is that with BS/Ponder/SDT/Jace/Fetches you browse through your library for an unmatched card-selection in Legacy and already run CB/Jace/Terminus for cardadvantage. Getting the card online by turn 4 is a joke for combo decks. I don't see a reason to add a clunky card selection/advantage tool if you already run all the beforementioned stuff. I don't say the card is Junk itself, but I don't see it achieving anything beyond the decks regular tools

[Adryan]

The reason is that with BS/Ponder/SDT/Jace/Fetches you browse through your library for an unmatched card-selection in Legacy and already run CB/Jace/Terminus for cardadvantage. Getting the card online by turn 4 is a joke for combo decks. I don't see a reason to add a clunky card selection/advantage tool if you already run all the beforementioned stuff. I don't say the card is Junk itself, but I don't see it achieving anything beyond the decks regular tools

You're wrong it's very good against every Combo deck. It's an instant, and digs like no other card for additional counterspells or permission. For me a 2/2 split of Jace and Dig Through Time is very good. Both cards have a similar purpose. Jace is more powerful, but can suck in a lot of situations or against some decks (Combo, Infect, Delver, the mirror etc.).

And by suck i mean, it's not a consistently good card. Jace is only good against f.ex Delver when you are already winning, he doesn't help you get out of tough situations because a 4 mana Brainstorm and gain 3 life for 4 mana is not good etc.

[Cipher]

Come on, man. Jace is only good against Delver? I run a full playset, but I can understand people running 3. Saying it's not a core card is too much.