Well then we go into the whole 3cc issue, while yes the 3cc helps with CB especially against Junk but wouldn't you rather spend that 3cc on something like Clique? Also, land disruption decks, good luck easily getting all 3 colors while getting everything else to go off. I just feel that it is an amazing card, but just misses the cut. That's my opinion though.
Even if you run 3 colors, you can still play 7 basics just fine, which is far from fragile.
I doubt it's a good idea to play Clique in this deck. Why, you might ask? Because Clique is a creature. This deck turns your opponents removal into dead cards and that's one of the strengths, I guess - not only do you generate CA with your PWs, CBTop and Shackles, you even turn your opponent's StP into blanks.
I suppose I just have to give Predict a spin.
This looks like a job for me.
Most of my posts will be written from my phone, so please excuse the eventual lack of proper typing.
I'll post my current list when I get home from work tonight, did fairly well in an MWS based tournament with a loss only in the finals to Aeon Bridge of all decks funny enough =/ I just couldnt stop a turn 2 Emrakul
Elspeth and Shackles rarely create CA. Moreover there a a lot of decks out there which turn YOUR Swords, Shacklettes, Elspeth, O.Ring into blanks!
The possibility that a opponent runs Swords against your countertop(!) is not a reason to dismiss the flex. of Clique especially if you realize that a resolved softlock is protection from 1cc-spells my fellow In-Nürnberg-Spieler.
I did some testing yesterday night with hanni's list and I can't stress the importance of basics enough. I feel that splashing is ok, but not very worth it compared to a solid Manabase. Here's what I run: 4 strand, 3 misty, 2 Heath, 3 tundra, 8 island, 2 plains. I run 10 basics and have very little mana problems. I don't like the 4th tundra because I don't want to have double tundra hands. Having 1 tundra is fine as I can drop basics/fetches turns 1-3 then the tundra as my 4th/5th land drop once I'm out of the woods.
Shackles is the best card in the deck. Every game I won was off the back of shackles. No shackles= gameloss against tribal. This deck still doesn't feel "broken" enough. But being able to be 50/50 against tribal is a very big achievement IMO for a countertop deck. Props to hanni on the list.
I've played the UW version tons of times against Junk and I'm currently undefeated, it is a REALLY good match up. The only difference between me and Hanni is -2 O. Ring +2 EE, which does help in the match. Setting a 2 and a 3 drop on top for Counterbalance isn't difficult, and completely shuts them down. Just remember to float a 3 drops for possible K. Grips.
The only way they can kill you is a discard heavy opening, followed by a large dude + Vindicate to your Walker/shackles, but I've survived many of those hands as well.
Hope it helps!
I think the only decks that survive the opening of massive hand removal then big creature is dredge and um, can't think of much that can survive it
I understand that CB @ 2,3 is good. I worry a bit about the few turns before that comes online, but most of all I think that match up should be included in the primer for today's metagame. The discard and Confidant seem to be the only real issue, but they are real issues for many CB decks.
Not to be rude, but I'd rather get a more definitive answer from the OP than annecdotal evidence from someone else. Not that I don't believe you or anything.
Just saying, The list i Have is currently in a 'low' budget mode, I am getting my Underground seas and Shackles hopefully in a few weeks.
Instant: 15
Diabolic Edict x3
Force of Will x4
Counterspell x4
Swords to plowshares x4
There is no brainstorm at the moment because I lack Fetch Lands and predicts(LGS is out and I dont have a way to order online).
Sorcery:5
Wrath of God x2
Day of Judgment x1
Decree of Justice x2
I only have two Wrath and no shackles yet. I honestly, have tested it both ways, shackles helps me more against decks with smaller creatures, but sweepers I have found to help me more against bigger creatures, if I dont have an edict or Swords in hand. I am running two decree of Justice as an alternate win condition, it has helped me once as a win con, and give me an extra card at the 4 CMC slot, which I am lacking as I cannot afford to get Jaces in my current financial situation.
Enchantment:10
Counterbalance x4
Oblivion Ring x4
Standstill x2
Counterbalance is kind of Self explanatory. Oblivion ring is in here, because I cannot afford Vindicates around the rest of the cards that the deck requires, AND it hits Emrakul, which would make me want to run it more than Vindicate either way. I still Like Standstill in here, while there are only two of them here, I have gotten some game winning advantage off of it.
Artifacts:4
Sensei's Divining Top x4
The 'Top' Part of countertop.
Superfriends:4
Elspeth, Knight-Errant x2
Jace Beleren x2
Elspeth is ridiculously powerful in here, the extra damage that her second ability can provide or the blockers her first one can may swing games.
Jace Beleren in here, is more for the CMC 3 and the card draw I can get off of him. While not as powerful as his full grown self, the card draw he provides and the CMC of 3 for the top, is really helpful.
Lands: 22
Non-Basic:12
Mishra's Factory x4
Celestial Collonade x2
Watery Grave x2
Creeping Tar-Pit x2
Tundra x2
The Colonades, I want to make a one of and use Hallowed Founts, but I havent been able to find any of the founts locally, nor more Tundra.
The Graves will be Seas as soon as I can get them. Tar-Pits are an alternate win condition, and can be pretty ridiculous with Elspeth.
Basic Land: 10
Swamp x2
Island x4
Plains x4
Tournament experience.
I can only remember a few of the rounds as it was a long day for me =/
Played against a Blue Stompy deck. This is where Elspeth saved me, We got to the point where I wasnt getting any removal and we were racing for the win, he was swinging 5 each turn, I went from 11, to 6 to 1, and he was at 4 life, I topdecked an Elspeth, and Boosted a single Decree token for a game win. The next game, I was able to counter most of the spells he played, and when he did land a creature, I would Edicts or Swords, I o-ring'd his Chalice and managed to out aggro him.
Another round was against a U/R Merfolk deck. Not much to say really, Kept vial off the board and killed the lords =/
Aeon Bridge.
Game one, he used the Bridge to get Emrakul out, going off on his second turn through Lotus Petals. Game Two, He show and tells for an Emrakul. I drop an O-Ring, Judge gets called, its a small tournament, its ruled that O-Ring does hit Emrakul. I am unsure if it works off of Show and tell, I was told it does, can anyone here clarify? Game Three, He does his bridge thing again, when I try to Force the Dreadnought he has a force to stop mine and I lose the game.
~
Last edited by Beatusnox; 04-13-2011 at 01:01 AM. Reason: Double post.
I generally agree on Treefolk Masters experience with the Junk/Rock/GWBGoodstuff matchup. Discard is the main issue here, but if you can get down a top, the damage done with Hymns and whatnot is minimized by a lot. If you can survive that onslaught, which you mostly will, them dropping medium-sized Tarmogoyfs and KotR just can't keep up with us dropping gamebreaking bombs like Jace, Elspeth or Shackles.
Not meaning to sound elitist or something, but when playing against those decks, I'm not really impressed by anything they throw at me.
Island, go.
Hello guys!
I ABSOLUTELY love this deck. I've been a dreadstill player for about a year or so now and I've always been a fan of CounterTop. After playing this deck, I havent looked back to anything. I run an identical list as Hanni with the exception of moats. Moats are so redicilously expensive (I do plan on getting them though, eventually) and next weekened there is a qualifcation for swedish legacy masters. I was planning to be there and I think I have fairly good chances of qualifying but I could really use some advice as what to play instead of moats.
I guess it makes my goblin match up a bit harder which obviously is a problem. I'm thinking that playing peacekeeper instead could be an option, as long as you use pithing needle/meddling mages on siege-gang, wierding, gempalm etc
Vedalken Shackles are very much needed in that mach-up. Most of their goblins when not attacking will have be controlled through the shackle.
You could also consider running some kind of board sweepers. One or two Wrath of God could be what you need, though even still, if you can keep Aether Vial off the table, having an active counterbalance at CMC 1-2 can just about shut them down. at least in my experience. It depends on where you play as to if Goblins will be a big issue for you. The meta could prove to not really have any of them or very few of them to play against. For U/W Superfriends, I Do not know the List on the main page atm(will check in a sec) but you could definitely always bring in path to exile for spot removal if you are really getting drowned in the Goblins.
Also, thank you for answering the O-Ring question, that is how I thought it worked, but I wanted to be sure.
~ Is the software causing anyone else to double post like crazy lately?
Last edited by Beatusnox; 04-14-2011 at 04:15 AM. Reason: Double post.
I don't agree on Shackles, I have found it very slow. I'd rather play green for goyf because goblins really can't deal with a tarmogoyf. Between goyf and all the removal goblins shouldn't be the hardest match up.
Wow... so much to address here. First of all, I'd like to say that I edited the links in the primer. The links look much cleaner now. I also added hyc8028's tournament results in the Tournament Results section.
Anyway, onto the responses:
How so?It's pretty misleading calling this deck "Superfriends"..
Why did you have problems with Shackles against Zoo and tribal? Were you running a really bad manabase, with alot of nonbasics or a low Island count? If you're implying that surviving until you have 3 lands in play doesn't happen, then you either played a really bad control deck, or you did something wrong.A very nice primer but I don't think Shackles are still good. I played countertop for years and always had problems versus zoo and tribal running shackles due to the fact it's not faster than wrath and Mana denial hurts too of you need 3 islands to handle a nacatl which beats you for 9 until you can shackle him. I prefer V. Cliques in that slots to "Instant" kill nacatl or jaces AND rip their post-Combat-play or cycle multiple tops/cliques/etc. It perfectly fits in the 3cc slot and is also good vs. Combo unlike shackles.
Once Shackles comes down, it has the ability to shut aggro down cold. If they don't overcommit, they can't put any damage through, and if they do overcommit, I gain lots of card advantage.
Shackles is also much easier to resolve than Wrath, since it only costs 3 mana. It might not do anything immediately without an additional 2 mana investment, but it's going to sit on the board for the rest of the game until dealt with. Wrath costs 4, 2WW to be exact, which is rather slow when the opponent can easily drop a threat the turn after.
As far as Wild Nacatl goes, of course a turn 1 Nacatl is gonna swing faster than a Shackles can come down. He's gonna swing faster than a Wrath can come down too. That's what Swords, Path, and Force are for.
Vendilion Clique as an answer to Wild Nacatl is so horribly bad. It still costs the same 3 mana as Shackles does, except it can be Bolt'd or Path'd... and if you're putting a a Path back to bottom with Clique, you're playing this deck seriously wrong. At best, you're trading Clique with Nacatl... so you spent 3 mana to answer their 1 mana guy. Seems pretty bad to me, and I'd rather just run more Oblivion Rings since they can hit Tarmogoyf.
There's no doubting Clique in the combo matchup, but that's not a matchup this deck has a problem with. Clique is still relatively slow against combo too, since it costs 3. Meddling Mage out of the board is more than sufficient for combo. Shackles may be bad vs combo (depending on the combo deck), but control decks should have cards that are bad against combo, because they are necessary for handling aggro. There's no good answer to aggro that's also good against combo that I know of besides Counterbalance.
I don't run Moat maindeck because its too expensive for an effect that can be hit or miss in some matchups. Moat totally skews my Counterbalance curve, making me heavy in 4 drops, and it makes my deck more mana hungry if I overload a bunch of top heavy spells. It's the same reason I run a 2/2 split of my Planeswalker's instead of a 3/3 split.I agree with Lemnear about Clique. Also, I don't really see why Moat is sided and why 2. Why don't you main 1? Because Elspeth is in the main all of your creatures can fly over moat. Also, if you run clique, clique flies over it.
Also, I do run Moat... in my sideboard. I run Moat in the sideboard because it's great against Goblins, and a few other matchups.
I've tried Esper Charm before, and it was ultimately not worth it. The utility is absolutely amazing, but a 3cc draw 2 is awful, and the color requirements make it just as difficult to cast as Predict (as a draw 2), if not harder. Also, replacing Predict with it drops my 2cc curve down too low; having 3cc spells for Counterbalance is great, but there are far more spells played at the 2cc range than 3cc, so having a larger 2cc density is vital for successfully playing with Counterbalance.Has anyone who runs a UWb list tested Esper Charm? I know it has a demanding cost, but it's chock-full of utility.
This is completely false. Shackles most definitely creates card advantage. If they aren't overcommitting because it's on the board, it's virtual card advantage, and if they are overcommitting to push damage through, then it's actual card advantage. Either way, over the course of the game against aggro, Shackles nets a large amount of card advantage. It becomes even more apparent when you have more than 1 Shackles in play.Elspeth and Shackles rarely create CA. Moreover there a a lot of decks out there which turn YOUR Swords, Shacklettes, Elspeth, O.Ring into blanks!
Elspeth can create card advantage too. Chump blocking with 1/1's isn't, but trading with 1/1 Goblins is, or having enough 1/1's to trade with a Kird Ape is. Against the control mirror, if my opponent is digging for removal spells to stop the bleeding from a 4/4 flier, Elspeth is again creating card advantage. Elspeth doesn't necessarily need to create card advantage though; that's not why she's in here.
What tribal matchup? And are you talking strictly about preboard games, or both preboard and postboard? After I bring in 4 Peacekeeper against Merfolk, that matchup is alot better than 50/50.Shackles is the best card in the deck. Every game I won was off the back of shackles. No shackles= gameloss against tribal. This deck still doesn't feel "broken" enough. But being able to be 50/50 against tribal is a very big achievement IMO for a countertop deck.
The Junk matchup varies slightly since the lists vary. The Junk decks with light threat density's are usually pretty good. Even if they hit me with a Thoughtseize and a Hymn, I still run enough draw and removal to hit another removal spell to answer their fatty. Elspeth and Jace are fantastic in the matchup too, and their manabase attack is much less effective against me than a deck like Landstill. If I keep the board clear long enough to drop a CounterTop lock, it's usually gg from there, even if they eventually are able to destroy it with Vindicate; I've gained massive card advantage in the meantime, and it becomes extremely difficult for them to come back from that.I understand that CB @ 2,3 is good. I worry a bit about the few turns before that comes online, but most of all I think that match up should be included in the primer for today's metagame. The discard and Confidant seem to be the only real issue, but they are real issues for many CB decks.
Not to be rude, but I'd rather get a more definitive answer from the OP than annecdotal evidence from someone else. Not that I don't believe you or anything.
Run either Wrath of God, or Humility.I was planning to be there and I think I have fairly good chances of qualifying but I could really use some advice as what to play instead of moats.
Wrath of God is good against them because Shackles prevents them from being aggressive when they attack and forces them to overcommit. If you then Wrath them before they can alpha strike, it's probably gg from there. Without a Shackles, WoG can still help slow their development down while you establish control over the gamestate.
Humility shuts off their ability to gain card advantage with Matron and Ringleader, which is important over the long haul. They still can swing with a bunch of 1/1's, but a bunch of overcosted vanilla 1/1's is alot easier to deal with, especially with a Shackles on the board. Humility + Shackles is usually gg.
That's arguable. Tarmogoyf is a great wall against Goblins, and it is way more mana efficient than Shackles, but it's alot easier for them to deal with. Blocking a single Goblin a turn isn't bad, but Shackles has the ability to steal a 2/2 to trade with a 2/2, untap it next turn to steal a 1/1 to trade with a 1/1, etc. At that rate, Shackles is killing 2 Goblins a turn, whereas Tarmogoyf would only be killing 1 Goblin a turn.I don't agree on Shackles, I have found it very slow. I'd rather play green for goyf because goblins really can't deal with a tarmogoyf. Between goyf and all the removal goblins shouldn't be the hardest match up.
However, Goyf and Clique aren't bad cards. I mean, Supreme Blue is another CounterTop Control deck; it's very similar to this deck. That deck has put up impressive results in the past, and going that route is definitely not a bad one. However, I like the gameplan that this deck has, and so I prefer to run my Planeswalker's and Shackles instead of Goyf and Clique.
Sorry for the double post, but the other post was too long to make a seperate unrelated edit.
Anyway, I didn't touch on this too much in the primer, and maybe I should add it, but...
This deck is almost like a Stax deck. The cards should not be evaluated by themselves. Each card gets stronger as other elements enter into the equation. CounterTop on its own, or Shackles on its own, are incredibly strong. However, when you combine the two, they become that much stronger; now you're opponent is having difficulty resolving spells, and when they do get a creature to stick, it gets stolen by Shackles. CounterTop will then keep additional guys off the board, making it extremely difficult for the opponent to apply pressure.
Another example would be Shackles and Elspeth against Goblins. Shackles by itself won't stop a Goblins player from either pushing damage through at the cost of card disadvantage, or dropping guys without swinging while waiting for an alpha strike. Combined with an Elspeth making a swarm of 1/1's tokens that will eventually become indestructible, it becomes difficult for the Goblins player to amass enough Goblins to alpha strike or to push enough damage through. Time is ticking, because once that Elspeth hits ultimate, swarms of indestructible 1/1 tokens + Shackles will make it impossible to break through. And if another Shackles comes down during that time? You get my point.
Between the Planeswalker's, Shackles, and CounterTop, the deck amasses permanent-based control solutions that stick around and continue to add value. When combined together, they become exponentially stronger. As more and more accumulate into play, the lock becomes stronger and stronger until the gamestate reaches the point where either the opponent concedes, or they simply have no way of coming back and the game eventually ends shortly thereafter. When this deck wins, it typically does so in dominating fashion. For me personally, I love that feeling.
The Superfriends name for this deck is such a good way to describe the deck. Jace by himself is strong, but Jace beside Elspeth is stronger. Superfriends doesn't just apply to Jace and Elspeth, but also Counterbalance and Shackles. Even my card quality enabler, Top, sticks around turn after turn making sure I'm drawing the best of the best, and obviously gets alot stronger beside Counterbalance.
EDIT: Even the sideboard is attempting to do the same thing. Aura of Silence, Moat, Peacekeeper, Meddling Mage, and Pithing Needle's are all permanents that come down, remain in play, and act as a lock piece. Of course, Needle only locks down [up to] 4 of a specific cards activated abilities (Factory can still tap for mana), and Meddling can only lock down [up to] 4 of a specific card, but they still lock those cards down. Meddling Mage on its lonesome won't stop combo, but when the combination of CounterTop and Meddling Mage come together, for example... you get my drift. Aura of Silence can soft lock artifacts/enchantments from getting into play, at least slowing them down enough that I can deal with them with Counterspell, Oblivion Ring, or even the Aura itself. Moat locks down all non-fliers from attacking, and Peacekeeper locks down all creatures from attacking.
I hope this deck gets the much needed attention it deserves. The metagame is ready for a strong control deck to re-enter the format, and I believe this deck is more than capable of being the formats premier control deck like Landstill was a few years ago.
Ok well in terms of speed we can agree it is slower than Firespout and the same speed of Wrath. Another issue is that if you are facing any GW deck, it is basically useless. Pridemage kills it every time. With that in mind, the card really only excels against tribal. So if you aren't facing a tribal heavy format. It is definitely the first card you would switch around.
It's slower than Firespout against small aggro, sure. Firespout is useless at stopping those Goyf's and Knight's that are turning sideways, though.Ok well in terms of speed we can agree it is slower than Firespout and the same speed of Wrath. Another issue is that if you are facing any GW deck, it is basically useless. Pridemage kills it every time. With that in mind, the card really only excels against tribal. So if you aren't facing a tribal heavy format. It is definitely the first card you would switch around.
Arguably, Shackles can be faster than Wrath if the deck can't hit 2WW by turn 4, whether that's because of the deck itself or because of the opponent (Stifle/Waste, etc). However, I'll concede that both spells don't have an effect until turn 4 at the earliest.
How is Shackles useless against any GW deck? If the opponent just so happens to have Qasali before I get any use out of Shackles, it's still trading 1-for-1 with a Qasali Pridemage, so it's costing the same amount of mana as Oblivion Ring to remove that Qasali. That's worst case scenario. Even still, that's 1 less Qasali for my Counterbalance or next Shackles. If I manage to either keep Qasali off the table, Swords the Qasali before they have the mana to activate, or they simply don't see Qasali while it's relevant, Shackles is absolutely amazing against GW. The presence of Qasali is absolutely no reason to not run Shackles, period.
That's almost like saying that running Counterbalance is bad because Qasali can hit it, minus the fact that CounterTop can usually protect itself by preventing Qasali from coming into play, but that's not always the case (they either have one out prior to, or I happen to not have a 2cc card on top, or they have a GSZ to sneak it into play).
Shackles excels against all aggro, with the exception of super huge fatties like Emrakul and untargetable creatures like Nimble Mongoose. It truly accels against tribal, which happens to be fantastic since that matchup has historically been the worst matchup for control decks (at least in this format) since Vial Goblins circa 2004-ish.
With or without Shackles, this deck pounds the shit out of G/W decks. Have you done any gauntlet playtesting with this deck to back up why Shackles should really not be included? Or are you basing your opinion of Shackles with experiences from other decks? Shackles shores up a huge hole that this deck has (Vial Aggro). Matchups like G/W were (and still are) highly favorable, so cutting Shackles because it's not as good against G/W as it is against Vial Aggro is nonsense.
Trust me, when I praise a card highly, it's not because it's a pet card of mine. This isn't a deck I tossed together a week ago, this deck has been a slow and constant deckbuilding project of mine for the last few years. The decklist that you see in the primer is the evolution of years of fine tuning.
Now I'm not trying to stifle innovation in any way, shape, or form. I'm not trying to toot my own horn, and I'm not out to criticize or offend anyone either. But if you're going to make an argument against a major pillar of this deck, you'll need more than just a few corner case scenarios where that pillar is not as good as something else.
I've taken into account all of the major archteype designs of the format with this deck, and I've played against literally everything. If something is less spectacular in one matchup (like Counterbalance vs Vial Aggro), it's because it's an all-star in other matchups. Everything is blended together in a way that gives the deck adequate answers to nearly everything; Shackles vs Vial Aggro, CounteTop vs Combo, etc.
If you happen to find a really bad matchup where there are several cards that are really bad against that matchup, that's the sort of thing I'd like to see discussed. Telling me that Shackles is bad because it's bad in one of my good matchups, when it's amazing in one of my otherwise bad matchups, isn't innovation.
I hope this post lays the anti-Shackles sentiments to rest. And no hard feelings please. Carry on.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)