[Deck] Eva_Blue

[klaus]

Eva_Blue definitely parallels UGb-Threshold. The major difference to me is (and this is not supposed to sound arrogant..) that it is slightly more aggro (Stalker) and slightly more controlish (Deed, EE+Trinket).
I couldn't mws-test it thoroughly since I'm a mac user now:rolleyes:, I want to take this to an upcoming tournament and feel it needs some more tweaking, so fire away!

Eva-Blue (Oct. 2008)

4 Tarmogoyf
3 Tombstalker
1 Trinketmage------------debatable choice: Trinket sort of replaces Top#3 and creates a mini-toolbox (EE#2,Top#3,Crypt#4), while being the 3rd 3cmc (2 Deed) for CB. - I definitely don't want more than 1 T.mage because of his lack of speed.

4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm

4 Force of Will
4 Thoughtseize------------instead of 3 Spellsnare and Daze#4
3 Daze
3 Counterbalance
2 Sensei's Divining Top--probably should be a 3-of..

4 Smother
2 Pernicious Deed
1 Engineered Explosives
--> I like this mini sweeper suite, do you?

Land:
4 P. Delta
3 Floodedstrand
1 Bloodstained Mire--fetching the basic swamp_8 fetchies for Stalker
3 Underground Sea
3 Tropical Island
1 Bayou---------------makes the manabase semi-extirpate-proof, not sure about it's definite inclusion..
1 Island
1 Swamp
3 Wasteland----------not perfect here but making Daze playable

SB:
3-4 Krosan Grip
3-4 Blue Elemental Blast
3-4 Diabolic Edict...........(Yap!)
3 Tormod's Crypt
0-3 Flex Slots -----------(Suggestions?..)

Thx 4 reading!
Klaus.

[The Rack]

I think if you are going to run a trinket mage toolbox you should up them to 3 for the 3cc for counterbalance and for consistency purposes. Having 1 untutorable creature that tutors for more stuff isn't that solid imo. I'm not exactly sure what to drop for 3 Mages but I wouldn' run less than 3 in a deck. My 2 cents.

[Aggro_zombies]

Black and Trinket Mage, but no Executioner's Capsule? Seems weak.

[dude 666]

Since you don't have a very aggressive gameplan, I'd cut a trinket mage, a ponder, a land, and a smother for 4x dark confidant. Or, you could cut the countertop engine entirely and play confidant and spell snare and make it more like eva green.

I don't see what advantages this has over UGb Thresh. You've replaced geese with tombstalkers and trinket mage. Deed and EE take space away from the counterbalance engine and slow the deck down. The more I think about it though, the less I like trinket mage in here.

That's all I can think of, I just don't see how it improves on anything.

[klaus]

Black and Trinket Mage, but no Executioner's Capsule? Seems weak.
Capsule is weak without Academy Ruins, which again is unplayable here.


Since you don't have a very aggressive gameplan, I'd cut a trinket mage, a ponder, a land, and a smother for 4x dark confidant.
I don't see what advantages this has over UGb Thresh. You've replaced geese with tombstalkers and trinket mage.

Bob+3 Stalkers= not synergistic.
And yeah Trinket is odd as a on-of but shouldnt be dismissed too quickly.

[Mantis]

First of I totally miss the comparison between this deck and Eva Green which seems to be much more aggressive. You have actually developed an archetype we haven't really seen before (well perhaps it can be compared to DreadStill), as explained below.

From my observations on this decklist it seems this deck can assume two plans, which I'm going to name the control plan and the tempo plan. Which plan the deck will assume depends on the opening hand and the opposing deck. The control plan is characterized by holding back Goyf, setting up Counterbalance/Top and using Deed.
The tempo plan is Daze, Goyf followed by Smother and using Wasteland.
Anyway, the plans can blend together and you can shift gears, so that seems very desirable. While a lot of decks go all in on their tempo plan and the opponent manages to establish control they roll over, you can switch over to the control plan.
Basically what I'm saying, the deck has a strong early and lategame.
Anyway, if I am completely off (which might be true as I haven't tested the deck) just say so.

That in mind, the deck looks very versatile, so that's good.

I've got one question though; why do you play Deed over EE? EE can come down earlier to hit CC = 2 and it's easier to get the mana for EE to remove Moon effects. It can also hit CC = 3 stuff while sparing your Counterbalance and Goyf.

He doesn't need Capsule as Engineered Explosives is there to catch anything.

Good luck on the deck,
Mantis.

[darkalucard]

I've been playing a deck with a simular concept and the problem is that the only good threats i can find are Goyf and Stalker.

That is only 7x Threats... while decks like Eva Green and Tombstone play more threats.
They usually play 10x Threats, Eva has Nantuko and Tombstone has Doran... so what does a Blue deck have? (Tog's not good enough to run three)

[klaus]

That in mind, the deck looks very versatile, so that's good.

Thx for the first positive feedback :smile:


I've got one question though; why do you play Deed over EE? EE can come down earlier to hit CC = 2 and it's easier to get the mana for EE to remove Moon effects. It can also hit CC = 3 stuff while sparing your Counterbalance and Goyf.


I"ve thought about EE VS Deed and came to the conclusion that some sort of split should be optimal. The *favorEE-arguments* you pointed out are all correct. What you didnt mention though is Deed's superior sweeper function, which supports anti-aggro strategies (being able to hit Vial, Pily and Warchief with 1 spell is nice). As well as anti-permanent-heayy strategies (being able to eat Crucible, Defense Grid and Chalice and the likes). Since I am running 7 2CMC permantents (not counting Top) 2 Deed should be max, though.


I've been playing a deck with a simular concept and the problem is that the only good threats i can find are Goyf and Stalker.
That is only 7x Threats... while decks like Eva Green and Tombstone play more threats.

You're right about Eva Blue running few dmg-threats. But..a deck does not neccessarily need more than 5 "real" threats. Look at ITF, Landstill, MUC etc.. etc..

[dude 666]

Bob + 3 stalkers is more than fine, and I'm not even taking into consideration that you play top. You need a way to draw into more threats since you play so few.

Also, you didn't answer the questions pertaining to this deck's superiority over UGb thresh or ITF. The only difference I see is tombstalker, trinket mage, and pernicious deed. Can you please explain what these additions are supposed to improve upon? I'm not trying to bash the deck, I'm just trying to figure this out.

[Omega]

3 wasteland should be cut


18-19 mana deck would be good

with 1-2 extra space

3rd Top
3rd deed
4th daze
4th tombstalker (not sure if itsa good idea)
1-2 rushing river or an out against Moon effect

[Isamaru]

Daze seems really bad in here. I think you should play Discard instead in order to force them to overcommit to the board before you Deed. Countermagic attempts to keep things off the board, but you're clearing it anyway, so why not do something more powerful with that one card than hopefully trading 1 for 1.

I'd play 4x Augur of Skulls over Daze. They're ridiculously easy on the mana base, they live through a Deed if you want, and can block a Goyf indefinitely.

Then Thoughtseize could be dropped down to 2-3x giving you room for the 3rd Top or whatever else you're trying to fit.

[bigbear102]

Seems like if you're looking for Blue beaters, Serendib would be a decent call, I doubt that you want Sea Drake.

Another option is possibly Vexing Sphinx, although you don't have a lot of cards you want to discard, it'll dig you deeper for more threats when he does die.

[Captain Hammer]

This is my build of Eva Blue.

10 Fetchland
8 Land

4 Duress
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Portent
4 Vision Charm
4 Stifle
4 Daze
4 Force of Will
2 Misdirection

4 Tombstalker
4 Phyrexian Dreadnought

Vision Charm combos with Phyrexian Dreadnought, combos with Tombstalker, protects Dreadnought by phasing it out, and pitches to FoW and MisD.

Stifle combos with Phyrexian Dreadnought, disrupts storm combo and opposing fetchlands and pitches to FoW and MisD.

I really truly honestly think this is the better approach. It's basically a much faster version of Threshold. Try it out.

[klaus]

Bob + 3 stalkers is more than fine, and I'm not even taking into consideration that you play top. You need a way to draw into more threats since you play so few.

Also, you didn't answer the questions pertaining to this deck's superiority over UGb thresh or ITF. The only difference I see is tombstalker, trinket mage, and pernicious deed. Can you please explain what these additions are supposed to improve upon? I'm not trying to bash the deck, I'm just trying to figure this out.

EE, Deed, CB/Top = all CA spells. I don't feel Bob belongs in here, esp. since he's always a slow investment.

As for the advantages over ITF (those arguments are obv. semi-subjective):
7 dmg threats and a faster overall/setup (Thoughtseize, Ponder etc.) allow you a more aggressive playstyle, while going a wee bit down on consistency (no Intuitions).


3 wasteland should be cut


18-19 mana deck would be good

with 1-2 extra space

3rd Top
3rd deed
4th daze
4th tombstalker (not sure if itsa good idea)
1-2 rushing river or an out against Moon effect

Your approach seems self-contradictory. Wasteland is the only reason you can successfully run Daze (making it a potential hard counter in the early midgame).
The 3rd Top is an option but I like keeping that lonly Mage in for my mini toolbox.
Deed #3 is questionable. I don't like blowing upo my own stuff so it will remain a Deed/EE split.
The mana base doesnt allow Stalker #4 also there's a slight dissynergy with Goyf.
Rushing River is an option but I dont need more maindeckanswers to moon effects.


Advantages over NQG:
In this version: Tombstalker>Mongoose (nough said)


Daze seems really bad in here. I think you should play Discard instead in order to force them to overcommit to the board before you Deed. Countermagic attempts to keep things off the board, but you're clearing it anyway, so why not do something more powerful with that one card than hopefully trading 1 for 1.

I'd play 4x Augur of Skulls over Daze. They're ridiculously easy on the mana base, they live through a Deed if you want, and can block a Goyf indefinitely.

Then Thoughtseize could be dropped down to 2-3x giving you room for the 3rd Top or whatever else you're trying to fit.

Since the deck has a tempo setup (I put down major threats early, counter your counter attempt with Daze/FOW). I'm not yet willing to drop Daze for good. (Also 1 T. Mage, 1 EE and 2 Deed are the only spells beyond cmc2).
Plus I already have enough 1drops.


This is my build of Eva Blue.

10 Fetchland
8 Land

4 Duress
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Portent
4 Vision Charm
4 Stifle
4 Daze
4 Force of Will
2 Misdirection

4 Tombstalker
4 Phyrexian Dreadnought

Vision Charm combos with Phyrexian Dreadnought, combos with Tombstalker, protects Dreadnought by phasing it out, and pitches to FoW and MisD.

Stifle combos with Phyrexian Dreadnought, disrupts storm combo and opposing fetchlands and pitches to FoW and MisD.

I really truly honestly think this is the better approach. It's basically a much faster version of Threshold. Try it out.


I like the idea of those 'Bigguns' in 1 deck. But this is taking the whole concept in a different direction.

[Illissius]

This is my build of Eva Blue.

10 Fetchland
8 Land

4 Duress
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Portent
4 Vision Charm
4 Stifle
4 Daze
4 Force of Will
2 Misdirection

4 Tombstalker
4 Phyrexian Dreadnought


I wonder why this seems familiar (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10307).

[Koala]

This is the list i have been using...

3 Trinket Mage
3 DreadNought
4 Stifle
2 Tombstalker
4 Goyf
4 FoW
4 Daze
1 E.Explosives
1 Sensei Top
4 B.Storm
1 Wipe away
3 Duress
3 Smother
1 Pernicious Deed
1 Ex. Capsule

19 lands + 1 academy ruins


SB

2 P.Deed
3 Tormod's Crypt
2 Trick bind
1 T.Mage
1 Dread nought
1 E.Truth
X xxxxxxx

[darkalucard]

Instead of running:

4x Smother (Dead vs allot of creatures and doesn't kill Goblin Lackey)

Why not more versatile removal like:

3x Snuff Out
2x Diabolic Edict

or

3x Innocent Blood
2x Smother

This way if your removal is dead vs a deck only half of it will be dead and at least the other half is good. Where 4x Smother could be almost 4 dead cards against something random since you cannot predict what decks you will face.

[klaus]

Instead of running:

4x Smother (Dead vs allot of creatures and doesn't kill Goblin Lackey)

Why not more versatile removal like:
3x Snuff Out
2x Diabolic Edict
or
3x Innocent Blood
2x Smother

This way if your removal is dead vs a deck only half of it will be dead and at least the other half is good. Where 4x Smother could be almost 4 dead cards against something random since you cannot predict what decks you will face.

As you might have discovered, I run 3-4 Edicts in the side that should take care of aggro builds/big creature decks. For Lackey I have 3-4 BEB (also, smother works just fine on the play).

As for Snuff Out, EvaBlue simply is not aggro enough to not care about 4dmg, don't you agree?

[darkalucard]

So I guess you do only need a turn 1 removal against goblins but still I personally would at least run a split between various removal than 4x Smother even though it is probably the best black removal spell. Anyways..

What about:

UB

Tidehollow Strix

Artifact Creature - Bird

Flying, Deathtouch

2/1

It can be a form of removal in that it kills any creature or it is a removal magnet that clears the way for your real threats.

Also against some decks it can actually go all the way, expecially since it has evasion.

This card could help b/c it can play both roles control and aggro in that it is removal and can help the deck go aggro when the deck needs to switch roles. This deck seems ment to be all about switching between control and aggro, if not this card then maybe another. I still think a deck like this needs +3 more threats.

[FoolofaTook]

First of I totally miss the comparison between this deck and Eva Green which seems to be much more aggressive. You have actually developed an archetype we haven't really seen before (well perhaps it can be compared to DreadStill), as explained below.

It definitely reminds me of Dreadstill, although with less counter ability because it doesn't run Stifle. Eva Green has twice the number of threats that this does, with 8 blue filter replacing them here.

The Thoughtseizes seem weak because they're not likely to be immediately followed up by fast tempo support. Too many openings will be turn 1 Thoughtseize for nothing decisive, followed by turns of quiesence (Ponder turn 2, followed by dropping an SDT turn 3 as example) as the deck struggles to get to the mid-game in a strong position. Thoughtseize works well in very active decks and much less well in decks looking to build a controlling position in the mid-game.

[Captain Hammer]

Tidehollow Strix is a VERY interesting idea.

I didn't realize that it has both flying and deathtouch.

Being able to kill both Goyfs, Dreadnoughts and Tombstalkers alike AND being a solid beater is a hell of a combination.

[klaus]

It definitely reminds me of Dreadstill, although with less counter ability because it doesn't run Stifle. Eva Green has twice the number of threats that this does, with 8 blue filter replacing them here.

The Thoughtseizes seem weak because they're not likely to be immediately followed up by fast tempo support. Too many openings will be turn 1 Thoughtseize for nothing decisive...
Thoughtseize is the best turn 1 play most decks supporting black could possibly do, really.
Common turn 2 plays (as Thoughtseize followups) include CB, Tarmogoyf, BS and fetch, etc.. with a high chance of holding additional counter backup.


...the deck struggles to get to the mid-game in a strong position.
This deck might struggle to aquire control till the mid-game against some archetypes (read: aggro, aggro control). But that's where the sideboard comes in.


Tidehollow Strix is a VERY interesting idea.
I didn't realize that it has both flying and deathtouch.
Being able to kill both Goyfs, Dreadnoughts and Tombstalkers alike AND being a solid beater is a hell of a combination.

The card seems nice at first sight. The reason I hesitate to even test it thoroughly is that it isn't aggro enough. I'd rather add the 4th Tombstalker I guess. But who knows I could be way off on this..

[darkalucard]

The card seems nice at first sight. The reason I hesitate to even test it thoroughly is that it isn't aggro enough. I'd rather add the 4th Tombstalker I guess. But who knows I could be way off on this..

Somebody please test the card... I'm lazy.

[urdjur]

A quick experience with Strix from the SoA prerelease is that it isn't removal at all. Many U/B/x lists tried to run it as removal because they didn't get enough in red or white, but all he does is draw removal from the opponent instead. You'd have to rely on counter-top to protect him from removal, just so you can use a 1-toughness 2cc creature that basically says "as long as ~ is untapped, Tarmogoyf won't attack".

It might be good in something like Ub Fish, but don't think for a second that it will work as removal.

[klaus]

A quick experience with Strix from the SoA prerelease is that it isn't removal at all. Many U/B/x lists tried to run it as removal because they didn't get enough in red or white, but all he does is draw removal from the opponent instead. You'd have to rely on counter-top to protect him from removal, just so you can use a 1-toughness 2cc creature that basically says "as long as ~ is untapped, Tarmogoyf won't attack".

It might be good in something like Ub Fish, but don't think for a second that it will work as removal.

I 2nd your analysis & assumptions. (Maybe because I, too am too lazy to test it:tongue: )