Printable View
lol dammnnn straight ^. New Elspeth is the nuts in control, better than jace even cause jace got nothin on elspeth 2.0. It's just slow you know but our deck is full of answers anyways and we win by making our land drops plus our win cons shine when we have 4 + lands anyways so i'd say YES new elspeth is worth testing. Maybe even running 1 of each for the benefit of both... too bad its already hitting 40 dollars... wtf gayness
btw who is shake
-UW%28x%29-Landstill&p=486511&viewfull=1#post486511]Post updated, take a look.
Ajani vengeant is not an option in the control mirror, too? And it's good against a good variety of other Mu's too... I think we have cheaper ways to deal with jace and counterbalance... Sure IF he its the ground in the control mirror she is the nuts, but the old one is amazing too... I don't know, it does deserve a test I think, but I'm not really fond of her in terms of verasility, on the paper.
@ Gustha:
gratz on the finish.
+1 on that Tropical. It has never disappointed me: boosting EE and Firespout (which you should have sided in VS Zoo btw) and giving you Grip which is most needed against CB.dec which rarely features Wastelands.
Also: +1 on Jace #3 ;-)
--
If Ajani was good, don't you think he'd deserve a MD spot? (I got 1)
I do like Shackles, too and have one in the MD atm. Shackles #2 is an option indeed, though. Especially so, since it's a wincon.
Firespout is a meta call for sure - in my last tournament, I didn't really need it. So moving it to the SB could be a good move.
-
I'm currently experimenting with a Thopter combo inclusion - with semi satisfactory results though.
My current SB looks like this:
2 Faerie Macabre (still good imo)
2 Relic
1 Crypt
2 REB
2 Grip
1 Firespout (2/3 in the MD)
1 Path
3 Spell Pierce
1 flex slot
Finks have always treated me well but I've won most Aggro games without them, too. (Jace is the NUTZ VS Burnish decks). Give it shot and cut them, see what you can do with those extra slots ;-)
@klaus: thanks!
+1 on tropical and jace, of course. It was just a metagame choice, turns out tropical island >>> eternal dragons, and I simply can switch 1 island and 1 fetch in manadenial/nonmanadenial metagames.
As for what concerns Fspout, I've recently become very disappointed with them. FS agains flyers is good only vs faeries, and they have wasteland and stifle. I had them in the sb because I wanted to kick the ass out of every tribal decks and have something vs zombie tokens. I didn't face dredge nor merfolk, but I'm sure I would've sided them in against a more creature-heavy zoo and merfolk and goblin. Against that particular build of punishing zoo, shackles and spot removal were more than enoughe to keep my life total clean, and some helix by ajani would've helped too. I also love kitchen finks because opponents usually side out swords and thus i am able to go on offensive early against many decks, which diluite their game plan to stop our most expensive threats and they find themselves unable to deal with a fast clock as double finks on t3, with ajani clearing the way with helixes or simply denying resources, and shackles turning their creatures against them. Thus, in g2, they're facing a little more angry aggrocontrollish deck with a solid early game and a much more solid late game. (see uw tempo match: 8-turns win with alpha strike, almost a record I think).
Does ajani deserves a MD slot again? I think the answer is yes and no. I sided him in nearly every ruond, it seems. But that's it, opponents just aren't prepared for it to come in, and think to adopt a certain game plan against landstill. When they face ajani it's just: "oh, fuck, i was totally unprepared, now I'm gonna die with pain!" It's just another force-eater, wingamer, 4cc bomb, jace-raper in the sb, mainly because I hadn't the 3rd jace. Provided that next time I'll play with 3 jaces no matter what, I would probably still be playing him as a 2-of. Due that I expected lots of controllish decks at the upper tables, I opted for vendilion clique instead, and wanted a second THAT badly. Clogging up the 4cc slot is also dangerous because of the new cb.deck feat jace, that can contrast our wincons by leaving jace on top.
Also, i think you can switch pierce with negate, having a hard counter to bring in vs enchantress as well as combo and the control mirror (and NOprog, replacing some counterspell) and of course lands/loam, is really good.
I agree the deck is not that stylish and the sideboard may look a little horrid, but that was just see the metagame - put up the deck in 15 minutes before the tournament and win :) After the tournament I would probably have left out FS's for grips.
I've seen your PM, thanks, I have some work to do now, I'll respond later!
Grats Gustha,
I personally have upped to 3 Jace and not regretted it. 4 Jace is clunky and too excessive but 3 Jace makes you see them at 4 lands almost all the time with Brainstorms, and that's what I want to see. I personally use his Brainstorm ability more if my opponents don't play any bolts.dec. The extra best card a turn is super in control with a good board. With a bad board I fateseal to keep him up and my life in check as they try hard to get rid of him.
I'm not too sold on Shackles, trust me though, I love Shackles a ton but for my manabase of 3 Waste + Ruins + 4 Mishra's + 2 Plains, I don't get a chance to use it against much except for non-goyfs. I guess that's what you really need shackles for anyway: anything non-goyf e.g. merfolks/goblins. Shackles wrecks those decks. I'll give it a try again. Just StP anything bigger e.g. Goyfs.
I went undefeated 4-0 at my local tourney but in the top4 I lost to reanimator. I was playing UWr(b) Scepterchant and I think I had a decent chance against reanimator but my only graveyard hate that day was 2 Extirpate. Regardless, I beat the same reanimator guy in round 2 but lost to him in top4. I definitely made a ton of mistakes e.g. not counterspelling entomb thinking that the reanimation spell is more dangerous but forgetting that leaving creatures in the yard is more dangerous since he can reanimate them with any reanimation spells he drew. Also, since I made the deck in 30min as I woke up late before the tourney, my sideboard was subpar (missing diabolic edict). He told me that it made no difference sine he'll just reanimate again, but from my games against him, Edict would have made all the difference in grabbing two more turns (edict can also be sceptered).
My list was:
4 Flooded Strand
2 Polluted Delta
1 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
2 Plains
2 Island
1 Academy Ruins
4 Mishra's Factory
3 Wasteland
3 Tundra
1 ETutor
4 Brainstorm
3 Standstill
3 Orim's Chant
2 Scepter
3 Jace
2 Elspeth
2 Crucible
4 Counterspell
2 Cunning Wish
4 Force of Will
3 EE
4 StP
Changes I'll be making in the future:
-1 Chant, +1 Standstill
+1 HUMILITY (this is what I needed against most of my troublesome matches, 1 ETutor fetches this nicely, and 2 Wish as well).
I'm going to tinker in dropping red, and keep it UWb with black sideboard cards against aggro instead of the 3firespout/2REB i was running.
All in all, I think I had the chance to do better next time. The deck strategy with Chants is solid in games 1, and still wins games 2/3, even without Chants.
I am shakeQuote:
Originally Posted by whiteshepherdman
It is reasonable to be skeptical of the new Elspeth, I was intitally very skeptical of her, but the more I think on the topic the more I like her. The question isn't, is she good enough, but, is she better than Elspeth, Knight Errant? That is the part I'm struggling with.Quote:
Originally Posted by gustha
I gave her the hands down immediately, but I am rethinking her spot again in UWx landstill.
Trends that I observed with Elspeth 1.0 when playing landstill:
1) Great staller against aggro/goyfs. If you're faced against 1 creature, you can keep chumping and digging for answers. However, when faced against 2 or more creatures, she becomes a couple of Fogs as your opponents whittle her down.
2) Wins games (FAST, +3/+3 flying is one of the best)
3) Ultimate is relevant but only used about 10% in most games. I usually just race with +3/+3. Landstill doesn't have a ton of time in most matchups anyway.
Comparing with Elspeth 2.0 on the numbered points:
1) E2.0 is perhaps an even better staller, generating 3 creatures to chump. Her +2 ability can net you some life to stabilize, but it's not too synergistic with factories (involves tapping mana to activate, and sometimes you may need to leave mana untapped. However, noting that E2.0 is 5cmc, by then you should be able to free some mana to use her +2 ability). The only issue with E2.0 is that if you want to ramp her loyalty, you're not getting much by playing landstill even with Factories. You really want to use her -2 first to stabilize a board position, and start stabilizing your life total with her +2 to make it beneficial. Unless you're planning on blowing the board or really need 2-4 life, her first ability is not strong in Landstill until after her -2 has been used. This is the only design flaw I see her if she's played in Landstill.
2) Wins games SLOW. 1/1 soldiers aint too good compared to 4/4 flying ones or 5/5 flying factories. Also NOTE that since it's a -2 ability to generate tokens, you can't spam it unlike E1.0 where you just keep spamming 1/1s or flying attackers. E2.0 will be a more dominant board generator while E1.0 is a more aggresive card. However, three 1/1 soldiers is perhaps much more relevant in most situations in Landstill when faced against aggro, just 1 activation of this will buy about 2-3 turns, and this is huge for a control deck to stabilize.
3) Ultimate is much more relevant in Landstill than E1.0's. Re-usable disk is huge. Not to mention that unlike Disk, she cannot be gripped so she presents a big threat. Either your opponents overextends into counterspell-removal to kill her or they stall with their board, in both situations you win more.
From a brief analysis, we can see how much more defensive a card E2.0 is compared to E1.0, and personally I think this is the selling point of the card in Landstill. Landstill usually requires a defensive strategy before gaining a position to win. For 1 mana more, E2.0 covers much more defense than E1.0. I personally think this is a worthy consideration in Landstill. I personally think the split 3 Jace2.0 and 2 Elspeth 2.0 is great on the curve. Perhaps the 4cc,5cc bombs will be something like:
3 Jace 2.0
2 4cc bombs (FoF/Humility/WoG)
2 Elsepth 2.0
The nice thing about 2.0 is that she fits as a flex slot for traditional slots of Decree and WoG/Disk. I feel that she's a hybrid utility card of Decree + WoG mixed together. The power of Planeswalkers in Landstill is their plethora of abilities that gives the deck additional 'interaction' advantage. Many times a Landstill player can win on the back of a Planeswalker even at a board/card disadvantage because the planeswalker creates more interaction for the landstill players. Instead of just the opponents interacting with the landstill player's hands/life/board, they are now forced to dedicate their resources to answering the planeswalker, and since these planeswalkers dont die easy, it buys time for the Landstill player to set up strategies against those decks. E2.0 to me is potential move towards diversifying strategy interaction and minimizing redundant card slots (she combines effects of E1.0/Decree/Disk all in 1 card).
The important trend to note for which Planeswalkers make it into Landstill are:
1) relevant abilities that defend the player (Elspeth has 1/1 soldiers, Jace 2.0 has bounce or BS into removal/answers, Ajani has Helix and Icy ability)
2) Ultimates that gains a huge board advantage or win games (Elsepth 1.0 not too relevant since it requires another card to abuse this advantage, Ajani ggnub, Jace 2.0 ggfnub)
3) Ease of casting (cmc): E1.0, J2.0, Ajani are all 4cmc. J1.0 was solely played in older lists because it came down much faster.
E2.0 has the strong points for being a contender based on 1), 2). The only issue is 3). However, if we honestly ask ourselves, how many times have we almost won a game on turn 20 but failed in the end because we still did not stabilize? I feel E2.0 not only gives good board position to stabilize with her -2, but she restores the important hp boost with a 2-6pt life gain (on average) from her +2, and her ultimate just resets the board and we all know how resetting the board favors a victory for the landstill player. Her ultimate also hits anything: Artifacts, planeswalkers, enchantments, so it's an answer against any deck in Legacy: enchantress/stax/countertop/progenitus/emrakul etc. I just see her as a WoG on a Planeswalker with two very relevant abilities in the strategies of LAndstill.
Another thing to note that E2.0's ultimate is not cool with J2.0 but her -2 ability really makes her J2.0's best friend.
I think the answer, the more I look to her, is no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Shake
I appreciate crz87 analysis (and good for the list, try dropping black, plague diabolic edict ravenous trap extirpate are good cards to have in the sb, along with thoughtseize/duress - maybe add 1 more wish and pulse sb), but don't agree.
Yes, elspeth knigh errant is a GREAT staller, as long as only 1 creature is on the board. 2 or more creatures are on the board, either you gain a turn to dig for answers while she dies (maybe involving a bolt, so you have Xx1'd youe opponent), or either you have a path/stp/shackles/wrath/humility to stabilize the board again. As long as you can reach the ultimate, no one can ever pass through your soldiers! By spamming tokens, she add loyalty, and that means that every turn you take with her, she becomes more difficult to kill. On the other hand, elspeth2.0 spams 2 tokens, and doing so she fells in bolt range, and that's the primary point of dislike. Against swarm aggro decks, chances are that you go for tokens, they kill all the 3 tokens, you go for tokens again, you kill another 3 tokens, you pump her and she dies. Sure you can trade in the meanwhile, but she'll lose some loyalty in the process and, given her cost, it would be unlikely that you have untapped mana, or you have to path/stp anyway something, things you would've done with E1.0 as well, but having a free mana to do that in the same turns.
Sure, if the board is empty, E2.0 is better than E1.0. If you don't suspect bolt you go for token, pump, chumblock, pump, chumblock disk. Then she fells to 1 loyalty and you're probably facing one creature, ready to attack next turns. You have to invest other resources to keep her alive. And she can't stall forever like E1.0, that keep growing while spamming tokens. She can spam for 2-3 turns, and if they can get rid of the tokens, it's hard times. Sure you can set back your opponent and go -2 -2 +2 -2 +2 -2 +2 -2, but i think elspeth1.0 would've done the same.
Meh, I generally don't know. I think E2.0 is superior to E1.0 only with an empty board, and that means I see her as a great cards against the mirror and thinks like enchantress/stax. She may be also superior in MU's like the aggrocontrollish one, where you tipically can set the opponent back to one creature at turn via multilpe removal spells, and pump the ultimate very easy. But elspeth shines in that MU too, and E2.0 is still a cc5 card, that you have to play around daze, slowing down the deck any longer. I don't think she is better than E1.0 against other aggressive MU's, surely not vs zoo, slow as hell vs merfolk, irrelevant vs goblin. That doesn't mean shea doesnt' deserve a try, but it's a 5cmc card, fck! The fact is, I was skeptical about jace being 4cmc and now I can't leave home without him... Maybe for this new baby will be the same :)
I completely agree. I'm like 99% sure I won't be playing Elspeth 2.0 in my build, but who knows, maybe I'll be proven wrong. But I really like these analyses and I agree with them. The selling point for me is the additional manacost of Elspeth 2.0. It's hard enough to get Elspeth 1.0 to resolve through Stifle, Wasteland, Rishadan Port, Daze, and all that jazz. i don't want to make my opponent's job easier by playing a huge clunky 5 drop that rots out my hand since I can't cast it.
has anyone tried out e 2.0 on mws yet. it would be easier to come to a conclusion if people played the card
Elspeth 2.0 actually races faster than Elspeth 1.0 on a clear board btw. -2 +2 -2 -2 = 1 turn faster than 1.0Quote:
Originally Posted by crz87
Leaving a side, for a while, Elspeth 2.0: Has anybody tested Ghastly Demise as a 2 off? It would be in replace of PtE. I dislike the land drop that it gives to oponent. Off course i'm talking about the UWb version.
There are a couple of things that I really don't like about Demise:
-it doesn't target Tombstalker
-it requires black, a manasource that you usually don't have acces to, in the early
-it requires at least 5 cards in the yard to take out an early Tarmogoyf
I dislike the landdrop of PtE, too, but as a 2off it is still better then Demise in my eyes.
Actually I'd rather consider to play Diabolic Edict and a second USea befor I'm going to play Demise.
Took top 4 (4-0-1) split draw into Top 8 and split Top 4 at my local meta.
List I played:
4 Strand
2 Delta
1 Swamp (Should have been a scrubland against choke)
2 Plains
2 Island
2 Seas
3 Tundra
3 Wasteland
1 Academy Ruins
4 Factory
4 Brainstorm
4 Standstill
2 Cunning Wish
2 Isochron Scepter
1 ETutor
2 Chant
4 Counterspell
4 FoW
4 StP
3 EE
1 Humility
1 Crucible
2 Elspeth
3 Jace
SB:
3 EPlague
3 Extirpate
1 Diabolic Edict
1 Pulse of the Fields
1 Dismantling Blow
3 Negate (Super solid choice against control/enchantress/combo if you play the scepter build)
1 ETutor
1 Path
cant rmb last slot
Can't rmb all my matchups but I know all my game-1s were CRAZY!
Match 1: Jeff with Eva Green
I hate suicide/Land-D decks and eva really does a good job hurting landstill. Jeff's one of the best players in our group so this one's tough. He leads off with a ritual into a janky 1BB 4/4 that gets killed by Elspeth token. Surprisingly that dude gets in there like our classic Negator against control as he disrupts my hand and manabase. I stabilize maintaining card parity at about 5 life when I dropped Humility. We proceed to go card for card: his creatures my removal until I rip a Jace. Being a good player, Jeff sandbags his cards and drops 3 creatures turn after turn, putting the pressure. The following situation over the next ?10 turns were:
He drops 2 creatures (3 creatures on board), I remove a creature, drop Standstill bounce with Jace, maintaining 1 creature with me having a Factory to block (He had wasted 3 Factories so if he drew the 4th Waste for Factory I'd be dead any moment). This series of play repeats itself twice as I chain into Standstill + Removal. So Jace + 1 removal + 1 Standstill won me the game, stabilizing me at 1 health. It was funny I had to hard cast FoW on Gatekeepers twice just so that he only has 1 creature on board. He did draw too many lands so I was lucky he was not applying as much pressure as Eva could
Game 2: -1 Counterspell, -4 Standstill, +3 Negate, +1Path, +1ETutor
My mistake in my sideboarding was: should have kept at least 1 Standstill in. I forgot how I deboarded and Etutor turn 1 for a Standstill but could not find any, so I picked up an EE, that you know was obviously discarded later. That damned 1BB 4/4 got in there again...
Game 3: went to time since game 1 was epic and took forever. Jeff blames me for the draw I blame him for not killing me Game 1!
Match 2: Jon with Enchantress
Why do I get paired against the most annoying matchups that take 2 hours?
Game 1: Epic game. I won't describe every detail but it involves me decking the Enchantress. Towards the end, he could win with Words of War which I counterspelled. He replenishes and I cunnign-wish->Extirpate on Words of War: Hot! He has a couple of Angel tokens that can kill me but I have two EE and a Chant on a stick (I can't target him since he has Leyline of Sanctity in play but I can still kick to fog). He had a Solitary Confinement out and 2 cards in library and 7 cards in hand. I forgot that he won't deck in awhile. So to play safe, I EEed for 3 to get rid of the Confinement, and he died over 2 turns to decking.
Game 2: He mulled to a risky 1 non-basic and leads it off with a Utopia Sprawl. Wasteland hits the land and he was without lands for 3 turns. Jace + Elspeth + Standstill curved out on me and gg.
Match 3: Aggro Loam
Supposedly a tough matchup but for some reason he's playing quite a subpar list. He REBs my Standstill and I get annoyed. Who plays REB maindeck in aggro loam with Chalices??? Who plays REB in aggro loam??
Anyway, he gets the loam going over turns not putting out any threats so I was very happy. As much as I hate the loam engine ongoing, I hate it more when there's a threat on board. He tells me that he does not have goyfs in deck so I'm relieved that it's going to be much favorable for me.
Both game 1/2s involve Jace coming in and winning the game, obviously I'm smart enough to keep FoW reserved on Seismic Assault and not waste them on creatures like a noob control player.
Match 4: Drew with Imperial Recruiter
Game 1: Drewlius on the IR thread on the Source, one of the important figures on tweaking and perfecting the deck, always a pleasure to play against a good friend, and to fight against the hated Blood Moons. He resolved Magus and Blood Mooon. Sweet, and obviously my EEs don't get drawn so this game starts getting epic from here.
The highlight was me ripping a Scepter off the top of my deck like a champ (I had Chant in hand) and 1 basic plains. So I scepter-chanted him out. NOW: This is where you should not concede a matchup even if it seems loseable. Drew did not concede where others would and proceeded to naturally grind me with the grindstone in play (I got the Chant-lock right before he could play Painter after recruiting it). So naturally grinding me, he hits my EEs in my yard :( I have not seen StP at all this game and one grindstone grinded 12 blue cards, leaving me with 4 cards left in the library. Knowing what's left in my deck, I still had a brief hope before losing. It was tough as hell to play under moon since my only hope on surviving is to get my Ruins/EE recursion going so I won't deck myself but Ruins was locked under both Blood Moon and Magus.
I thought for awhile and figured I had an out. I just have to hope that he doesn't have REB against my Wish, which he didn't. So the plan goes:
1) Crucible returning basic Island from Graveyard
2) play Island Cunning Wish->Dismantling Blow hit Blood Moon
3) StP Magus, start recurring EE@1 and not die to decking
4) Drew scoops.
Epic game 1 again, obviously took a god-damn long time
Game 2: He got the moon going again, but Scepter is just that good against Moon.
I got a StP on a Scepter, but he had quite the nutty hand. He plays around Scepter on StP and has double blast in hand to blast the Scepter and have enough mana to grind me with Painter in play.
I let the Painter resolve since I have 2 FoW (no blue cards in hand). If he paints blue, I will have 2 FoW counters in hand pitching Factory and Ruins in hand while having StP/Scepter on board to deal with the Painter. He attempts to blast my Scepter, I FoWed, he blast, I FoWed, and I won this. Was a tight matchup and surprisingly I functioned with entirely colorless mana that game against a good Imperial Painter draw. This is where Scepter would have helped a tough matchup where classical Landstill has to battle through Blood Moons with much more effort.
Match 5: Jeremy with Bant Aggro and we drew into Top8.
I think this is quite a favorable matchup for me but I wanted to do some trading :D
Match 6 (Top 8): Jeff with Eva again:
Why do I have to play against Sinkhole/Waste/Hymn again? Ugh
Game 1: 1BB 4/4 attempts to resolve, I plow it cause I hate him now. His disruption got in there and roflstomped me bad.
Game 2: I won this but can't rmb why, probably just from stabilizing and with Jace.
Game 3: 3 Standstills MD because it's just that good at stabilizing.
This game was a very close one too. I can't rmb too much but that annoying 1BB 4/4 sticks in play as I removed/countered the more troublesome threats (Tstalkers, hippie, goyfs). He hymns in an attempt to discard my Elspeth and I rip lands like pro against his Land-D and hymn misses Elspeth. Elspeth comes in, stalls the game, he draws worse than me since he's not playing blue and I won it after using Elspeth's ultimate and getting in with 6/6 flying factory (double factory to pump).
Top 4: We split Top 4 (Me: UWb Scepterstill, Jeremy: Bant Aggro, ugh can't rmb the other two decks).
Highlights:
- 61 cards as always cause I'm a noob (but really, the 24th land as 61st card has really smoothed my land draws).
- 1 Etutor acting as 5th Standstill, 4th EE, 2nd Humilty, 2nd Crucible, 3rd Scepter. Has been solid maindeck but I would hate to have 2 Etutor MD. Although in a lot of tougher matchups e.g. combo/enchantress I boarded the 2nd ETutor MD and it's important. ETutor MD is not too ideal due to card disadvantage but in matchups where you need the speed to get the relevant items (EE, Scepter), this is where it shines.
- Last week I lost to reanimator after going 4-0 undefeated into top4, made me realize how important Humility was. Also, I had some tough time with no WoG/Humility MD. It's not really needed anymore but I think Humility still steals a ton of games.
- When Elspeth 2 comes out, I will be testing her heavily. Out of most matchups I played, I feel that her 5cmc is still justifiable except against the Suicide decks packing WAY too much Land-D. Stifle is not a huge problem since I can play arond it, but not sinkholes. Many times I was wishing Elspeth 1 dropped more than 1 token so that I can have more room for strategies. When you can only chump 1 Goyf at a time, there is a huge risk of your opponents drawing a 2nd creature and just sealing the game. I was lucky enough that this didn't happen to me too often. I feel the main selling point of playing E2.0 in Landstill is that she holds herself and yourself well without any secondary cards. Elspeth 1 is superior if you can pair her up with a card e.g. StP/Disk/Wrath/Humility, but without any of these, she is weak in stabilizing with her 1/1 soldier. E2.0 will not only buy 3 turns worth of E1.0's 1/1 soliders, she will also stabilize about 4-6 life in the process. All this is huge, and her ultimate is the main reason why I would play her. I'm excited to test her, and I think she'll be in a much more defensive and controllish-Landstill build. Although I am working on a personal control deck that may turn out to fit my playstyle a little more. Not sure yet though, I have yet to find a control deck that fits my playstyle that's better than Landstill.
P.S.
How do I convince a stubborn friend that Landstill has a favorable matchup against Countertop? And I'm not talking about aggro Countertop (Bant, NO). Talking about the Countertop that runs like 6-8 win-conditions (Goyf, Jace, Cliques). It's obvious for us since their creature win-cons are dead to our massive removal, and EE takes care of Countertop easily. With such a deck not applying much pressure, I don't see how it's not a favorable MU for us. The Bant/NO Countertop might be problematic though. It's just one of those friends who have the false believe that Countertop is THE best deck in Legacy. As far as I know, this is not Standard with any best deck. This is an awesome format with lots of diversity in Top8, sometimes janky homebrew decks that eventualy become established decks.
Crz87,
Nice report. Scepter SMASHES blood moon and company.
As for your question about how to convince your friend. You can either beat the hell out of the countertop junk with EEs, OR you can just.let him keep thinking that way and prey on his deck in tournaments. Either way, have fun with your scepters!
Yeah out of perhaps 20 games I played, Scepter was bad in 1-2 of them (i.e. having nothing to imprint). Even imprinting Brainstorm on a Scepter felt good, netting a good card every turn until it is removed.
I personally find aggro loam and eva-greenish decks the most difficult matchups with this decklist.
Do you feel that Scepterstill warrants its own thread? I think the bulk of the deck is still landstill-based so it should belong here, but I feel that only a few people are playing it and it's not deserving enough attention despite being successful in the meta at the moment (from your results and my own personal small tourneys 10-20 people) and seems to be pretty strong 50-50 against game1s in the metafield.
You might want to start a thread and primer if you feel it needs attention and recognition of a different form of Landstill. I'm at least an advocate of it, although I might not play it if I find a more comfortable shell. There are some complaints with the playstyle of the deck that I dislike (i.e. sometimes having to rely on Scepter-Chant to stabilize because those slots can be filled with other bombs that solve certain problems, but I do attest that Scepter-Chant solves those problem just as well, but in a more delaying-strategy than a solve-the-problem-not-the-symptoms manner).
Eh, I would probably say that it doesn't deserve its own thread because I consider it a Landstill deck above all else. During certain swings in the metagame I have certainly considered just swapping out Scepters, Chants, and Fire/Ice, for more traditional Landstill elements and cutting red for black, like you've done. I think it's just a Landstill deck with an unexpected package unlike the usual angle of Humility and WOG and such.
Which brings me to my next point: the ridiculous numbers everybody I know put up with the deck, yet so few people seem willing to pick it up. It's never really bothered me because it always allowed me to run under the radar and encounter little to no hate because of it. It's just an interesting observation my friends and I have laughed about for the past few years while we clean up local tourneys with the deck. It's probably just differing play styles that keep people away from the deck just like it's my play style that makes me want to desire to play this and next to nothing else. (I'll be honest though, I've picked up Doomsday from time to time for the surprise factor.)
I don't play U/W/x Landstill but U/B/g Landstill, but regardless I've experienced the same reactions since I built it last month: People surprised I didn't pick up one of the many aggro or combo decks that are more popular, and asking "Why do you want to play THAT deck?" in that cocky tone of voice. Since no one plays Landstill really, there's no presence in Top 8's relative to the amount of T8's you see by other decks. Yet it is insanely strong with only a few bad match ups that aren't too terrible.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiiMagic
The number of people who like to goldfish or play dudes hoping to win, far outnumber the amount of people who enjoy playing reactive style decks that enjoy the long game.
Yupp I agree, Landstill has fallen off the radar and the common people who don't engage in these decks scream out "Countertop is the best deck in the format", and I chuckle to myself.
I do agree that Countertop is the best performing deck in terms of matchups against various forms of decks. It is also much easier to play than other decks. Countertop is stressful but playing it correctly ain't too hard. Decks without the benefit of such win-easy games strategies e.g. Landstill (control deck that doesn't rely on a win-engine like Countertop) has a much higher learning curve.
It's not for me to say that Landstill is a tough deck to master, that's just the bare facts. From underperforming with the deck months/years ago to recently doing well, all I can say is that I have finally understood the important elements of control: Not everything needs to be FoW'd, countered, removed etc. Everything in a pure control deck without cheap-wins (countertop lol) involves a lot of futuresight and planning, knowing the matchup and opponents, weighing the costs and benefits on letting certain spells resolved to be dealt with later, roughly calculating the chances you draw into future answers/removals. Each decision costs you. Some decisions are pretty straightfoward: plow that lackey, EE a board of 1/1s, but others involve a much tougher choice.
I think the main barrier currently to playing Landstill is the fact that it's a tough deck to master, and there isn't really a good netdeck list out there. The UBg versions have somewhat streamlined, while the UWx versions are still in the fluid zone. Personally I find the fluidity of UWx a big attraction. I have been appealed by UBg to test out the raw power of Pernicious Deed and 4 Jace, but I feel that all in all, playing UWx build tends to teach me a lot more about control in the format. These lessons also tend to let me experiment some form of personal control decks (most of them being failures, still trying hard to work a 27 land Maze + Mox diamond control deck in, not working out but a list seems to be brewing up with Elspeth 2).
And in all honesty, Landstill is a great deck in today's format. We are no longer plagued by once-popular suicide decks, and most decks have slowed down by 0.5-1turn, making Counterspell much more relevant and powerful than before. The slowing down of combo by 0.5-1 turn also gives the deck a much more favorable position in a big meta. I used to be scared of bringing Landstill in my local tourney due to combo game 1 and having yet the risk to lose game 2/3 since it is just not as fast as countertop decks packing Dazes. However the format slowing down just that little is a huge boost to this deck, and its diversity of answers and strong 50/50 matchup really makes it a competitive choice for tournaments. The only issue holding back is: "Why do I have to play Landstill, a steep learning curve deck, when I can play other decks that easily place well without that much effort?"
And the control players that do play Landstill know why they play the deck: when played correctly, you shore up most 50/50 matchups to at least 60/40. And you would also probably say "Because creatures suck and I like the challenge to stabilize, and dominate with sheer card and board advantage, and crush your dreams when you thought you would win by hitting me down to 1 life, or close to decking me"
lol
The reason Landstill is not played more (in my opinion) is because there are some hands/series of draws that will just not win against certain matchups/lines of play. Since it is the most reactive deck in the format, digging for answers is a must, but sometimes the answer is not found on top. I will be playing Landstill in every tournament I take seriously for the foreseeable future, but I also understand why others are not playing it. Sometimes it is just nice to force your opponent to "have it," and when they do not, that is a free win. Landstill pretty much does not have that going for it.
@cr87
Congrats on the top 8! However, I disagree with your boarding plan against Eva Green, however:
Why not take out Wish instead of Standstill if you are bringing in Path and Enlightened Tutor? Wish is extremely slow against them and only has one decent target after your boarding plans in the form of Diabolic Edict. Dismantling Blow can answer Choke if they play it, but 3+3 mana is hard to get against Choke, and even harder with their Sinkholes and Wastelands.Quote:
Game 2: -1 Counterspell, -4 Standstill, +3 Negate, +1Path, +1ETutor
Also, Standstill is insane against them, as they generally play out a single threat at a time and they generally don't come down in the at the first few turns of the game, (they want to be playing discard or LD at this phase) so turn two or three Standstill is very achievable.
Edit - Also, Sensei's Divining Top is absurd against Suicide decks if you run into a lot of them.
Yupp I did board out wishes obviously, it's way too slow and nothing much to hate. I actually brought in +3 Negate, -1 Counterspell due to the UU being tough against them.
In the past I ran the 2 Top configuration and that really did best against Suicide decks, but since I'm not expecting much suicide decks (only 1 deck in my meta, and in general suicide won't be too popular in today's meta, i'm playing without tops).
@Have Heart: you hit the heart of the problem: Landstill just doesn't have the oops I win factor. However, I tend to disagree. I believe that all the 4cc bombs in Landstill are an oops-I-win factor. Ever since the printing of Planeswalker, Landstill has a win-condition that is hard to remove outside of Maelstrom Pulse/Vindicate. It doesn't win instantly, but it does win over turns combined with card/board advantage. The difference between landstill's ggfactor and other decks is that ours is not instantaneous, and requires many turns to set up and secure, but once secured, it serves the same purposes as any other ggfactor .e.g NO-Prog, Countertop etc. Jace 2.0's printing has been a tremendous resource and win-condition boost for the deck. We don't have a fast and easy ggfactor compared to other decks, but we still have the win-conditions that are at the same time a resource against your opponent's resources. But you hit the heart of the problem very well. I just wanted to point out from our perspective that we do have a similar win-condition, just that it is developed over a series of many turns and interactions.
I started thinking a bit about my deck after not playing almost the entire summer. I really loved the Ubg deck which seems to be more popular now. However I feel its matchup against vengevine madness isn't too great, and that seems to be the hot deck atm. Because of this I'll just stick to my UWb version. I'm going to try running wish in it though, it's cute :3
My current set-up:
Maindeck: 60
// Card Advantage & Quality: 9
4x Brainstorm
3x Standstill
2x Sensei’s Divining Top
// Removal & Board-Control: 10
4x Swords to Plowshares
1x Path to Exile
2x Engineered Explosives
1x Humility
2x Vindicate
// Counters: 10
4x Force of Will
3x Spell Snare
3x Counterspell
// Win Conditions: 4
2x Elspeth, Knight-Errant
2x Jace, the Mind Sculptor
// Multipurpose: 3
2x Cunning Wish
1x Enlightened Tutor
// Lands: 24
4x Tundra
1x Underground Sea
1x Scrubland
2x Plains
2x Island
4x Flooded Strand
3x Polluted Delta
4x Mishra’s Factory
3x Wasteland
Sideboard: 15
4x Leyline of the Void
3x Engineered Plague
3x Extirpate
1x Enlightened Tutor
1x Pulse of the Fields
1x Tsabo’s Decree
1x Blue Elemental Blast
1x Diabolic Edict
-
The things I'm not quite sure about are:
Mainboard:
- Only 3 Standstills.
- Top.
- Jace.
- E.Tutor targets. Should I try to get a Moat and split 1/1 with humility? Should I run 1/2 humility?
- Cunning Wish. Play 0,2,3?
- 24th Land. I used to play 23, which do you think is right? Possible a trop for Krosan Grip side & EE for 4?
Sideboard:
- Number of Wish/non-Wish Slots.
- The wishboard. I think this can be improved a bit still.
3 Brainstorm can be played but only if your deck is highly redundant. I would probably not do it in your build. 2 SDT, 2 Wish are cards that help you set up and are not able for use immediately. I don't think this deck can function as well without Fact or Fiction. Some people prefer multiple Jaces, I haven't tested that but I guess it apparently worked for UGB players.
That said, I don't think Jace, TMS is necessarily a replacement for Decree of Justice, I still run 3 DoJ and I haven't looked back. Your only source of pure card advantage outside of the singleton Jace is 3 Standstill, and having 3 Decree as a safety blanket for when you drop it does help. It also is another win condition.
I don't think your philosophy on Cunning Wish is necessarily correct, having less cards to board in will decrease your win percentage in a number of matchups post-board to begin with. Having a "catch all" is not as effective sometimes as having the ability to sideboard well with the correct selection. When I played with Cunning Wish a long time ago, I had only 4 wish targets:
Enlightened Tutor
Pulse of the Fields
Ray of Distortion/Return to Dust
Extirpate
Usually that is enough, I had an actual sideboard that consisted of Path to Exiles, Negates, etc. Obviously those can be wished for as well. Some food for thought.
Game-1 often takes a while as well, causing sideboarded games to be of lesser importance than with slow decks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morbid-
I don't really want to play too many cards with 4+ manacost. I have 2 Elspeth, 1 Jace, 2 WoG, 2 Humility = 7 atm. FoF & DoJ are also 4+ and I don't really want to cut any of those other cards except maybe for 1 humility because of the wishable E.Tutor. Speaking of which, should I drop a humility for the 4th brainstorm, which I guess would be better to have after all (also increasing blue count to 20).
The only thing I wouldn't mind having an extra normal sb card against is storm, but without mystical that matchup has improved a bit, and I don't really want to cut any wish cards (I actually want to play more :P). Some of the cards are also sided in as singletons sometimes, if that matters.
The numbers of this list seem to be really questionable. Your only 4 ofs are FOW and STP and your draw suite doesn't seem strong enough to allow you to dig for what you might need at the time.
I would NEVER play less than 4 Brainstorms, and I feel like your 4 drop slot is a little heavy with those 7. I'm probably speaking from my bias against Humility, but I'd cut both of those suckers.
Hi Jamie, choosing card slots for UWb Landstill is a pain indeed and I always end up wasting 1-3 hours on the last 3 slots depending on meta, but a few notes:
4 Brainstorm always. I used to buy the 3 Brainstorm + 2 Top configuration but when you start getting to understand the purpose of Brainstorm in a control deck, it's not to be used freely. Save your Brainstorms ONLY when you need to use it e.g. (dig answers when you don't have answers in hand, set up land drops). Many players in my group enjoy Brainstorming turn 1 which I feel is a weak play since the power of Brainstorm becomes stronger as the game goes on and players' cards decreases. Therefore 4 copies of Brainstorm is a must.
I debate on 3-4 Standstills and despite issues where it cannot be cast favorably sometimes, I stil go with 4. Why? This is what I noticed in Landstill. You lose most of the time because you don't end up stabilizing, you trade cards 1-1 until your opponent wins the top-decking or drawing mode and you don't have enough raw card advantage. However, 4 Standstill is weak if your maindeck isn't tuned to use it. I say 3 i the best amount in a general deck now, but I would go with 4, tune your deck to support it (more paths, decrees, wastelands) etc.
WoG is pretty relevant now although I'm a fan of Humility over WoG for decks with 2 Elspeth and enough removal. In Cunning WIsh builds especially, I forgo Wrath since you can Wish->Etutor->Humility or Wish->Pulse to gain back some life. I would cut WoG for the 3rd Vindicate and 3rd EE. 3 EE IS A MUST!! I cannot stress how this card stabilizes games and sweeps a board of creatures/non-creatures to put you in a favorable position. It's huge against Zoo, Merfolks, Goblins somewhat and is the thing that puts you over the top of Countertop (no pun intended).
3 Spell Snare, 3 Counterspel is a nice configuration although I prefer 4 Counterspell. UU is sometimes an issue (I run 8 cololress in 24 lands so it's an issue sometimes against wastelands). The main reason I play 4 CS is because I play 2 Scepters in my deck now.
3 Jace if you can squeeze it in. Every game that I saw him, I tend to win or put my opponents in a tough situation. Jace with sweepers is a great combo provided you hit up to 4 lands safely. A reason why I like Crucible maindeck these days. It really screws up tempo deck strategies. Hitting 3 mana isn't too hard against them unless they're packing Sinkholes Vindicates but who plays those decks anyway these days? We are having more mid-range slower aggro decks focused on 2cmc and 3cmc than we used to in the past. 2 Crucible has been amazing for me. It's a card and board advantage engine, returning lands from yard so netting a card in your hand if you can play a land from your yard every turn, also it sets up wastelocks and stills some games. It's hilarious to note that against aggro loam, if you get Crucible online and have the counter on their Maelstrom pulse, you are the one dominating them with land destruction since Crucible > Loam due to the free cost of returning lands.
Either way the list looks good, only issue I have is: 4 Brainstorm, at least 2 Jace, cut Wrath/Vindicate don't play both, probably cut Wrath. In your list I actually would like to go, -2 WoG, +1 Vindicate +1 ETutor (which acts as a pseudo 4th Standstill, 3rd EE, 3rd Humility). Also find room for the 3rd EE, it's the best card outside of planeswalker and FoW in Landstill.
Nice post crz87 :)
So cutting both wraths for 1 Etutor & 1 Jace. Cutting the second humility for brainstorm, with a tutor main as well. Guess I can give that a shot.
What do you think about the sb? Cut 3 wish targets for Spell Pierces or something?
Sounds like a good change, but make sure to test it against your meta. Card slots are flexible according to meta for this deck, meta-tuning is what breaks and makes the deck work, shoving your mostly 50-50 matchups to 55-45 or better.
Your SB:
4x Leyline of the Void
3x Engineered Plague
1x Extirpate
1x Enlightened Tutor
1x Pulse of the Fields
1x Tsabo’s Decree
1x Ravenous Trap
1x Mindbreak Trap
1x Blue Elemental Blast
1x Diabolic Edict
My SB for UWb Wishstill
3 EPlague
3 Extirpate
1 ETutor
1 Pulse of the Fields
1 Diabolic Edict
3 Negate
1 Dismantling Blow
2 Flex slots (BEB, more GYhate, Perish etc, Path)
I think Leyline is a little subpar in the deck. When I build landstill, I want my SB to be as diversified as I can. The big selling point to playing UWb instead of other UWx list is perhaps strictly due to Extirpate. If you noticed, the more popular UGb Wishstill lists are all packing 3-4 Extirpates. Extirpate used to be discussed to be a weak main-deck card, but I have really liked it so far. Unlike Crypt/Leyline/Relic, Extirpate is not a dead card against non-GY based decks. I usually board in Extirpate against mid-range decks, control decks as well. Extirpating when your opponents Brainstorm or Top/cash-Top is quite brutal. Personally, I'm just a fan of this card in certain matchups (GY, control, mid-ranged). The ability to Peek at your opponent's hand is quite crucial to determine the next turns of play.
Negate v.s. Spell Pierce is a matter of preference and meta-gaming. If you're worried about vials/survival/stax/combo, go with pierces since it's faster. After playing with the Scepterstill builds, I personally like Negates better since 2 Chant MD serves to answer bulk of the troublesome matchups (combo) so post-board Negates on Scepter makes for the 4-7 hard counters in the deck. Even without scepter, I still prefer negate, but pierce wins in faster metagames.
If you're playing Wish, you definitely want an artifact/enchantment removal target. I like Dismantling Blow since it's the most easily casted under a bloodmoon and the kicker is nice (draw 2 cards) though not usually used. I have lost games due to not having a Grip effect in the wishboard. I'm not a fan of Tsabo's Decree. You should have a good shot against tribal postboard with EPlauges so Tsabo's really a 5B win-more card IMO. I never played it, it's brutal tech though. I tested the cute wish targets of Ravenous Trap/Mindbreak etc but I realized I just don't need them. Mindbreak Trap especially is usually a wasted slot in the SB since against combo, I never want to keep wishes in (too slow) and I board out wishes and go for a straightforward more-counterspell, more-extirpate approach.
For my SB strategy, again stressing the redundancy of dead cards and having the SB slots be as flexible as possible, I board accordingly:
tribal: +3 EPlague, +1Edict, +1Path
control: +3Negate (wow), +3 Extirpate
combo: +3Negate, +3Extirpate (although Meddling Mage is usually much stronger than Negate since you want pro-active solutions to combo instead of reactive ones due to them playing Chant)
aggro-loam: +2Extirpate (keep one in wishboard), +1 Path
Dredge/vengevines: +3 Extirpate (this hits vengevines hard! Also against Dredge, just pate their Bridges, plow ichorids, FoW Dread Return, EE Zombies and play a more tricky control game)
stax/enchantress: 3 Negates, 3 Extirpates (good against Wasteland/crucible/replenish)
As you can see, Extirpate is quite the solid choice for black-builds. For a control deck, hitting multiple copies of a spell that you don't want to see increases your net answers in future turns. Although the only drawback is that sometimes they don't have the target in the yard. However, since I mentioned that Extirpate really shines against control, mid-range decks and these decks are the ones taking more turns, you get more chances to see cards in the yard for targets. Extirpate is still decent against combo due to the ability to mess up Brainstorm/Top piles, and hitting their Rituals/LEDs when they go: Ritual AdNauseam, potentially weakening their post AdNauseam draws. A more deep analysis on the combo player's play with Extirpate would be to observe their manabase and see how they play their spells. Example:
Turn 1: He duresses your only FoW/counter
Turn 2: He leads with a Ritual, you rip Extirpate.
You analyze his play by assuming he's going off with Ad Nauseam since he feels he is protected after taking your FoW and would most likely go Ritual Ritual Ad Nauseam. This is a good time to Extirpate the first ritual after priority is passed to you.
This is an example of a less-obvious use of Extirpate that can win games, there's obviously a lot more small situations, all very specific depending on what's in the yard, but this is a good example of an opponent dumping a spell and making a legal and relevant target in the yard for Extirpate to be used. I have been wrecked by Extirpate when using Brainstorm, and it is a strong reason to play Extirpate against control, mid-range decks as well, since reshuffling their 2-card knowledge provides a little more advantage as well.
You're not going to be able to Extirpate anything relevent here if I'm understanding what you're saying correctly. So let me be more clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by crz87
Turn 1: Irrelevent
Turn 2 Opponent: Dark Ritual. Dark Ritual. Ad Nauseam.
In this scenario, after the first Dark Ritual resolves he gets priority back. He will cast the other Dark Ritual and then the priority is yours again, but apparently all you can do is Extirpate when there is BB and a Dark Ritual on the stack with an Ad Naseam in the grip which means you're probably dead.
Has anyone tested Peacekeeper? 2W 1/1 During upkeep pay :1W: or sacrifice Peacekeeper. Creatures cannot attack.
After reading Atog Lord's UBw Dreadstill report, I feel that Peacekeeper is akin to old lists running Preacher as tech. Peacekeeper would probably win much slower but it is a hard lock on the following decks:
- Merfolks
- SnT/Reanimator
- Dredge
- Bant Aggro packing only StP as removal (counter it)
Out of these few matchups, Merfolks/SnT/Dredge are perhaps the more troublesome matchup out of Landstill's aggro matchup (we handle Zoo fine, gobs depends if they waste/port us to death).
I think I will be testing him, but so far Scepter-Chant acts as a pseudo Peacekeeper but requiring casting spells that can be counterbalanced. This is more out there for the people not running Scepter-Chants in their Landstill lists. Seemed like that tech did very well for Atog Lord (14-1-0) and shored up his bad matchups (merfolks).
Similar to his strategy, we go UWb with W for Peacekeeper owning the above mentioned aggro matchups, and B for Perish/EPlagues on Gobs and Zoo/Bant matchups. As such, just fine-tune your deck to beat the other matchups (Countertop/Control/Combo out of which Landstill already has favorable matchups aside from combo).
Peacekeeper has a drawback that you cannot win as well though, unlike Dreadstill which can quickly win with a Dreadnought after Peacekeeper. However from Atog Lord's report, it seemed that he is mostly winning with Peacekeeper + Jace lock. And since I have myself up'd the Jace count to 3, I think he's a strong inclusion (cheap yet more powerful option to moat).
Last week I made Top8 at my local tourney. Lost to Hypergenesis (Him Terrastadon, Me Humility, it gets blowned up as verified by cdr on the rulings here. I didn't drop Humility to hope to cast it later, but Terrastadon nukes my WW, and I don't draw WW in the next 2 turns). I died to the classic flaw of Humility: "Grip alpha strike with Teeg + Goyf + Predator eating my Scepter". I definitely made some mistakes but it taught me the power and fragility of Humility. It seriously shuts down a ton of decks, but any decks packing green, you cannot rely on the option.
The same issue applies to Moat. Moat/Humility is in general a stronger choice over WoG since its effect applies continously, but there is a risk on losing the game once this is dealt. WoG is certainly viable but I like the static permanent removal choices over it. Humility/Moat are prone to Grips, which costs you the game since you cannot counter Grip. Peacekeeper on the other hand is a creature (that is untouched in the aggro matchups mentioned above) and cannot be gripped or killed by split second (only split second card played in Legacy mainly is grip/wipe away), in addition, most aggro decks tend to side out creature removal against you, so in a field of unsuspecting players not prepared against a less-popular Landstill deck, this tech may steal some wins.
I'm going to be testing Peacekeeper over Humility in the SB option, knowing it'll give me the straight win against UG, UB, Mono-U Merfolks, SnT/Reanimator and sealing most aggro games where opponents do not run heavy removal, or board out removals against Landstill. Although Preacher is as strong an answer, although against Reanimator/Progenitus/Inkwell/Shroud it fails. It is brutal against any other aggro decks with light removal though.
@Chii yeah he has priority there, I guess if he's careless and passes it back to me, or if he played a different spell, I can sneak that Extirpate in :P
Yeah dude, I think Peacekeep is pretty sick. I got to nab all of them from my local store for 55cents each. Its 100% an upgrade over Firespout in the Merfolk matchup which was needed. I haven't gotten to test him out just because of a lack of tournaments but I definitely plan to play him.
Typically the claim of something being 100% better than something else comes AFTER thorough testing with results to compare against previous results... but I must say your approach of making sweeping unproven generalizations is, if nothing else, to the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiiMagic
Peacekeeper was brought up months ago on salvation, and AFTER testing, the determination was that he was terrible, almost strictly worse than Preacher (who, you know, lets you WIN THE GAME) against Merfolk.
Seriously think about it, letting Keeper die and then alpha striking with 1/1 creature tokens seems pretty far fetched... and the "pray my Jace resolves" plan is dangerous on multiple levels...
On a side note, I haven't dropped a match against the 'folk since adding Preacher to my board, so maybe I'm biased.
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
2 Sensei’s Divining Top
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Path to Exile
4 Force of Will
4 Standstill
4 Counterspell
2 Firespout
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
3 Engineered Explosives
2 Decree of Justice
4 Flooded Strand
2 Scalding Tarn
3 Tundra
2 Volcanic Island
1 Plateau
4 Mishra’s Factory
3 Wasteland
3 Island
2 Plains
I haven't come up with a sideboard, but what do you think?
The other thing I'd like to add is that it isn't necessarily a hard lock against anything, notice for example how Merfolk, Reanimator/SnT, and Dredge have access to bounce spells. Not sure about Bant Aggro, as there are many forms of it, but let me say that when we start devoting resources to protect our win conditions, it creatures a very fragile situation and you don't want to be progressing into that position from the beginning of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by RogueMTG
Why 4 Ponder? What does 4 Ponder / 2 SDT give you that 3-4 SDT + 2-3 Business cards don't?Quote:
Originally Posted by lorddotm
I think we need to restructure this thread a little bit, to be honest. I was speaking with a former MTG player from the glory days of The Drain, and he mentioned that the productivity of the discussion highly increases when a standardized core of a deck is established as much as possible, and the flex spots are discussed more in detail. This way, we don't focus on reiterating what's been said multiple times already. Personally I think the core of the deck can be as high as 45+ cards, with the remaining 15 tailored for the surrounding metagame. I have tried Ponder before and that's not what you want to be doing with this deck.
I saw someone comment about how this deck needs certain answers, I feel that Ponder does that very well. Especially since we don't run very man fetchlands.
Then again, I play mostly combo, so I have no idea what the in's and out's of this deck are. Aren't multiple tops terrible?
I played a couple of Ponders not too long after they came out. Top fills this role better, as it's better in the early game against mana denial, since it can find multiple landsl and better in the late game because you can use it repeatably. Ponder is blue and pitches to Force, but you can make lists with sufficient blue cards and Tops so it's not a problem.
No, they are pretty easy to get rid of if you play 7 or so shuffle effects. Fetchlands turn uneeded Tops into pseudo-Impulses. Also, it's nice to draw into additional Tops in blue matchups in case they counter or Grip one. I played at the Minnesota 5k without Tops after running a playset at the STL one, and I definitely regretted not having at least a pair in the list. Landstill needs some sort of manipulation other than Brainstorm, whether it's Top, Loam, Crucible or Dragon to give it "deck velocity" to survive late game top decks.Quote:
Then again, I play mostly combo, so I have no idea what the in's and out's of this deck are. Aren't multiple tops terrible?
I have absolutely NO idea why you would think Preacher > Peacekeeper. They are identical in cost and in P/T so its only their abilities that we can be disagreeing on. Why is gain control of your opponents worst creature better than creatures can't attack? I'll worry about how I'm going to win the game after I've dealt with not losing the game first. I don't understand how Preacher, you know, wins you the game by commandeering a Cursecatcher while you get islandwalked by a few lords, but I'm sure you've tested Landstill more than I have, so I'll just take your word for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RogueMTG
Moving along...
I'll start this off then I suppose. Here's a list of cards that I think cannot be omitted from any UW Landstill deck while still being able to be called that.Quote:
I think we need to restructure this thread a little bit, to be honest. I was speaking with a former MTG player from the glory days of The Drain, and he mentioned that the productivity of the discussion highly increases when a standardized core of a deck is established as much as possible, and the flex spots are discussed more in detail. This way, we don't focus on reiterating what's been said multiple times already. Personally I think the core of the deck can be as high as 45+ cards, with the remaining 15 tailored for the surrounding metagame. I have tried Ponder before and that's not what you want to be doing with this deck.
4 Force of Will
4 Brainstorm
4 Standstill
4 Swords to Plowshares
3-4 Counterspell
3-4 Mishra's Factory
4 Flooded Strand
2 Blue Fetches
This is only like half of a deck, but I feel like any other card I can think of, I know some people would say it is not a MUST. I feel that Elspeth and Jace, TMS are musts with the current state of the format, but I can respect other people's decisions to not include them. I guess we could start to discuss what other cards everybody else feels are musts.
Preacher > Peacekeeper in Merfolks is true to some extent. I didn't disacknowledge preacher and in fact I mentioned that Preacher maybe better than Peacekeeper specifically to Merfolks since you have a non-grippable Shackles effect.
But take note that althouh Preacher can win you games, Preacher only wins you games if the board positions that are still somewhat favorable for you e.g. 3 creatures out, Preacher wins games, anything more, Preacher sucks. Peacekeeper IGNORES board position, and is strictly better from an overall situation. It's the same reason why I am not giving the axe on Elspeth 2.0 since despite the fact that Elspeth 2.0 costs :1: more, she is strictly better from an overall situation and much better in ugly board positions than Elspeth 1.0.
Peacekeeper does not care if your opponents board position. It is a little safer than Humility in all honesty since a Grip has split second that you cannot deal with and you lose games but nothing kills Peacekeeper at split-second speed that is Legacy playable except Wipe Away but that kills ANYTHING (preacher/peacekeeper/Humility/Moat) so Wipe Away isn't a good argument in our scenario. Reanimator/SnT has bounce and Bant etc has StP, but Peacekeeper still shines in those matchups where opponents aren't playing Gobs/Zoo (aka little removal aggro decks). If they have bounce/removal, you just sandbag counters and win on the back of Jace. Unlike Preacher, Peacekeeper can just ignore the board whereas Preacher still requires you to play carefully and keep the board under control, not to mention Jitte being a huge problem against Preacher.
Also, Peacekeeper is very strong against Survival Madness. I feel that it is overall the stronger card. Preacher also costs WW, which might be an issue against Wasteland/Merfolks. I don't advertise a card without strong reasons. Atog Lord's UWb Dreadstill report sums up the strengths of Peacekeeper in Dreadstill, and in all honesty, he is perhaps even stronger in Landstill that packs an even more diverse Maindeck, making him a stronger as a sideboard/supplement card.
About Landstill's core:
4 Force of Will
3-4 Brainstorm
3-4 Standstill
4 Swords to Plowshares
0-4 Counterspells
3-4 Mishra's Factory
0-3 Wasteland
0-2 Elspeth 1.0
0-3 Jace 2.0
0-3 Decree
0-2 Top
3-4 EE
What I mentioned above is a collection of lists that run a common combination of cards above, although I think with today's choices/meta, the following below is what really makes Landstill Landstill:
4 Brainstorm
4 Standstill
4 Swords
3-4 Counterspells
4 Mishra's Factory
2-3 Jace
3-4 EE
flex slots
These are the things that you cannot deter from. Any major change would shift it towards either non-Standstill approaches, Speedstill (more snares/Vindicates). Flex slots are always tuned to the meta, and this is what makes this deck appeal to people playing it, i.e. the ability to adapt and tweak for a meta.
Comment on 3v4 Standstills
For people running 3 Standstills, and buy the argument "Standstill is no longer good in the format": You are not playing an optimal deck running 4 Standstills. Aether Vials and all that do suck, but if you suspect such a meta, pack more EEs etc and plan out your plays so you resolve Standstills. I as on the verge on agreeing that Landstill's Standstill is no longer viable, but after more practice and maturity, I begin to understand that making such a statement is simply an excuse for not being able to design and pilot the deck well.
I tried the Top-Predict approach. It's cute and nice, but I think the draw is even more conditional than Standstill, and requires you to setup for Top/Brainstorm Predict which takes more effort than going for an UNCONDITIONAL turn 2 Standstill when the deck is designed correctly.
It's really hard for me to defend Standstill v.s. Predict because my friends don't play Landstill and only bitch about Standstills when I chain them and then make all the arguements that Predict > Standstill because it's not a situational draw. There's a reason why chaining Standstills feels overwhelming because it's 3 friggin cards per Standstill. Have you felt overwhelmed when an opponent 'chains' Predicts/Brainstorms? I don't think so but you feel overwhelmed when someone chains a second Standstill. 3 Predicts (each attempt to drawing 2 cards being conditional) nets 6 cards, which amounts to two resolved Standstills.
Let's assume that Predict isn't all that situation (which it really is and a mana-intensive draw with Top + topping + Predict), drawing 3 cards off Standstill and 2 cards off Predict is a HUGE deal for a control deck. The only benefit that Predict has over Standstill is that it's run in a shell with Counterbalance, so seemingly it seems more powerful when evaluating the card but the truth is its unsituational card advantage is only positively felt because it's in a shell that is netting pseudo card advantage. WotC has yet to print a card that trumps Standstill's card drawing power, not to mention the synergy it has in a control deck.
Making landdrops and sculpting a hand under standstill for 0-3 turns is also crucial for Landstill players to slow the game down a little. This is part of the strategy and big advantages to playing Standstill. If your opponent doesn't crack it, you set yourself up for more lands and cards. If they crack it early, you're in a good position again. Now, there are cases where Standstill does suck, but even Predict/Top is too slow (or draws 1 card) against Turn 1 Aether Vial Turn 2 standstill against Merfolks and other fast decks.
I'm nagging a ton, but that's an argument why 4 Standstill is completely viable in today's meta, and just wanted to dispell a myth. But if the meta is infested with vials, obviously play 3 Standstills. But even against Merfolks/Gobs, if I'm on the play I would play 4 standstills. On the draw that's a different issue. And if you're that worried about vial decks, then just pack more MD Paths. Your fear of not resolving standstill corresponds 1-1 to the dominance of vial decks, and to beat those decks, just metagame accordingly. That's what the flex slots are for in the deck anyway.
And an observation to Landstill:
Landstill is all about card advantage and stabilizing early game. Every extra card you can draw is a resource for a deck that doesn't has a 'cheaty' win-condition e.g. Countertop, Natural Order, Show and Tell.
Every card in the deck should play out synergistically and emphasize the point above. Every card needs to fulfill roles that x-1s opponents.
E.g.
- WoG x-1 although there are better options like EE.
- Planeswalkers (esp Jace 2) are good examples on how 1 card translates into more card/board/interaction advantage for the Landstill player
- Crucible is an old-school huge card advantage engine netting 1 card a turn when you have lands in your yard
- Isochron Scepter when resolved is another card advantage engine
- Cunning Wish gives flexibility
- Vindicate/StP 1-1s, but these are needed for obvious reasons.
- Standstill nets 3 cards.
Basically in the early game, you are doing the following:
- FoWing spells (you lose 1-2)
- Counterspell/StP (1-1)
- EE (maybe 2-1)
Landstill's challenge is to learn how to do 1-1 trades (sometimes 1-2 from FoW) intelligently and accurately while keeping in mind the options that the deck will draw and try to stabilize against the decks that have stronger early games/win-conditions.
During the process of stabilizing, cards like Brainstorm/Standstill will give you future options, refill your hand. And when the turn comes to resolving the card advantage cards listed above, namely planeswalker, this is where you will start gaining huge advantage over turns and simply win because of that. The reason why Standstill (and hopefully you see my point why 4 is a good number if you can aim for that in a meta) is stil strong is because of this very fact. You need to recouperate the resources that you exchanged against decks and keep yourself fueled defensively until resolving the engines that net you more card/interaction advantage. At that point you will start to win games.
Many decks are really designed to play against other decks e.g. I build a legacy deck keeping in mind Gobs/Merfolks/Countertop/Combo, but who builds a deck keeping Landstill in mind? This is one of the hidden strengths of the deck, being under the radar. Just as ChiiMagic pointed out, ScepterChant being under the radar will steal you some games. Given that most decks are now preparing against Jace 2.0, still nothing much can be done DIRECTLY against him outside of REBs. And you on the other hand as a Landstill player, is sculpting the deck that keeps him alive, knowing that he keeps your hand and your game alive.
Recognizing the weaknesses and strengths of LAndstill, you can begin to understand why certain cards can play well e.g. Peacekeeper argument.
- Weaknesses: stabilizing early game, often losing card/interaction advantage since you are dealing with decks that are usually very strong in the early game.
- Strengths: accessing card/interaction advantage engines e.g. Planeswalker/Crucible/Scepter/Standstill that give you a stronger mid-end game.
Peacekeeper will shine in mostly offsetting the weaknesses of the deck. He will single-handedly buy you turns just as Humility would (Except that not even 1/1 can attack), giving you time to hit the Strengths of the deck, and start winnign from there. Preacher does the same as well, but I think Preacher is weaker on the Weakness aspects of the deck, but is stronger on the Strengths of the deck. So his inclusion over Peacekeeper has to deal with how the deck itself was designed.
E.g. Peacekeeper's main lock is to win through Jace 2.0 since your creatures cannot attack as well, although you can setup an army of 1/1s from Elspeth 1.0. So playing 3 Jace maybe needed to support Peacekeepers in the SB if you plan on not going to time. Interestingly, Peacekeeper is quite absurd and synergistic with Elspeth 2.0. Net some tokens under him, then blow him up with her ultimate and swing in, perhaps leaving enough loyalty for another disk activation