Miracle Control

If I had to make a stab, I'd say that the strength of the BBD build is less about Thopters and more about SFM being really strong right now. SFM seems good in mirror and good against Liliana decks. I'd probably not run SFM maindeck, but playing them SBed Paulo Vitor style (GP Paris) seems potentially appealing.

I'd also be interested to hear about how the deck performed with less Spell Pierces (of the 4 Miracles decks, two ran 1, one ran 0, and one ran 2). Less Swords to Plowshares and less Spell Pierces. More REBs (despite a relatively large portion of the top 16 being non-Blue).

I'm rather curious what you guys think the strongest hate cards are against UW/x miracles? Lately, at my local shop, the meta has been almost 40% miracles lists, to the point where they've inbred to running three (or in one case, FOUR) blasts main. I'm a long-time lands pilot, and while I've had little to no trouble dealing with Jace's resolving (I run a tarpit, a punishing fire package, AND an oblivion stone), the only consistent threat that's been a problem is the EOT -->entreat for 8-10 angels and kill me. Normally, I'm perfectly fine dealing with the occasional miracles list since it's already at worst a 50-50 matchup, but lately seeing SOO many miracles lists locally week in and week out, I feel like I need a solid trump. I've considered going old-school with a mindslaver since I'm already on academy ruins, but I figured I'd ask if anyone else has thoughts on a playable trump over miracles?

The Seattle area is full of mages, which I think influenced both Joe's and Adam's choices, though in different directions.

Replacing Swords with REBs is a concession to True-Name I suppose, while also having relevance against combo (which I've heard is more prevalent in LA). But to me it seems suboptimal in general. In Seattle it looked like blue decks were feeding on blue decks in the top half of the tables (and of course in the "Miracles" draw bracket, where Lands and similar decks also tend to be looming). It was inevitable there would be a lot of blue in the top 16, but this sort of inbreeding also opens avenues for other decks.

With so much Miracles in the meta (I think I saw a Miracles match next to me for most of the tournament, although I only played against it one round, where my opponent scooped the match due to mental exhaustion after losing game 1– I was on esperblade). Abrupt Decay decks were having a field day. Adam is a trooper and probably one of the best if not the best control mages in this area.

I agree that Stoneforge is strong right now. Equipment is pretty strong against Miracles' game plan by allowing a small attack force to apply a lot of pressure. It's especially good if people are cutting their Swords to Plowshares for red blasts!

Relying on just Entreats to take the game home is a very risky proposition IMO, although if I were currently on Miracles I'd also still RIP/Helm at least from the board, as that has an oops I win factor, and could also fair well in a non-Helm mirror (imagine boarding out the Thopter Sword combo for RIP/Helm; your opponent may be helping you by bringing in their own RIP).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 'Nilla Pac

Lost my win and probably draw in yesterday. Bleh. Finished 6-3.

I was shaky all day - I actually received two warnings for accidentally looking at too many cards with top, which has never happened. I should have probably ate something besides trail mix and a pretzel all day.

---

6-3 is not shaky. Sure we all aim high, but that's respectable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

Relying on just Entreats to take the game home is a very risky proposition IMO, although if I were currently on Miracles I'd also still RIP/Helm at least from the board, as that has an oops I win factor, and could also fair well in a non-Helm mirror (imagine boarding out the Thopter Sword combo for RIP/Helm; your opponent may be helping you by bringing in their own RIP).

---

No, just no.

I think Nilla was referring to how he felt he played all day, rather than his 6-3 finish. It's a very good finish, but it's crap when you look back and just go "How did I lose that?" and you know you could've done better. Happened to me in Paris. Ended 5-3-1 (fucking draw piece of shit) and after talking with my friends about how I should've approached my opponent in the draw game, and how horribly I played in my first 2 matches, and how badly I boarded in the final round I knew I should've done better. I remember my R2 being something like a 70-30 in my head and totally punting it because I just wasn't ready to play Magic properly at that point, and having only ever played as BUG Delver, never against it, I felt like my final round should've gone better, but I decided to just remove all of my answers for his major threats from my deck.

Just yesterday I didn't mulligan a 1-lander down to 5 in Merfolk for absolutely no reason other than "I'll probably get there" or whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 'Nilla Pac

The deck felt good, I just wasn't very focused. I also tilt more than I used to, getting bitchy in my old age I guess. Tournaments used to have lunch breaks in the middle. Oh, how I miss those...

---

Yeah, I'm starting to feel like more of my losses are coming from "frame of mind" and focus rather than anything else. Going to a tournament distracted by personal problems and other outside issues is probably the number one reason I drop games. This deck is very unforgiving if you aren't in a very clear state of mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzra

Yeah, I'm starting to feel like more of my losses are coming from "frame of mind" and focus rather than anything else. Going to a tournament distracted by personal problems and other outside issues is probably the number one reason I drop games. This deck is very unforgiving if you aren't in a very clear state of mind.

---

I've started keeping Canadian built for the days when I show up to legacy hungover. Miracles is definitely not the deck to play if you're not 100% ready to face the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amalek0

I'm rather curious what you guys think the strongest hate cards are against UW/x miracles? Lately, at my local shop, the meta has been almost 40% miracles lists, to the point where they've inbred to running three (or in one case, FOUR) blasts main. I'm a long-time lands pilot, and while I've had little to no trouble dealing with Jace's resolving (I run a tarpit, a punishing fire package, AND an oblivion stone), the only consistent threat that's been a problem is the EOT -->entreat for 8-10 angels and kill me. Normally, I'm perfectly fine dealing with the occasional miracles list since it's already at worst a 50-50 matchup, but lately seeing SOO many miracles lists locally week in and week out, I feel like I need a solid trump. I've considered going old-school with a mindslaver since I'm already on academy ruins, but I figured I'd ask if anyone else has thoughts on a playable trump over miracles?

---

Are you on Miracles yourself? If so, Venser was great in the mirror, as are REB's. I've also like Unexpectedly Absent in the mirrors.

If you're on some other deck, Pithing Needle, Liliana, Gaddock Teeg, and Percicious Deed/EE are all good choices.

-----------

I played Miracles at SCG Seattle as well and went 3-3-1 drop. A play mistake put me into the draw bracket (also, my opponent would not concede even though the game was totally locked up and he had NO way to win) and I tilted a bit after that. Then I had to play a friend and lost, so I dropped once I hit 3 losses. I liked the deck, and I liked how UA performed all day.

-Matt

Any news about the Legacy Championship in Vienna?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UB Control

Any news about the Legacy Championship in Vienna?

---

What news are there supposed to be? Did I miss something?

It's on Sunday, with an entry fee of 15 euro.
Admin opens at 9:00
Tournament starts at: 11:00

At the last GP Vienna there were Swiss-Rounds only, without Top8. I finished 2nd from 65 people and got 50 euro.... So yeah, the price payout is more than shitty - but hey, it's Legacy :) If I don't D2 the GP I'll take part in the Championship for sure!

See you there! Anyone else from this thread going?

Greetings

Considering that I used to post in here a lot, do I count?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Julian23

Considering that I used to post in here a lot, do I count?

---

You do. I did not forget your glorious past, when we stood side by side, pushing the best deck to fame and popularity. This was before you left the us for those little green men living in the woods.

But I knew you'd be coming, anyways :D

Greetings

Why nobody plays unexpectedly absent in this deck? It deals with nasty non creature permanents like Liliana.

The question is where to slot it. Theoretically it could take the spot of early countermagic (spellpierce or REB), or else you could slot it into the 2cmc slot in place of something like Counterspell...

I'm trying it out and its been good for problematic permanents, but sometimes its just dead weight in my hand instead of being a much-needed counter.

We have counterspells, pierces and fows but nothing against non creature permanents (I don't include explosives here because they are slow) I'd like to read the opinion of people that has done heavy testing like Philipp. His snapcaster focused version seems great to include them but maybe the double white mana cost is too much for a heavy blue deck like this in a wasteland dominated meta.

Detention Sphere is actually really good and doesn't require your opponent to crack a Fetch to be cast. It's also a 3 which we have even less of than 2's, which are important for Lilianas and TNN's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cschacal

We have counterspells, pierces and fows but nothing against non creature permanents (I don't include explosives here because they are slow) I'd like to read the opinion of people that has done heavy testing like Philipp. His snapcaster focused version seems great to include them but maybe the double white mana cost is too much for a heavy blue deck like this in a wasteland dominated meta.

---

I think that running entreat necessitates having double white on the board at some point anyway, does it not?

Super short tournament experience.

For this event at my LGS, I decided to give my new hero - Ein’s list a shot, moving away from that famous miracle streamer’s list for a change. I don’t favor one or the other; however, I do feel like Ein’s list would allow me to play faster, avoiding draws. The only changes I made was swapping a Terminus from Main with the Verdict from the SB. I did this so I have more CMC 4 in case of flipping against opponent’s Sneak Attack or Jace.

Painter
I don’t get to play against Painter much in my area, but I did watch lots of this MU on the miracle stream. This guy promptly named Blue off Painter, turning on my Blasts as well as his, but he never had a shot.

Esper Stoneblade
50 minutes of grinding. I won first and second was a draw. Runed Halo doing work on TNN.

Zoo
This is interesting. At one point, he had Teeg and Spirit of Labyrinth. I had to Disenchant the Spirit, StP the Teeg, then Brainstorm to set up. He also Bolted my Clique before I can use it to block, I stabilized at 2. Fortunately did not get Bolted out of the game without CB, raced his life total using Angels.

Storm
With CB in play, he didn’t have a shot. Without CB in play, he ran into my wall of counters, as well as Clique-ing his tutor away.

Death blade
At some point, I played Snapcaster to flashback a removal and he allowed it. That’s when I knew his hand was trash. I started playing bombs like Jace and Entreat, it was over. In the next game, Halo’s doing work against TNN again.

Goblin
Bad, I was able to chain Snapcaster and StP to win a game. SB game he’s actually a Death and Taxes (Thalia and Spirit) splashing Red for Blasts and some uncounterable Goblins. He blasted my Snapcasters to stop the possible flashback StP and I could not find a mass removal after game 1.

Overall, I’m impressed with Halo, it’s never a dead card. Ein's list is fine, might make changes to the SB though.

Congratz on the result, twndomn. Losing to Goblins is fine :)

I'll take my GP list -1 Flusterstorm +1 Vendilion Clique to the GP in Vienna, as I havn't started testing REBs yet.

On Unexpectedly Absent.... it's a good card, and as mentioned it's the good old slot-problem. But let me be more clear by outlining serveral points that discourage me from playing this card:

1) WW is a serious issue, as we can't always use this card as a lategame-trump. Sometimes you need to cast it fast, which you cannot.

2) The effect is powerful indeed, hitting pretty much everything is very good and should be very close to what a Controldeck needs. But most of the time it doesn't really get rid of the card. Unless you cast it in response to a shuffle effect or X=a lot this card will only be a Subindicate (Submerge+Vindicate). But Submerge is a good card in some decks, you may say. Correct - in Tempo-variants. Decks that can use the short window (1-3 turns) where the evil card isn't into play. They can beat face with Tarmogoyf, threatening a soon death and invalidating the value of some of the bounced cards. Miracles cannot pressure the opponent. But, and I am very well aware of the fact, Miracle can follow up the UA with a powerful card like Counterbalance or Jace, the Mind Sculptor. But I cannot think of a lot of cards that need to be removed before deploying those cards. In short: UA is good and versatile, but only living up to its full potential when followed up by something, or while adhering a constant stream of pressure.

3) It is preferable to fight over problematic cards via the stack, as many of Legacys permanents do something once they hit the battlefield.

4) If there was a hard-to-counter permanent that would wreck our gameplan I'd instantly play the card, but as pretty much every MU is either a good MU or winable I don't see a reason to play the card. On the other hand - if this card would interfere with Sneak Attacks [one of the most uncomfortable MUs in nowadays metagame(on the top tables)] I'd be in! As it does not, I don't see a reason.

5) The good old slot-problem. Where do you want to squeeze this card in? This interferes very closely with #4, you could find slots, if there was a need to, as the need isn't there, there are no slots.

I hope I have been clear, if this shouldn't be the case, feel free to ask again, with a more detailed question.

Greetings

I went to my first tournament with Miracles at GP Montreal. It was a win-a-box. Apparently 2-0ed my first two rounds and split the box because I wanted to go home. My list was essentially the same as the list that top 4ed GP Paris.

Round 1 vs RUG Delver
Game 1: This was an extremely long game. I played top turn one, dispatched a couple of his threats, and later resolved a Jace and ultimated him for the win.
Game 2: I play a turn one top, he plays a turn one ponder. The game goes back and forth between me playing land drops and him resolving a couple threats. I terminus his threats away and play a rest in peace. I resolve jace and ultimate him, just like the first game.

Round 2 vs Elves
Game 1: The game goes back and forth with him playing creatures and me cantripping. I vendillion clique him seeing a hand with a bunch of elves and a natural order. I obviously snag the natural order and he plays more elves. I cast an entreat for 3 about 2-3 turns later and he can't deal enough to kill me.
Game 2: He plays an elf, I play a top. He plays symbiote into visionary, and turn two, I resolve a counterbalance. I terminus away his board and land a jace a few turns later. Because the amount of lands he has out consisted of gaea's cradle and bayou, and I had the countertop lock, he could not cast anything and died to Jace ultimate.

Round 3 vs Tin Fins
This match actually did not happen considering I split the box with him. He gave me the free event coupon and I went back to my hotel room. The list ran very smoothly, and I got good matchups. I guess it was just my day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cschacal

Why nobody plays unexpectedly absent in this deck? It deals with nasty non creature permanents like Liliana.

---

I play 1 Main and 1 Side and it's been excellent. The deck has few ways to deal with non-creature permanents, whether it be artifacts, enchantments, or planeswalkers. Liliana, Koth, Jace, and Pithing Needle are all big problems in my experience. So's Sylvan Library. Most of the time, you have to let the problem do work and wait for a fetch, but people really just don't expect it. I nailed my Esperblade opponent when I was behind with an UA on his Jace into a fetch, and he lost the Jace, allowing me to pull back into the game. Regarding D. Sphere, if you're against BGx, they just decay the Sphere and you're back where you started. At least UA can put the card a few down if need be, buying you some time. Plus, it means they might constrict themselves if it's a great card and they subsequently play fetches afterwards. They might have to play back for a few turns to draw that critical card again.

It also has game in returning your own stuff for protection, or flipping to Counterbalance. Sure it's cute, but it's been worth it before. Protecting Jace from Pulse, Counterbalance from Decay, or just to flip a 2 to Counterbalance.

Also, sickest play of Seattle: Brainstorm and set up Turn 3 Counterbalance + Top on the same Turn, floating a 3 on top after Brainstorm to counter the Patriot player's TNN. What does he cast instead? Fused Wear/Tear. B-B-B-B-BLOWOUT.



-Matt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YamiJoey

Detention Sphere is actually really good and doesn't require your opponent to crack a Fetch to be cast. It's also a 3 which we have even less of than 2's, which are important for Lilianas and TNN's.

---

Don't fall into the trap of thinking you can only cast Unexpectedly Absent in response to a fetch; that's a "danger of cool things" problem.

Evaluate it as a way to get a second chance at dealing with problem permanents, including Liliana (which is one of the most problematic of them all for Miracles). It's great at resetting an opposing planeswalker or Vial, it's occasionally decent insurance for something non-Griselbrand that got snuck into play and that you now have the counter for, etc.

Right now I'm experimenting with one in the main (since my 2-drop slot is more in need of shoring up than 3, and I've never much cared for Detention Sphere anyway since it gets hit by both red Blasts and Abrupt Decays), and finding it useful primarily as the "I'd be winning the game right now if only he hadn't stuck that thing before I got control" roleplayer.

Hey guys,

recently i have seen some lists with a 3FOW/1Misdirection (basically Oarsman and his companions) cut. As far as i can remember, einh once wrote that misdirection isn't good. So who's right?

Would be nice if J.Lossett senpai could write a few lines about how the misdirection worked for him and why he cuts my precious FOW. :smile:


Unexpectedly Absent Topic: Blowing it on a creature seems kinda mediocre, and most of the other stuff can be handled by a pithing needle, too. It seems like no one considers running a maindeck needle though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panda-san

Hey guys,

recently i have seen some lists with a 3FOW/1Misdirection (basically Oarsman and his companions) cut. As far as i can remember, einh once wrote that misdirection isn't good. So who's right?

Would be nice if J.Lossett senpai could write a few lines about how the misdirection worked for him and why he cuts my precious FOW. :smile:

---

Yes, you are correct that I wrote that this card isn't good. It's horrible, to be honest. Splitting up Force of Will is just bad, having a 1of against one particular archetype isn't good either. I won't go too much into detail as I thought it was common knowledge that this card is just unplayable. But I am happy to hear reasonings why it'd be good, I'll respond in a proper way then.

Greetings

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panda-san

Hey guys,

recently i have seen some lists with a 3FOW/1Misdirection (basically Oarsman and his companions) cut. As far as i can remember, einh once wrote that misdirection isn't good. So who's right?

Would be nice if J.Lossett senpai could write a few lines about how the misdirection worked for him and why he cuts my precious FOW. :smile:

---

Joe has explained his card choices like... no less than ten times, you can just watch those clips here: http://www.twitch.tv/oarsman79, if you dig hard enough.

My opinion is that Joe focuses on stack manipulation, it's evident in the inclusion of Venser, he's customized Miracles into a version in which he can maximize his play style and ability. That's why there's a Misdirection in his version. There's no right vs wrong, you have to compare deck list vs deck list as a whole.

I discover that if I play his version, I too often think too hard, think too slow, and cause myself to draw.

The basic reason why I don't like Misdirection is that my plan against GBx (Hymn/Decay) decks is basically as follows:
1. Kill all their creatures.
2. Neutralize Liliana.
3. Kill more creatures.
4. Entreat. (or Blood Moon)

Misdirection is very, very good against Hymn and Abrupt Decay, but it doesn't actually do anything to directly affect my goals in the matchup.

Hymn can potentially be problematic because it will sometimes hit lands, which in turn affect my ability to Entreat. However, Top (and Brainstorm to a lesser degree) helps keep the land drops coming. Misdirection is good against discard, yet at the same time, its innate card disadvantage makes it awkward against discard.

Abrupt Decay is actually not even that good against us since it does not directly affect any of our game plan except perhaps hitting Rest in Peace (which helps neutralize creatures). Luckily all of our < 3 cmc permanents post-board have EtB triggers that make them worthwhile even if they are immediately removed by Abrupt Decay.

Misdirection doesn't kill creatures, doesn't kill Liliana, and in an attrition based and grindy battle against a discard deck, Misdirection isn't what I want to be topdecking. Joe and others have their reasons for liking the card (in part, a different approach to the MU), so this is simply my take on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Einherjer

Yes, you are correct that I wrote that this card isn't good. It's horrible, to be honest. Splitting up Force of Will is just bad, having a 1of against one particular archetype isn't good either. I won't go too much into detail as I thought it was common knowledge that this card is just unplayable. But I am happy to hear reasonings why it'd be good, I'll respond in a proper way then.

Greetings

---

Well, Misdirection is just icing on the cake in that specific build. While you can always argue why it would be horrible and could never replace a force, you can also say that it doesn't need to be a Force.
While acting like a force in an ongoing counterwar, it can also cause some random blowouts like misdirect a Hymn, or redirecting a Bolt to a Nemesis. Even though these blowouts don't happen often, discard like Thoughtseize is often a thing. When your hand is Jace, Force + random pitchcard, you dont really want to force a Thoughtseize, but you might need to do it. With Misdirection you can get a 2for2 at least. Being able to fight over a CB being decayed is pretty nice also.

I played the 3/1 split for like 6 months, switched to 4 Forces for like a week, and immediately wanted the Misdirection back. Its neither broken nor always great, but far from unplayable.

Thanks for your advice about UA Philipp. It would be great to hear you and Joe talking about this deck :smile: I'll try your version but with a 2/2 split between snapcasters and vendilions, only 3 FOW and 3/1 split of terminus and SV. I hate Misdirection as much as I hate Force of Will. I have been playing misdirections in the sideboard but I have decided to change them for more flusterstorms. I thought misdirection would help against discard but it didn't. I only play 3 FOW because this card is only good against combo and it is for sure the most removed card after game one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThoSha

Well, Misdirection is just icing on the cake in that specific build. While you can always argue why it would be horrible and could never replace a force, you can also say that it doesn't need to be a Force.
While acting like a force in an ongoing counterwar, it can also cause some random blowouts like misdirect a Hymn, or redirecting a Bolt to a Nemesis. Even though these blowouts don't happen often, discard like Thoughtseize is often a thing. When your hand is Jace, Force + random pitchcard, you dont really want to force a Thoughtseize, but you might need to do it. With Misdirection you can get a 2for2 at least. Being able to fight over a CB being decayed is pretty nice also.

I played the 3/1 split for like 6 months, switched to 4 Forces for like a week, and immediately wanted the Misdirection back. Its neither broken nor always great, but far from unplayable.

---

Saying that it is generally unplayable was a hyperbole. I didn't think you'd take it that literal.

Misdirection should not played as the 4th Force. Because if we do this we can also cut the 4th Terminus for a Supreme Verdict, because it's uncounterable, and then we cut the 4th Swords to Plowshares for UA/EE because it can hit Planeswalkers and Permanents, then we cut the 4th Top for Ponder, because Top cannot shuffle, and Ponder is better if we already have a Top, later on we cut the 4th Flooded Strand for a Mystic Gate, cause it can't get stifled, then we cut the 4th/3rd Jace for an Elspeth, because she can't be REBed, only to cut the 4th/3rd Tundra for an Island, because it can't get wastelanded.

See what I did there? Replacing the 4th copy of a playset with something that's better in some narrows scenarios is not the way I build decks anymore. I kind of this this back at GP Strasbourg, and even though it worked out rather well I grew as a player, not doing that again. Having super icey 1ofs is a great feeling, if you draw them. But for wha I can say is that it is important to do your thing in a constant way. You want to be able to remove creatures for W, which forces you to play 4 Swords to Plowshares (the only counterargument I'd kind of accept here is the inclusion of REBs in the MB - but I am still in the process of testing), you want to interact with your opponent as soon and as efficiently as you can. This is why playing less than 4 Force of Will is bad, plus Miracles has a hard time dealing with Show and Tell strategies preboard, as we have many dead cards.

Short: It's not good to split a playset of cards 3/1, simply because the 4th card holds some superior value in some certain situations. You want your deck to work like an oiled machine, over and over and over again. That's how I build decks, if you want an inconsistent but individually more powerful deck - go ahead and do the hillarious cuts I advised above.

Greetings

The main reason I like the 4th force of will over 1 misdirection.

1) Can handle planeswalkers.
2) Can handle creatures.
3) Is always a counterspell (misdirection is only a counterspell if a counterspell has been played), so it has huge flexibility.
4) When hardcastable, is always relevant. (Misdirection hard cast is really not very relevant. Nice thoughtseize on turn 10...)
5) When you really need force, it usually stops you from losing the game and can often just win you the game.

The main reasons I like 1 misdirection over the 4th force:

1) Sometimes when you'd have two forces you'll have 1 force and 1 misdirection which can give you more options.
2) Misdirection can gain huge advantage against heavy discard/decay decks.

I can't come up with many more compelling reasons for misdirection over the 4th force of will. I think most importantly there's two very strong reasons not to run misdirection over force of will. Misdirection is never necessary, whereas force of will often is. Your opponent trying to go off turn 1 with a combo? You need to have force of will. Compare: Your opponent hymns you. You're down 2 cards, but your opponent can't win for many turns, allowing you to gain advantage and still win. Even if you expect discard heavy metas, it's still incredibly unsafe to not have the 4th force of will, because you still have a high chance of playing against decks where force of very vital. The second reason is that misdirection is usually only good early and is usually only good at stopping other early game cards. Yet as a 1-of, you're unlikely to even see the card when it matters and misdirection loses so much value over time, whereas force is always relevant. It does retain relevance against an abrupt decay, but I don't think it's worth devoting space specifically to handle that card, given what you're giving up for it.

Misdirection can be a very awkward counterspell, helping in counterwars only if other countermagic has been played already. For this reason, if you want a 5th force of will effect in these situations, running 1 Misdirection in the sideboard certainly seems acceptable to me (although I'd probably prefer flusterstorm most of the time).

I haven't followed this entire exchange, but wasn't Misdirection originally added for one main reason: Abrupt Decay (with splash benefits against Hymn to Tourach and Ancestral Visions)?

Yet the arguments above don't seem to discuss saving your Counterbalance or Rest in Peace...

Misdirecrion is really good in other decks like BUG and Bant. Here we'd rather Force their thing. It hits Abrupt Decay, but apart from that we simply do not care. Play an extra Balance if your Balances keep rotting.

Great arguments, i can get behind that.
I can totally understand why one would want to play 4 Force of Will to play it safe.
There is just one point tough, that is huge in a deck like this that you have forgotten.

Miracles runs 4 Sensei's Divining Tops and many shuffle effects. While splitting up playsets is narrow in Delverdecks that don't have as great card selection over a long game as we do, we might split up some playsets to gain more versatility when games get grindy. Its funny that most of those things you mentioned are things that i do. I play 3/1 split of Force/MD, 3/1 split of Terminus/Verdict, 2/2 StP/REB. Also Mystic Gates to have some outs for Choke. But of course i would never cut a top, because then you would be absolutely right about all this being narrow.

I have to be fair that i am running 74 cards from the oarsman-list. But only because it works that way, no need to change anything for consistency really.

I've played both oarsman's list as well as Einherjer's list, following some of their changes for the last few months. I think oarsman's list is fine, and I've certainly done well with it, but I've fared better with Einherjer's, winning and top 8'ing several 50+ man events recently. I also took a modified version to Seattle, where I finished 7-2 with terrible breakers due to an embarrassing early loss to Burn and a terrible punt against feline; I attribute the losses to my poor play (particularly against High Tide) rather than to the deck sputtering on me, and I am still very happy with how the deck performed overall (although I think I'll switch things up and play different decks at smaller events).

Joe's list allows for more blowout opportunities and cool stack tricks with cards like Venser, extra Cliques, Misdirection, and second Karakas, as well as more one-ofs which can be situationally useful at different times. I feel like it's stronger once it gets to the late game, due to all the tricks it can play. Einherjer's list feels more streamlined, starting with the six hard counters, but also with the emphasis on Ponders and Snapcasters to give it more reliable control of its draws in the early game. In my personal experience, when I performed poorly with the oarsman list, it was usually due to stumbling early (e.g. not being able to find that fourth land, Swords, Terminus, or Force of Will that you needed).

I think the decks play out most differently against B/G decks, several of which are unfavorable to even matchups. Joe has the ability to use Misdirection against Hymn/Abrupt Decay, uses Karakas tricks with Venser/Clique to control Liliana, and slaps down a Rest in Peace to cripple their threats. In contrast, Einherjer tries to blank Abrupt Decay by removing most of his removal, control discard with Pierce/Flusterstorm, and stall opposing threats with an endless barrage of removal backed by Snapcaster; however, the presence of two Ponders in addition to Snapcasters allows this decklist to more quickly find Entreat the Angels or Jace to pull ahead.

I think it really comes down to pilot preference.

Well said, Lord, I agree.

ThoSha: You could say I am wrong about one thing, you could claim my testing is flawed in another aspect or point at my wrong conclusions. This all was, is and will be true, to some extent. But I find it kind of bold telling me I forgot about 4 Top + Library Manipulation. Like really? Are you telling me I forgot about this aspect?

Greetings

It was kind of bad written from me. Of course I expect a player of your caliber to not forget about this given thing.
I just felt like this point is tremendous and should be given credit, because it should change how you look at these one-offs, not making them ridiculous.

By your logic with the well-oiled machine that does the same things every game, you should even reconsider your list.
Like cutting the 1-of Clique and Karakas, to add a 4th Tundra and Snapcaster Mage. Also cut the singletons in your sideboard as they are random.
Of course you won't do that, because you know that they are worth it in a deck like this. So why wouldn't that apply to other splits that are reasonable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThoSha

It was kind of bad written from me. Of course I expect a player of your caliber to not forget about this given thing.
I just felt like this point is tremendous and should be given credit, because it should change how you look at these one-offs, not making them ridiculous.

By your logic with the well-oiled machine that does the same things every game, you should even reconsider your list.
Like cutting the 1-of Clique and Karakas, to add a 4th Tundra and Snapcaster Mage. Also cut the singletons in your sideboard as they are random.
Of course you won't do that, because you know that they are worth it in a deck like this. So why wouldn't that apply to other splits that are reasonable?

---

I expected this question, so let me elaborate.

1) It's not the fact that I hate 1of silver bullets. I hate it, if they take the place of much needed cards, that should be played in playsets like Swords, Force, Top, Brainstorm... It'd be totally okay for me to play 4 Force of Will 1 Misdirection, whereas 3/1 is a no-go.

2) Snapcaster / Clique ist not a split.

3) Karakas is not in the slot of any mana-producing land, it's in the utility-land slot.

4) Three Tundra are enough. If four were necessary to produce the mana this deck needs in a given time frame I'd play 4. But three are enough. This logic applies to 3 Jace and 2 Angels aswell.

5) Sideboard cards are 1ofs, but not at the cost of other cards.

I hope I could get my point across, if I didn't - please tell me and I will write alot more than just this few sentences.

Greetings

Now it makes perfect sense for me.
So the main difference in our opinions is just that you set the playset of Forces in stone, which I don't.
If I wouldn't value the Red Blasts in the maindeck more than a set of Swords, i would agree with you on that also.

At the end of the day it comes down to preference, both lists have been proven to be very good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Einherjer

Short: It's not good to split a playset of cards 3/1, simply because the 4th card holds some superior value in some certain situations. You want your deck to work like an oiled machine, over and over and over again. That's how I build decks, if you want an inconsistent but individually more powerful deck - go ahead and do the hillarious cuts I advised above.

---

This is an excellent explanation, and I'm 100% behind this concept in regards to Miracles.

New question: has anyone tried out Swan Song in the place of Flusterstorm? I've been liking the added utility vs Sneak and Show, and the fact that it is a hard counter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

I haven't followed this entire exchange, but wasn't Misdirection originally added for one main reason: Abrupt Decay (with splash benefits against Hymn to Tourach and Ancestral Visions)?

Yet the arguments above don't seem to discuss saving your Counterbalance or Rest in Peace...

---

Yeah, I think this gets to the heart of it. BGx is the only reason to run Misdirection. I'm pretty sure it's worse than a fourth Force by in every single other matchup. BGx was the deck for a while, and it's still popular in my area, but I don't think the upside is so great against the deck to begin with. I used to run a single Misdirection out of the sideboard, but ended up cutting it because it felt high-risk with medium reward. I loved flipping a Hymn to Tourach, but you were still down the extra card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Einherjer

Misdirection should not played as the 4th Force. Because if we do this we can also cut the 4th Terminus for a Supreme Verdict, because it's uncounterable, and then we cut the 4th Swords to Plowshares for UA/EE because it can hit Planeswalkers and Permanents, then we cut the 4th Top for Ponder, because Top cannot shuffle, and Ponder is better if we already have a Top, later on we cut the 4th Flooded Strand for a Mystic Gate, cause it can't get stifled, then we cut the 4th/3rd Jace for an Elspeth, because she can't be REBed, only to cut the 4th/3rd Tundra for an Island, because it can't get wastelanded.

Short: It's not good to split a playset of cards 3/1, simply because the 4th card holds some superior value in some certain situations. You want your deck to work like an oiled machine, over and over and over again. That's how I build decks, if you want an inconsistent but individually more powerful deck - go ahead and do the hillarious cuts I advised above.

---

That's how I go about things, as well. I don't even understand why people run only 3x Jace, much less cutting Swords or Terminus. RUG Delver is hardly a deck anymore.