Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poron
Instant speed shenanigans still can mess things up.
I personally think that Counterbalance is too inconsistent without Ponder (At best 4 Ponder). Even Levy who runs them all (4 Ponder) has only one Counterbalance main, and that says something.
Also, 1cc cards are the weakest cards in a deck, just compare Brainstorm/Top to Jace/Elspeth/Entreat or StP to Terminus.
disagree so much.
it's card advantage anyway.
You play 1 card, CB, and they lose 2-3 cards and 2-3 next topdecks.
against some matchup a well timed CB is just GG. If it wasn't for Abrupt Decay this deck would live almost only on CB and Terminus
to get this straight:
Jace, Elspeth, EtA and Terminus is better card-advantage than Counterbalance for various reasons, e.g. more direct effect on the board, more consistent, easier to protect, actually winning the game, less time consuming (imo this is relevant), or simply mindblowingly powerful (a big EtA is often stronger than whole decks). This is also why I like Cunning Wish so much, it directly hates on these cards if my opponents play them and with Noxious Revival I can reset an EtA.
Sure, but when a deck like Canadian (and most others in legacy have low curves) runs four spells out of 42 that aren't cmc>3 it's obvious to see the effect it can have. You don't need to counter every spell they play; if you counter an important spell with Counterbalance it's a 1 for 1, just like Counterspell, but it still can impact the game after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Buddha
Different type of card advantage.
Counterbalance gives CA about cards in your hand (in fact, against decks that don't play many permanents, CB gives its best. ANT, TES, OmniTell, etc.)
Jace/Terminus/Elspeth/Entreat give CA about permanents.
Yes, I agree that CA on the field is more important, ok.
But one is UU, the other are all 4cc or very situational/dead.
Entreat/Terminus are dead cards in your opening hands.
And (4+2) they are 10% of our deck.
Risky, situational or expensive cards.
They are not comparable with Counterbalance.
Unless CB was a 2UU enchantment, and yes, at that point it would be bad.
Don't compare the card advantage that a Wrath of God 2WW and Counterbalance UU can give.
It's just wrong to compare them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sauce
Okay. Here are some thoughts.
Brainstorm in response to Top while tapping out. You are looking for Force. The only blue card in your hand is Jace. Are you going to pitch Jace in order to stop his Top? If so, okay. If not, then you are really Brainstorming to find a Force and a blue card. That doesn't have a great chance of happening.
Turn three I would have put down the Colonnade. You have nothing to do. Maybe you want to bluff having Vendilion Clique or a Counterspell. But as soon as his turn goes by and we don't play Clique, he knows that we don't have one. So we actually gave information away.
Turn four you draw a Plains and lay it down to cast Jace. That was really bad. You definitely want to play Karakas there. Anytime both decks have a legendary land and no land destruction, get yours on the board at the first reasonable time to prevent him from being able to use his.
Turn five you have Force in your hand. And yet you play Colonnade instead of Karakas. You could have the mana to hardcast the Force, but you give that option away without gaining anything.
It probably seems like I am focusing too much of land drops. But it is a part of the game just like anything else. You talked a lot about which land to play on turn one, but never mentioned it again after that. You made at least two, and arguably three mistakes on land drops within the first five turns, and didn't realize it while watching the replay. I would conclude that your problem here is not making bad decisions, but being unaware that you are even making a decision. I bet you can clean those plays up in the future with just a touch more focus.
1. against ANT, TES, and Omnitell Counterbalance is obviously much better than EtA, etc. (since these cards are simply dead cards)
2. however, against Stoneblade, Deathblade, Mirror, Goblins and every other goodstuff deck they are very well comparable with the result that board-advantage is better.
3. against tempo decks, I'd say Counterbalance definitely has an edge over EtA, and is also better than Elspeth, and Jace, but worse than Terminus.
But my point is this: the ANT/TES matchup and the Tempo matchup is not so much won on the back of card-advantage but on the back of redundancy and tempo-play/efficiency. To give you an example: What is the better strategy to win the ANT matchup? 4 Counterbalance or 4 Flusterstorm?
What is the better strategy to beat Tempo Thresh? 4 Counterbalance or 4 Terminus/PtE?
Of course Flusterstorm respectively PtE is much better, and they don't even make card-advantage!
or, to point it out even better: What is better against Tempo Thresh: Counterbalance or a Plain (by having 22 lands, and that plain would be your 23. land?)
to sum it up:
1. Preboard, I focus on the Stoneblade/Deathblade/Shardless BUG matchup, because these matchups are the most difficult
2. Postboard I favor Flusterstorm/Spell Pierce over Counterbalance to fight combo
Yeah, against Tempo decks my statement is not true, but against midrange decks including Stoneblade, Deathblade, mirror, I think it is (that there is a difference if you counter a Brainstorm or a Jace, the point being that counterbalance is much more consistent in countering 1cc than 4cc).Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawn
Agree, the brainstorm was suboptimal. I probably do pitch Jace to fight the Sensei's top, FoW and no other blue cards. If I don't find FoW then well, it's a bad brainstorm since I get to draw a dead card next turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by oarsman
I agree, overall I would never recommend brainstorming that way.
Turn three I don't want him to know I have Colonnade mainly. I don't want him to keep STP/Terminus if he tops and sees it on top and hopefully shuffles it away. I feel like when I am so far behind on board, why let him know how to deal w/ my only possible way to attack Jace? Also, we could be representing VClique and not necessarily having to play it if he does nothing at the end of his turn/draw step.
I agree w/ the Turn4 playing Karakas to play Jace. Great point.
I was not going to hard cast FoW into his potential Spell pierce though on Turn 5 and I was okay pitching brainstorm since it was never going to resolve due to his CB + Top in play.
Also makes him think I don't have FoW this way possibly.
Besides the Karakas land drop I don't necessarily think they were mistakes, I think I just did not explain my lines of why I was playing them the way I was playing them.
But I like hearing your perspective and criticism as it is from someone who has a lot of experience with the deck.
Thanks
Although its a good point about playing your karakas first, it won't be relevant after the rules change with the m14 release
Simply put, Miracle is a rare deck that runs actual Counterspell. For you to give up combo match-up pre-board, a match-up you are somewhat favorable due to CB-T and actual CS, sounds like a ridiculous meta-game call. You didn't focus, you pretty much abandon your combo match-up. Not to mention you are going to beg for removal, if your opponent drops turn 1 DRS. If you Truly "focus" against decks that run DRS and Goyf, you would have MD RiP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Buddha
Look at Top-8 Miralce lists, let it be Alex or Joe, none of them run 4 Ponder, most I have seen is 1 Ponder. I don't see how you arrive at that conclusion other than you have a man-crush on Levy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Buddha
Counterbalance is most definitely better than Flusterstorm against Storm (and just about any combo). In today's combo meta, permanent based combo-hate is much better than anything else. Storm will simply strip Flusterstorms out of your hand with discard or Silence you. Other combo decks will run Defense Grid. You don't want to be all-in on counter magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Buddha
I've been wondering lately about Scroll Rack. Tight for space and a bad version of top to be sure, but isn't it pretty decent in theory as a possible one-of that can actually make top better by having it on the board? Wow, that's a long sentence. Anyway, what about it?
-ABC
I've played with ponder, especially when running 4 Snapcasters. It's an additional spell to flashback and I've found it useful to set up miracles, dig for Countertop combo etc. However later in the game, when you have a top on board it starts to become less relevant. It's like a glorified shuffle effect. Early on, it sets up good draws but at the cost of losing some tempo. I find that it's not critical to the deck's success because this deck has 4 top so card quality is not an issue. It felt alot like a "filler" card to me, being neither good nor bad. I ended up just playing more spell pierces and cards that do stuff. It's not like before when all blue decks played Daze and tapping out each turn was no problem. Ponder costs mana and sometimes playing just land is better. Also flooding is not a serious problem in this deck. Lots of land is good for this deck. I think ponder suits decks which want to draw just the "right" amount of lands, like Blue midrange or tempo especially, where flooding is death. I would say ponder is OK in this deck, but not amazing since drawing extra lands suit control decks.
Having a Top in play is a best case scenario to begin with. Aren't people complainig that their deck starts to fall apart if they cannot stick a Top?
As for the early game, Ponder is not so much about lands, but about setting up Terminus (while making landdrops).
This is whyis actually not true: Terminus.Quote:
Early on, it sets up good draws but at the cost of losing some tempo.
But I too think that 20 lands and 4 Ponder is a bit unstable regarding lands.
To say the least: Ponder is very tempting.
Looking over my list once again, I agree that a bit more disruption could be good, ...so there you go.
No, that's wrong. Ponder does not set-up Terminus. Ponder does nothing to the Terminus stuck in your hand. Brainstorm and Jace allow you to SET-UP that dead Terminus back to library.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Buddha
Your understanding of set-up is pretty much 1-time Top, which is redundant when you already have Top in play. I would argue exactly opposite, which IS about lands, because Top only allow you to look the 3 non-land cards, Top-draw doesn't advance the library while Ponder does.
If you don't have top in play, that's why you use E. Tutor or fetchland-brainstorm to find it. Wasting 4 slots on Ponder is not it.
About the BUG matchup: pack Leylines.
They:
1) kill their MD/SB Duress/Thoughtseize (that against Miracle will come out)
2) kill their 4 Hymn
3) kill Liliana's ability 2 and 3
99% of the time they only have Maelstrom Pulse to break it, and you only need to save 1-2 hard counter.
Rest in Peace just shrinks anything they play (even if it gets A.Decayed) and a single Jace can give you the win (you have 3 Pyroblast, they don't)
After all this you still have:
4 StP
4 Terminus
(2 Pyroclasm, eventually)
With Leylines and RiP, BUG is not that bad matchup.
I find myself at home with one into play
I agree with a lot of this, but I'm still not sure why Pyroclasms are better here than Supreme Verdict. If you are worried about Teeg or something and want to diversify your answers that's fine, but if not then I don't know what Pyroclasm is gaining you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poron
To me, Pyroclasm does 3 things better than Supreme Verdict:
1. Killing Teeg when there is no Mother of Runes present or killing a Mother of Runes when there is a Teeg present.
2. Blowing out a fast Elves! draw on t2.
3. Getting flashed back with Snapcaster Mage.
Against some decks (mostly mana denial decks, mainly Goblins/Death and Taxes), it can sometimes be considered more of a wash because you are weighing the ability to cast Pyroclasm through mana denial with Supreme Verdict's ability to wipe all of the x/2+ creatures without having to fetch a Volcanic into potential and likely Wastelands.
Even against the mana denial of Fish, RUG, URW, and BUG Delver uncounterability makes Supreme Verdict somewhat, if not very, advantaged. Everywhere else, including Shardless BUG, Supreme Verdict is just miles better.
Also, is there somewhere that this is archived? I wasn't able to watch on Saturday, but wouldn't mind seeing the coverage if it's around somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by oarsman
http://www.twitch.tv/mtgdeals/b/426829677Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
The coverage was a trainwreck. The stream didn't even start working until round 7, and even then, there were approximately ten thousand problems. Still, if/when the matches we did cover get broken down into separate videos, I'll let you know.
I played three games of the mirror on sunday under the new legend rules. That is going to take time to get used to. The weirdest part is this:
if you have the ability to resolve your own Jace, or stop the opponent's, what do you do? Before, it was probably correct to get your own copy on the board. You get a single use from it and then both die. The situation is much more complicated now.
If the choice is both players having Jace or neither, I don't know which is preferable. It seems reasonable that the answer to that would be different for the more skilled and less skilled player in the match. But even then, who prefers what? Does the better player want Jace on both sides because he thinks he will use it better, or does he want nobody to have it so that he can try and win a lower powered game? It is going to take a long time to figure this stuff out.
EDIT: Darn it, twndwn found it. I have not watched any of this yet, but I am probably going to wish a record of this stuff did not exist.