Printable View
Oh another thought that I can't remember if it has been mentioned yet, but surgical extraction can be cast in response to miracles tapping their top, ruining their attempt at a miracle (unless they have it all with a BS in hand). I like the card a lot better now, even if it is a 1 for 0 (but so is the card pitched to FoW), but we need every edge we can get.
If you've already hit a copy of the miracle card with Therapy or Thoughtseize, you can also let the Top resolve then respond to the Miracle trigger by extracting it, so you get to strip it from their hand and they have to shuffle their Top away. They also can't Brainstorm out of it that way.
Haha, yes, I'm aware of the dream scenario too. But stopping the first entreat is necessary / what I'm talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navsi
But you're right, a good point to make.
And this is the main reason I have come to the conclusion that Abeyance has no space in the sideboard. I mean, I like the card because I have played it, it has potential, but I really want to play more impactful hate cards (at the core: discard, surgical, Sgames, combo hate, 1-2 PW).Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
Surgical, as you said in the quoted post, seems to fill the role that is covered by abeyance, while being a multi purpose tool at our disposal that hits other strategies.
Tldr: I like abeyance but It's job against miracles (and storm to a lesser extent) is done by surgical already, the 76 is real packed and abeyance seems like a card that fills the 16-17th slots in the sideboard, if you know what I mean.
@Rubblekill, I see what you're saying but I would never run more than two surgical extractions against miracles.. The card isn't good, it's just better than veteran explorer. I prefer abeyance to surgical against miracles, storm, elves and shardless. Hence I run a split.
But you're right space is tight and maybe the absolute answer of slaughter games is better than the tempo play of abeyance. I just really don't like playing a taiga. Could play Tiaga in the side, since we want more lands when we cut veteran explorer.. Or could run the mono black counterable version of the card in exchange for better mana against all matchups but with the risk the card gets countered (unlikely, though possible..)
Infact I play two SE. And the problem I was referring to is that I got not space for both SE AND abeyance (and 3 Sgames). In g2-3 the n1 goal is to survive until turn four to game them, and I think we have all come to the conclusion that games is a necessary evil. I also hate that taiga but games is necessary unfortunately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
If the assumption is "does it overlap with SE sometimes" ?Quote:
Originally Posted by rubblekill
The answer is: "Yes, it has some overlap"
But, it does not mean overlapping is a bad thing.
SE CAN mess with a miracle trigger. But with SE + Abeyance, you will play SE/abeyance more aggressively against SCM shenanigans; and thus messing with their next best card in their deck.
Abeyance can also protect one of your key spell (preventing any counterspell from being played once resolved): like sticking a deed on the board.
In the "grand scheme of things", SE + Abeyance are just making games against Miracle faster and thus your match winnable.
SE, only, is already very nice but you will durdle far more and thus you will likely end up drawing the game.
@ Thread:
From my point of view, we are already "high" on the Legacy curve, so that, in my sense, we should not seek to keep the curve as high post board.
It means the following:
1) Against better control decks, we are not in the control seat and we should be the beatdown. 2 PW/2 SLG coming from the board will not help enough to win the match. Sure you'll have chances to take G2 but very likely you won't be able to finish G3. Why ? PW/SLG does not kill miracle fast enough. If you didn't scoop fast G1, there is a good chance that the miracle player will drag you into a draw.
2) Against combo deck, we are supposed to be in the control seat. But to really be in the control seat means that we have to interact with the stack or to lock the game, in some way. Nic Fit is already a sorcery speed deck and adding further sorcery spells demanding 4+ mana is clearly not where I want to be. G2 might be winnable because we are on the play. G3 is a really different story.
Interacting with the stack while not playing "blue" is really difficult, I acknowledge that. But overall, I think it would be harder to transform into a prison shell.
3) It's been 6 months (at least) since the last time I saw many lists playing Liliana. Wake up gentlemen... SHE is one of our best tool against other control decks and a very nice addition against combo decks. Why does she have disappeared from our tools ? Liliana + SDT is likely one of the most disgusting synergy we can offer to any opponent.
If I could scan my LotV into my computer and play them on modo I would... I draw the line a $90 cards on modo, so unfortunately she really isn't an option. I could buy her and then sell her back again at a $10 loss per card. But yea, I guess I can test her in paper when I can.
That said, in my experience playing Junk before nic fit, LotV really doesn't do much against miracles. She gets them hell bent like our discard currently does and then they either entreat anyway, cast a mentor and make a token, or you use her to kill a Jace or half of their 8 lands. Really not a big deal.
@Matt, you've also played s lot of junk and still post in the forum, what's your thoughts on Liliana against miracle?
You come to valid conclusions, but I don't really see you presenting a solution here. I think it's safe to say we (as a community) won't be agreeing on LotV as answer to Miracles and vs. ANT/TES she's too slow. Building further on your premise, how would you want to attack this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralf
I understand your point, but my reasoning is: I like Games and SE better and before Abeyance. The overlap would not be a problem, heck it would be a bonus instead. I still like Abeyance for all the reasons you have listed, I am not denying the fact that the card plays well with other hate effects (like SE). I simply don't have space for more cards in my sideboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralf
My plan in G2-3 against cancer.deck is "reach 4 mana asap and game their wincon", I often feel like I am in the one in the control seat while they durdle in the first turns with top and counterbalance, I won't play a rhino before a games if I can afford to do it; meanwhile abeyance is a 2 mana card that can be countered or balanced (just like SE). Imho games remains a necessary evil and has to be played at least as a 3-of, and this doesn't allow me to play abeyance AND games AND SE AND other stuff I feel I need.
So in conclusion I'm not saying you are wrong, instead I do even agree with most of what you have said. Only I have other priorities for my sb.
I have to agree with Echelon here: LotV is too slow in the matchups where she is needed and miracles float their key cards in the top 3. Instead of a 3 mana discard spell I'd rather play 1 cmc discard against them and choose the card to discard directly. And lili does not complement, in my opinion, the philosophy of this deck: EVERY card in our deck matters and is basically gas. I don't want to discard any of them.
Isn't that why we all pilot this deck? We love our cards too much to discard them and want to play them no matter what, be it SFM or Karador!Quote:
Originally Posted by rubblekill
Anyways. People aren't satisfied with Slaughter Games, Abeyance and LotV for one reason or another so let go of those as possible solutions and let's see if we can Sherlock Holmes this shit.
I reckon Miracles and ANT/TES both are MUs where we'd like to board in 10 cards or so. That means that out of 15 available cards, at least 5 need to pull double duty vs. those decks.
Now I believe the general consensus for the Miracles MU is that we need more threats and that those threats must be incredibly hard to remove and that cards vs. ANT/TES cannot cost >2 mana b/c that makes them too slow.
This puts the basic requirements model for our SB at:
- Cards used during the ANT/TES MU may not cost >2 mana
- At least 10 cards must have value for the Miracles MU
- At least 10 cards must have value for the ANT/TES MU
- Card selections must be done under the assumption there is no access to red or blue mana
So... Who wants to start? I'm also looking for a way to describe requirements for a portion of the Miracles cards (something along the lines of threats may not be killable by StP/Terminus or something along those lines).
That's not what we are saying at all. I was beating them down with main deck threats that were hard to remove while being up in cards all 3 games and I still lost two of them because of entreat. We need answers for their threats (unless you can think of a threat that is an answer for entreat?), there's no way we can go under them with just more threats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
I used to play humility + equipment as a sideboard plan against a lot of decks. It works against entreat as well, something to consider for those on SFM.
Have we ever tried?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
Besides, I excluded it from the requirements for a reason. Give it a go. Saying "We can't" (right off the bat, mind you) has never solved shit.
Between Grip and 3 Deeds (and pulse theoretically) angels are not a problem usually. JTMS is. At least with how I play/how my deck is constructed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
It can be and variance is a thing, you know that. It's a valid point to want to address it.Quote:
Originally Posted by rubblekill
I'm confused. You said "the general consensus" was to add more threats post-board against miracles and used that as part of your requirements. I don't think that is the general consensus at all :/ By all means you can try it and make it one of your requirements, I don't think it's going to work since without any tempo plays they can just one for one you until they entreat or Jace, but that is neither here nor there, I was just addressing that you seemed to think more threats is the conclusion we have come to, when that isn't the case? We are talking about answers. I'm confused.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
I'd add these as board conditions:
- Must have a SB replacement for cards which cost life against Delver/aggressive decks
- Must have at least one way of dealing with artifacts and enchantments with cmc>3 post board
Putting these in just so we don't auto-lose to rogue decks because we can't kill a Smokestack or similar stuff post-board. Obviously a lot of our lists have a Reclamation Sage or QPM in the maindeck so it's not a problem, but it should probably be in the requirements.
For Miracles - I think Humility might be worth more of a look here. It's particularly relevant when combined with Sorin. I remember we discussed the possibility of running Elspeth (KE or 6CMC) in combination with Humility because she wins pretty well with it, but Sorin does basically the same thing but also kills Jace which is pretty big.
@Navsi, tbh I don't think you should be running unmaking specifically because you are siding it out against delver. There are painless options that are just as good that you could be playing instead that allow you to keep in more removal against delver, pulse, vindicate, council's judgment etc
Also, humility shuts down snapcaster, clique, entreat, mentor, venser, all of shardless's threats, tribal decks (merfolk, goblins, elves, eldrazi lol, D&T), reanimator, show n tell etc etc The problem with it being that you have to play equipment to break the symmetry. Also humility + engineered plague is a dream that has been realised a few times ha
EDIT: I typed miracles to begin with when I meant Delver -.- miracles on the brain.
I was more referring to Painful Truths than Unmaking really, I consider most of the Vindicate variants relatively interchangable (I play Unmaking currently because my meta is light on delver and has quite a bit of Lands and Miracles).
Ah, I see, then I entirely agree :) though I don't mind a thoughtsieze or two against the non-burn buildsQuote:
Originally Posted by Navsi
I have been having good success against Miracles with both Gaddock Teeg and Sylvan Safekeeper in the board. Granted, I'm playing my wonky Chalice list, so I've got additional support to keep Teeg safe from StP. But still, getting those two out together is a sweet combo and is game over for Miracles. Teeg of course pulls double weight against storm.
I'm sure Teeg is already established in most sideboards, but do keep the Safekeeper in mind.
2-3 Chokes and 1-2 Needles have always been my answer of choice against Miracles. Non-creature permanents they have to answer makes them squirm. Lily is a another good one to have. In my latest Nic Fit lists I've always favored DRS>Explorer, Liliana>Deed, Truths>Top and SFM>random crap. Those changes tend to make a lot of matchups more favorable, including the dreaded Miracles and Elves matchup.
Wait a second, that deck is junk Dead guy ale: liliana sfm package drs. This is nic fit, it ain't got no 'random crap'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qweerios
I have been using Tsunami's instead of Chokes for a while now. Also good against Shardless which can't answer it with an Abrupt Decay, which I really like. Even only putting only 2-3 Islands down the drain can make a huge difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qweerios
Miracles sideboards in 2 wear//tear against almost every match up at the moment, our chokes/needles are not safe unfortunately. I've seen miracles operate quite happily with basic plains, answering threats until they find their wear//tear. That said I try to overload wear//tear with equipment, needles and deeds. So I think of choke as more of a speed bump.
@Qweerios, I miss Junk sometimes. How are the shardless, delver and tribal matchups these days?
Whatever man. Moving on. If you (or anyone else) want to add to the requirements model, just let me know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
Requirements model so far:
- Cards used during the ANT/TES MU may not cost >2 mana
- At least 10 cards must have value for the Miracles MU
- At least 10 cards must have value for the ANT/TES MU
- Card selections must be done under the assumption there is no access to red or blue mana
- Must have a SB replacement for cards which cost life against Delver/aggressive decks
- Must have at least one way of dealing with artifacts and enchantments with cmc>3 post board
Once we round out our requirements model we'll start building example sideboards. I'm curious to see where this takes us. Maybe after this we want to revisit SE Fit to tighten that requirements model a bit (either Brael or Navsi mentioned it was a bit too loose. I agree, but there's only so much one can do on a public forum). It would be completely according to the SE methodology.
I skimmed through Chapin's book by the way - he describes even remotely close to what we're doing here. This is the place where SE, model based deck development started!
Ok :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
The last requirement, can that include maindeck vindicate effects, or are we talking Gsun target?Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
I question why it has to be at least 10 cards for ANT/TEST matchup. We aren't taking out our veteran exp/therapies (like miracles), just our paths/decays (deed and pulse are good) and a couple of top end / grindy cards. That's about 8 cards? So you'd need at least 8 in your sideboard, and that's enough cards to create our game plan of: shred their hand/deck/establish lock piece, win.
Other requirements, I can only speak for myself but these are effects I always try to have in my sideboard:
Always play at least two more sweeper effects that are cheaper than deed
(for all the creature decks, especially tribal)
Always play at least two grindy card advantage effects, ie draw spells or planeswalkers
(for midrange/control matches where you don't want therapy)
Always play at least two ways to interact with the graveyard for cheap
(For reani/dredge/lands etc)
Obviously the more effects the merrier, but two is my minimum
This is why I think planeswalkers are the best places to be looking. I'm still down with Pithing Needle because it has overlap against so many random and obnoxious things, but the bread and butter of an anti-miracles plan should be planeswalkers, I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
Agreed on needle, but this whole discussion started because I was professing merely having more resilient threats wasn't good enough, you still just die to entreat end of turn. Doesn't matter if you have three planeswalkers and a sigarda in play, if you can't answer an entreat you die :( 3 deeds isn't enough, you need more answers if you want to win it reliably.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arianrhod
It is still Nic Fit if you play Explorer (even as a 1-2of) with Therapy and win with a GSZ into Sigarda. I simply abandoned Deed a long time ago as I find it too hefty and restrictive. Having 4 DRS, GSZ with Arbor and a SFM package into one of the best mana sink (Batterskull) is way more attractive to me. I also find Liliana and even Toxic Deluge to be more effective than Deed at what I need the card to do. Overall I have found these cards to make the deck faster (lower curve), more resilient (less dead/situational cards and more early interaction) and way more versatile (lots of GY hate, early tutoring, equipment package) while still being able to curve out with a single Rhino or Sigarda to go above most decks. Nic Fit is the best Junk deck I've piloted over the last 6 years. One of my favorite perks of this deck is how consistent it has been at getting Liliana on the board on T2. Attaching a Batterskull on a Sigarda is a close second though...
Choke vs. Tsunami. I've had someone recover with Miracles from 2 Tsunami in the same game and those 2 cards function very differently. First of all, Tsunami only works once, they won't extend into it again. Second, Choke in effect will deter your opponent from taping his Islands until he finds an answer, which is why multiple Choke is a massive headache. Lastly, the fact that Choke is a long lasting hindrance that requires a non-creature answer in a timely fashion is key. Miracle needs to Top and make land drops, Choke restricts topping and mana development as early as T2.
If you are scared of Wear // Tear you can always bring Stony Silence out of the board to complement Choke. I've had my Needle and my Choke/Library 2 for 1 by Wear // Tear before and it wasn't the end of the world. Just put yourself in the Miracle player's shoes for a second and think about how badly you want that Wear//Tear against a Choke or Needle, and then imagine both are in play.
@Jain_mor
Delver and Shardless have always been great matchups. As for Tribal, if you mean elves, then it isn't the greatest but it has always been so-so. SFM and Jitte are a big boon for this MU.
@Qweerios, I'm glad you've popped in actually, I've been debating cutting deed for a long time, but I tend to find it winning me games where no other card would. Can you PM me your list? We think on similar wave lengths. Cheers.
How about Nevermore? Dies to deed, can be countered, but it comes down a turn earlier than Slaughter Games and is slightly less awkward on the mana since it's WW rather than RB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
Is it just no good because of Council's Judgment?
In a similar vein Memoricide and Stain the Mind are very similar to Slaughter Games without going into red. Being countered some percent of the time is probably worth the tradeoff of improving your mana.
I'm not quite sure how to build it but I still think Jund has a lot of potential. It's slightly worse against Junks good matchups, but it's much better against Junks bad matchups.
Which book did you skim? I swear I remember reading about it in one of them. I don't remember for certain if it was Magic or Deckbuilding but I'm guessing it was Magic since I never fully finished Deckbuilding as it got too repetitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon
Edit: Back on the Jund idea, or perhaps just splashing a Taiga, what about Thought Hemmorage instead? It helps our clock while accomplishing the same thing as Slaughter Games and combos pretty well with something like Cabal Therapy to not just know their hand so we strip a card, but Therapy clears the way of counterspells, then we can cash this in for extraction, discard, and damage.
@ Those looking for ideas:
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post905974
I don't think Thought Hemorrhage is comparable to Slaughter Games. If we cast Slaughter and hit 1-2 copies in our opponent's hand, we're going to win that game with or without a couple free Bolts. The deck is generally based around answering our opponent's plan then making a game ending threat ourselves. Unless we are running other sources of burn and attrition damage, there isn't much point playing incidental damage. It doesn't matter particularly whether Sigarda kills in three turns or four when we have generally stabilised by that point anyway.
I don't know about that. Getting a couple cards out of my opponents hand is nice, but I've certainly had games where my clock is anemic enough that I've lost after getting several cards out of their hand. Certain matchups like Shardless and Delver can be won along a traditional axis of card advantage and threats. That's not what beats Miracles though, against them you need disruption combined with a clock. It's pretty easy to beat Miracles in CA for the entire game, but they can still win depending on their build. The Entreat builds especially have the ability to just turn a game around out of nowhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navsi
Also, a turn 12 Slaughter Games is pretty useless, a turn 12 card that can be converted into 3 damage though? Not as useless. It extracts Jace or depending on their hand it kills Jace and takes something else.
Yo dudes,
Sorry to interrupt the SB development discussion. I am just looking for an opinion here on some additional sideboard tech. I've got a Thorn of Amethyst in my board that I don't think I really need because storm isn't a deck that I will ever face ever. I am looking to up my game against miracles by throwing in a walker that they won't be able to deal with but is also not Liliana of the veil because dollars. So right now i'm thinking of adding either Ob Nixilis Reignited or Garruk Apex Predator. Pros: Ob has an ultimate that they cannot beat, and he'll get there pretty easily. Drawing cards doesn't hurt either. Garruk kills their jace, end of discussion. Also costs seven and cannot (I believe) be counterbalanced. Cons: Ob gets counterbalanced, which is obviously a problem, and also isn't terribly impactful before he ultimates. Garruk costs 7 mana and relies on creatures to win, which could be an issue. Also the creatures do nothing against angel tokens.
So either of these dudes could work out to help beat miracles, but I'm not sure which one i'd go with. So could someone point me in the right direction here, either by telling me which walker is better, or by explaining how this choice isn't a good one at all because it's, I don't know, too narrow or whatever? and if this is the case, what is one card that I can use to improve my miracles matchup? I realise that that's probably just the discussion going on right now and I should probably just wait for y'all more experienced folks to work it out, but hey, may as well ask.
Thanks for any insight here.
Garruk Relentless or Sorin, Grim Nemesis are your best planeswalker choices. Some people have advocated Sorin Lord of Innistrad, and I played with Vraska the Unseen as a sideboard threat against Miracles. Ob Nixilis Reignited is definitely good, but I'd so go with Sorin GN, he's just better. Apex Predator is awesome, he is on the expensive side, but a deck can definitely be built to accommodate it, he produces a 3/3 every turn, Terminus is not that great...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vestige
I've already got a flip garruk, which is probably another argument against apex predator. And I totally forgot that there's white walkers other than ajani and elspeth, so Sorin would probably be a good fit once I can get my hands on one.Quote:
Originally Posted by TTX
Since it's safe to assume that the MD runs GSZ I'd say for that last requirement, for consistency's sake, it should be a GSZ'able target. This requirement may be ignored if the maindeck already includes such a target.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jain_Mor
Why the 10 cards? Because I like to push the boundaries of what we think we can do.
As for the requirements: You're really pushing the SB in a certain direction there (i.e. to what we always do). It's fine to want those, but I think it's best to consider them nice-to-haves for the time being. As such, I will include them in our requirements model.
Could you define more clearly what you consider grindy CA cards? Currently there's a lot of room for interpretation and I have the feeling that's not what you're aiming for.
The deckbuilding one. It seems we're breaking new (or rather undocumented) ground with this approach.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brael
Our updated requirements model:
- Cards used during the ANT/TES MU may not cost >2 mana
- At least 10 cards must have value for the Miracles MU
- At least 10 cards must have value for the ANT/TES MU
- Card selections must be done under the assumption there is no access to red or blue mana
- Must have at least one GSZ'able way of dealing with artifacts and enchantments with CM >3 post board. This requirement may be dropped if it is fulfilled by the MB
Nice-to-haves:
- Must have at least two sweeper effects that are cheaper than Deed
- Must have at least two grindy CA, i.e. draw spells or planeswalkers (Under revision)
- Must have at least two cards to interact with the graveyard that cost <= 2 mana
- Must have a SB replacement for cards which cost life against Delver/aggressive decks
I think this one is a bit looser than that. I've used Bob successfully against Delver but most of my cards gain life. My average cost is something like 1.67, but after lifegain is included it averages at 1.22, and after I can start manipulating with Top it drops even further (how far it drops depends on if there's also a Courser out).Quote:
Originally Posted by Echelon