Miracle Control

I feel like most people are running neither Waste nor Factory. I've seen a lot of lists with 10 fetches, 3/4 tundras, 4 Island, 2 Plains, 1 Karakas, and 2 Glacial Fortress. Personally, I think Factory is house, as it survives a Terminus and gives an alternate win con (not to mention providing early blocking vs. a Goblin Guide or Nimble Mongoose, as ivanpei mentions).

I think 10 fetches is too much, as we have no way to gain life and the life loss can be relevant. While fetch is nice with Top, I think 8 is enough.

Is anyone giving serious consideration to Crucible of Worlds? It allows us to 'reanimate' Factory or Wasteland, reshuffle with fetches, and it's a 3 CC for counterbalance.

I think Waste goes against the 'theory' of the deck, as previously discussed. Rarely is it relevant and we really want to hit our land drops (and have them stick around).

Personally, I'm running 8 fetch, 3 tundra, 1 karakas, 2 plains, 4 island, 2 glacial fortress, and 2 factories with 2 SCM and 1 Clique, 1 O-Ring in the 3-slot.

ivanpei - are you running Clique in addition to SCM and Mishra's Factory?

I tried 3 mishras, 2 wasteland and 1 crucible main in a small tournament. 23 lands in total.
sometimes one more white mana would have been good for entreat, but I could manage that most of the time.

But crucible felt too slow especially against combo and most of the time you want to have your mana ready for counterspells, clique, top/cb....

another clique or a spell pierce would have been better. Next time I also go with 4 mishra or 3 wastelands.

Hmm Mishra sounds fair...but where would I put it in.., that's what I play:
3 Tundra
3 Glacial Fortress
4 Island
2 Plains
1 Karakas
4 Flooded Strand
3 Polluted Delta
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Arid Mesa

And I could see myself cutting the Rainforest for a Mishra but that's it. I do not want to go below 3 Fortress as they are pretty good against Maverick/Elves and stuff, while having a little flaw in the Canadian-MU --> Hand with Tundra and Fortress, play tundra, gets wasted, play tapped Fortress. Still I think this card is essential. One of the strengths of this deck is it's strong mana-base. So I wouldnt weaken it too much with too many off-color(non-color)lands.

Greetings

EDIT: I read you'd be playing with 4 Mishra AND 3 Wastelands...deleted half of my post :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malakai

Round 5: RUG without Mongeese
I cast Ambush Viper to block it at some point, but he Dazes it.

---

Ambush Viper?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

I feel like most people are running neither Waste nor Factory. I've seen a lot of lists with 10 fetches, 3/4 tundras, 4 Island, 2 Plains, 1 Karakas, and 2 Glacial Fortress. Personally, I think Factory is house, as it survives a Terminus and gives an alternate win con

---

I'm not sure Factory is needed. 3 EtAs provide enough clockery, and its use as pseudo-removal is kind of wane with the most gangster removal suite in the game.
Plus having :w: :w: & :u: :u: (preferrably all basics) available by turn 4 is helpful/necessary more often than not.

I'd love me 2-3 Wastelands in the list. Not for strategical but tactical application. Mostly to get rid off Caverns of Souls. Still, the manabase is too fragile the way it is right now, so I can't see myself "splashing" more colorless lands. Factory on the other hand is just unneeded compared to all the losses you will accumulate when you can't cast half your hand on turn3.

Regarding the decklist, several people who are involved in the development of it asked me not to post it. Still, I'm sure you can find it somewhere on the internet. Also, it's not too far off what most people post here.

3 mishras and 2 wastelands not 4 / 3
7 noncoulored are too many for sure.

At the moment I would go with 2-3 wastelands nothing else, but sometimes mishras shine for sure, maybe 24 or even 25 lands is an option.

I also considered mox diamond since I love them (playing also rock/junk), this would give us a better mana base, making splashing red easy, adding crucible would be feasible.
Turn I CB, turn 3 jace and larger entreats are also not the worst.

but you have to cut something for it, so I dunno.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

I feel like most people are running neither Waste nor Factory. I've seen a lot of lists with 10 fetches, 3/4 tundras, 4 Island, 2 Plains, 1 Karakas, and 2 Glacial Fortress. Personally, I think Factory is house, as it survives a Terminus and gives an alternate win con (not to mention providing early blocking vs. a Goblin Guide or Nimble Mongoose, as ivanpei mentions).

I think 10 fetches is too much, as we have no way to gain life and the life loss can be relevant. While fetch is nice with Top, I think 8 is enough.

Is anyone giving serious consideration to Crucible of Worlds? It allows us to 'reanimate' Factory or Wasteland, reshuffle with fetches, and it's a 3 CC for counterbalance.

I think Waste goes against the 'theory' of the deck, as previously discussed. Rarely is it relevant and we really want to hit our land drops (and have them stick around).

Personally, I'm running 8 fetch, 3 tundra, 1 karakas, 2 plains, 4 island, 2 glacial fortress, and 2 factories with 2 SCM and 1 Clique, 1 O-Ring in the 3-slot.

ivanpei - are you running Clique in addition to SCM and Mishra's Factory?

---

I'm not running Clique in the main at the moment mainly because I don't play counterbalance in the MD so I can't protect it. I feel that playing Clique main gives opponents something to point removal at and sort of goes against the plan of blanking the opponent's removal.

I'm playing without glacial fortress and I haven't had coloured mana problems yet. I've tested against RUG extensively and the 4 Factories don't hurt my manabase much, haven't lost to colour screw yet. It's not that much of a stretch to play 4 colourless lands. If you are maining the Counterbalances along with Counterspells, I understand the need to hit double blue on T2. I'm not maining Counterbalance, so I can get away with a little colourless lands.

I also don't understand the 2nd plains. For those who play the 2nd plains for Entreat, I think it's not necessary. I've found that I can play around wasteland very easily and get the 2nd white by sandbagging a fetch and popping it for Tundra with the Miracle trigger on the stack. I'd much prefer another fetch or the 2nd Karakas over a 2nd plains. Karakas has been super useful from my testing. Either from keeping Thalias/Teeq off the board or by bouncing Emrakul and other Legendary Fatties. Even won a game by bouncing a Griselbrand and getting in there with Snapcasters/Factories FTW.

Also by playing 4 Factories/3 Snapcasters and increasing my threat count, I can go down to 2 Entreats and 3 Jaces enabling me to play more counters and removal. I've felt this is the right choice and the deck feels less clunky and more responsive. Of course in the grindy control mirror, I'd definitely miss the Counterbalances/3rd Terminus. But I don't expect to see as much Miracle Control as say RUG/Mav/Sneakshow.

The second plains and other basics are there for more than just wasteland considerations. Price of Progress is a real card that gets cast a lot.

As for the factory/waste discussion, this is like the 3rd time it's happened. If you missed all the others, go back and read, everyone has their preference and the argument goes nowhere.

Lessons from the tournament:

• When Brainstorming, set the two cards on the table before double-checking, then put them on your library.
• Entreat is both awesome and miserable. I'll be moving down to 1 in the main, 1 in the board.
• Wasteland was amazing all day, including two wins by itself.
• Not playing 4 CB 4 Top is wrong.
• 4 Snapcasters was too many.
• Counterspell was sometimes awkward, but nothing else really does the same job.
• Fettergeist should probably make an appearance in the 75.
• Peacekeeper would often have been better than Humility.
• Relic was chosen over other graveyard hate in order to be able to bring it in against Delver, but this use may be ill-advised. More testing is needed.

On fatigue:
I made sure to stay hydrated, and I had a decent lunch. I have to assume fatigue took its toll in round 8. The entire tournament I was working hard to stay focused and calm. Often, it can be beneficial to just count the number of permanents on the board to ease your mind.


On the neat play in round 7: I messed up in the initial report; it's been fixed on here now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

I noticed your build ran 3 Wasteland (something I brought up a couple pages back). Your thoughts on it's inclusion?

---

I was on Factory before the tournament. On the ride there, we were talking about Wasteland, and I pointed out that every deck needs to have a very good reason to not run it, or otherwise have it. Someone asked me if I had a good reason, and I really didn't. Just remember that Wasteland does in fact tap for mana, and really ask yourself if trading lands will be beneficial. It is as often as it is not. A lot of times it's just a removal spell on a manland.

As it stands, I'll never leave home without it again.

Right now I am running 3/3 and i might go down on one factory. But I just love factory soo much. I havn't had problems with mana and having the biggest creature on the board when humility hits is awesome.

At 22 lands, I would not go above 5 non-blue lands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by klaus

Ambush Viper?

---

Snapcaster Mage w/o flashback ability

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ivanpei

I'm not running Clique in the main at the moment mainly because I don't play counterbalance in the MD so I can't protect it. I feel that playing Clique main gives opponents something to point removal at and sort of goes against the plan of blanking the opponent's removal.

....

Also by playing 4 Factories/3 Snapcasters and increasing my threat count...

---

If you are playing 4 Factories and 3 Snapcasters, don't opponent's already have something to point their removal at?

@ Malakai - thanks for the takeaways.

Great point about WL.

You still did really well and while the feeling that you 'let some slip away' is frustrating, at least you had the ability to win those games. I would rather learn from my mistakes and know I could have won then have played a deck without a chance.

Updates to your decklist in line with your comments?

I think the consensus is that Wastelands are good.

Thanks for fixing the report.

I'm totally fine with them pointing removal at Snapcaster because he's already done his job as a recoup. Also I don't activate factory until late in the game where I have the extra mana and I'm using it as a clock. In that case, getting it killed is fine too. Plowing a factory is really inefficient as well since if I'm swinging with factory, I already have too much lands. However, investing 3 mana and a card in a clique then getting it killed is not a very good play. Unless you are running countertop and using clique as a clock, then I understand its appeal. Also being able to combo with karakas as a hard to kill wincon is pretty sweet as well.

I think I'll cut the md paths to 1 and play a full set of Snapcasters. I agree that counterspells are not particularly great but nothing can replace them. They're just a really useful answer all in the mid to late game.

If Pointing removal at Clique isnt the same as removal on Snappy then Im confused, because Clique, just like Snappy's etb ability, has done its job from its etb ability. At least I feel there should be 2 to 3 of them somewhere in the 75. UW miracles is amazing at getting rid of creatures but Clique actually stops them from casting whatever it is that was tucked and hand information is pretty big.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menace13

If Pointing removal at Clique isnt the same as removal on Snappy then Im confused, because Clique, just like Snappy's etb ability, has done its job from its etb ability. At least I feel there should be 2 to 3 of them somewhere in the 75. UW miracles is amazing at getting rid of creatures but Clique actually stops them from casting whatever it is that was tucked and hand information is pretty big.

---

Agreed clique belongs in the 75. I play 2 in the board myself. My argument is that Snapcasters ability IMO is more critical than his body. The 2/1 is just a nice plus whereas clique's 3/1 flying body is the main reason you are playing the card, the mini Thoughtseize is still a very strong plus.

For example, would you pay 3 mana to have a choice of stp/snare/pierce/brainstorms, or a mini Thoughtseize. Against an aggro or control deck, clique is not card advantage. It is card parity with an added disruptive element. Snapcaster is card advantage even if he gets plowed. It let's your mini entreat of 2 angels get there or frees up your mishra's factory. Getting clique plowed hurts more than getting snapcaster plowed.

However clique is still fantastic vs combo and that's why I still play a pair in the board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ivanpei

Agreed clique belongs in the 75. I play 2 in the board myself. My argument is that Snapcasters ability IMO is more critical than his body. The 2/1 is just a nice plus whereas clique's 3/1 flying body is the main reason you are playing the card, the mini Thoughtseize is still a very strong plus.

For example, would you pay 3 mana to have a choice of stp/snare/pierce/brainstorms, or a mini Thoughtseize. Against an aggro or control deck, clique is not card advantage. It is card parity with an added disruptive element. Snapcaster is card advantage even if he gets plowed. It let's your mini entreat of 2 angels get there or frees up your mishra's factory. Getting clique plowed hurts more than getting snapcaster plowed.

However clique is still fantastic vs combo and that's why I still play a pair in the board.

---

Yeah, I get that Snappy is CA, but Clique is still amazing in control mirrors even if it gives a target for removal. Tucking their best answer/threat and presenting a threat itself all at once gives a sort of advantage that is built into the inherent design of the card. I would happily trade a StP(w/e removal on Clique) since it is irrel against Jace and Angel tokens for a Counter, Miracle or Jace in a control match up.

How many Snapcasters are considered average for the deck? Being a do nothing deck I feel having all 4 seems right and lets me shave down numbers for Counterspell and Pierce. Is anyone playing Ponder? Tried a few games and fiddled around on the numbers from playset to 1. I know I want some number of Ponders in there. Although not 4 it could be that 1 or 2 is as many slots as this deck is going to get without cantripping too much and falling behind hoping to see something and make up later for not developing or answering earlier. The additional cantrip has been needed with Wastelands/Mishra in openers to get Cspell and Cbalance online as early as possible. That and only 8 shuffle lands.

Counterbalance gives the deck the card advantage virtually that it lacks. Havent yet tested a Standstill version but I want CBalance against RUG and combo more.

Anyone else rocking 4 Jaces atm?

Why consider #4?
- dominates the mirror (which will be more frequent than we'd like it to be very soon)
- miracles loves BS effects
- with 3/4 Wrath effects we are likely to drop him on a clear battlefield

yeah why not.
I would then consider playing 23-24 lands and maybe even without mishras, since 4 jace and 2-3 entreat should be enough to win the game. It is the more controlish way or you go the more aggro way: clique/mishra/snap/entreat 3 jace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorondor

yeah why not.
I would then consider playing 23-24 lands and maybe even without mishras, since 4 jace and 2-3 entreat should be enough to win the game. It is the more controlish way or you go the more aggro way: clique/mishra/snap/entreat 3 jace.

---

I think so too. 3 EtA & 4 Jace supported by CB-Top should be enough wincons.

Why do people play up to 3 Glacial Fortress in this deck? That is just wrong. Hallowed Fountain is at least better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CookedChestnuts

Why do people play up to 3 Glacial Fortress in this deck? That is just wrong. Hallowed Fountain is at least better.

---

Choke.

@CookedChestnuts:You are right. I forgot CHOKE was a card. -.-

If you're playing Fortress because of Choke, I honestly feel that you're approaching the post sideboard Maverick matchup totally wrong. It's not hard to save your Counterspells and Force of Wills for their two/three-of "silver bullet" against you. The matchup is atrocious for them, when you're playing 4 1 mana wrath effects, 4 Swords to Plowshares, and 4 Snapcaster Mages to ambush their creatures and recur Swords to Plowshares.

Glacial Fortress is terrible, especially if you're playing a Counterbalance version of the deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CookedChestnuts

If you're playing Fortress because of Choke, I honestly feel that you're approaching the post sideboard Maverick matchup totally wrong. It's not hard to save your Counterspells and Force of Wills for their two/three-of "silver bullet" against you. The matchup is atrocious for them, when you're playing 4 1 mana wrath effects, 4 Swords to Plowshares, and 4 Snapcaster Mages to ambush their creatures and recur Swords to Plowshares.

Glacial Fortress is terrible, especially if you're playing a Counterbalance version of the deck.

---

I have never had to do any work in order for my Glacial Fortress to come into play untapped.

Glacial Fortress isn't much of a liability. The manabase isn't the greatest I have ever played but it works decently well. Postboard against Maverick, you're never putting all your eggs into the GF-basket since you've got Disenchant to deal with Choke anyways. Still, having Fortress in your deck helps more than it is gonna hurt you.

But only slightly. I can see people cutting them and I wouldn't mind too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CookedChestnuts

If you're playing Fortress because of Choke, I honestly feel that you're approaching the post sideboard Maverick matchup totally wrong. It's not hard to save your Counterspells and Force of Wills for their two/three-of "silver bullet" against you. The matchup is atrocious for them, when you're playing 4 1 mana wrath effects, 4 Swords to Plowshares, and 4 Snapcaster Mages to ambush their creatures and recur Swords to Plowshares.

Glacial Fortress is terrible, especially if you're playing a Counterbalance version of the deck.

---

I don't play Glacial fortresses as well. So basically people who play it expect to draw a 1/2 of against Maverick in a post board game while not having any answers to choke. That sounds beyond narrow to me. The trade off is actually pretty serious, hands with Glacial fortress as the only coloured mana become terribad.

You are forced to play a CIPT tapped land on T1 OR forced to lay a fetch instead and risk running into Stifle. Running out a fetch early to support a T2 Fortress also makes Top/Brainstorming less efficient because you used your fetch too early. If it was a simple Tundra, you can just lay Tundra T1, fetch T2 and go about your business. Fortress messes up consistency in ALL your games in all matchups only to help slightly in postboard Mav matchups.

Glacial fortress is really really narrow and does very very little against Choke even if you draw it. A single Fortress won't save your ass from getting whooped if Choke is unanswered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ivanpei

I don't play Glacial fortresses as well. So basically people who play it expect to draw a 1/2 of against Maverick in a post board game while not having any answers to choke. That sounds beyond narrow to me. The trade off is actually pretty serious, hands with Glacial fortress as the only coloured mana become terribad.

You are forced to play a CIPT tapped land on T1 OR forced to lay a fetch instead and risk running into Stifle. Running out a fetch early to support a T2 Fortress also makes Top/Brainstorming less efficient because you used your fetch too early. If it was a simple Tundra, you can just lay Tundra T1, fetch T2 and go about your business. Fortress messes up consistency in ALL your games in all matchups only to help slightly in postboard Mav matchups.

Glacial fortress is really really narrow and does very very little against Choke even if you draw it. A single Fortress won't save your ass from getting whooped if Choke is unanswered.

---

I'm with you on this one: -3 GF +3 basics improves several MUs of the Wasteland infested meta, while GFs are far from being an auto-win against Choke.dec. The MU is positive both pre and post board anyway..

@klaus: I've been going back and forth between 3 Jace/1 Elspeth and 4 Jace. There have been a lot of times where the board looks pretty grim, and I have a miracle in hand. By resolving a Jace, I'm able to put the miracle on top, and most often watch my opponent attack into Jace for a turn (time walk). However, I have noticed that sometimes I get multiple Jaces stuck in my hand. Not sure what the correct answer is there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyC27

@klaus: I've been going back and forth between 3 Jace/1 Elspeth and 4 Jace. There have been a lot of times where the board looks pretty grim, and I have a miracle in hand. By resolving a Jace, I'm able to put the miracle on top, and most often watch my opponent attack into Jace for a turn (time walk). However, I have noticed that sometimes I get multiple Jaces stuck in my hand. Not sure what the correct answer is there.

---

I think you just answered your own question there :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsck

I think you just answered your own question there :)

---

Yeah.. I guess the problem of "too many Jaces" is a good problem to have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyC27

Yeah.. I guess the problem of "too many Jaces" is a good problem to have.

---

I played 4 at first and it was fantastic in the control mirror. Then I played alot against rug, reanimator, sneakshow and gw Mav. 4 was definitely too much for those mus kept getting multiples stuck in hand. The current meta is too fast for 4 Jaces IMO. 3 is a nice. Number for me. Even against gw, thalia, teeq and wasteland makes it hard to cast jace consistently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ivanpei

I played 4 at first and it was fantastic in the control mirror. Then I played alot against rug, reanimator, sneakshow and gw Mav. 4 was definitely too much for those mus kept getting multiples stuck in hand. The current meta is too fast for 4 Jaces IMO. 3 is a nice. Number for me. Even against gw, thalia, teeq and wasteland makes it hard to cast jace consistently.

---

This is completely true. I had the same problem in playing U/X control variants in the past. He's very strong, but you don't need multiples and you don't need him early. Additionally, I really disliked having two Jaces in hand, so if 4 planeswalkers was what one wanted, I would recommend 3/1 for Jace/Elspeth even.

well, this argument: "having 2 in the hand is bad", does not really count. Same for eslpeht/jace in the hand, is not much better in the given non controlish mus.

You also don't argue about STPs, having two in the hand against ench, tes, belcher, high tide and even s&t is also bad.

You can pitch jace to force and terminus into jace is one of the best plays we can do.

I am also playing 3 atm and no other planeswalker, but dunno, one in the sideboard or maybe even one more main, is something you have to consider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorondor

well, this argument: "having 2 in the hand is bad", does not really count. Same for eslpeht/jace in the hand, is not much better in the given non controlish mus.

You also don't argue about STPs, having two in the hand against ench, tes, belcher, high tide and even s&t is also bad.

You can pitch jace to force and terminus into jace is one of the best plays we can do.

I am also playing 3 atm and no other planeswalker, but dunno, one in the sideboard or maybe even one more main, is something you have to consider.

---

After a bit of testing I've returned to the conclusion that 3 is most likely the correct number for the MD. That 4th SB Jace should be a given though for obvious reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorondor

You also don't argue about STPs, having two in the hand against ench, tes, belcher, high tide and even s&t is also bad.

---

I think this is an unfair comparison to running 4 Jace. Sure, two STPs can be bad against those decks you mentioned, but in a large majority of matches you really want to see multiple swords, and early. They are great tempo, and can help you buy time to setup your more expensive spells. Jace requires a lot more work to the boardstate to be effective, and is difficult to even hope to play or keep alive against many decks. For this reason, having 2 Jaces can end up as a huge liability. Sure, you can pitch to force or what have you or shuffle with brainstorm, but getting two Jaces in hand without force or brainstorm ends up hurting more often than not.

And as for Jace in the board...

I know that Jace is amazing, but in the sideboard has anybody considered, or more importantly tested, considered Gideon Jura? 5 mana is pretty steep, but he does a lot in those matchups where you can afford to get to that mana. His versatility to deal with creatures or be a quick clock is very strong. Plus, playing him down after a Jace is pretty disgusting, since they'll be forced to attack Gideon instead of Jace, and will probably have to do this several turns before they have any hope of getting to Jace.

Swords is often one of the weakest cards against the deck due to the insignificance/low number of creatures most miracle decks seem to run, so I imagine people will bring out some number of swords in boarded games. This also plays to Gideon's advantage, as a 6/6 that can't take damage can't be ignored and will be hard to answer in this case. He can win the game fast, and beatdown an enemy Jace quickly.

That said, perhaps the 5cc is just a bit too much. His synergy with Jace is pretty insane, and I feel like in most matchups where you could afford the 4th Jace, you could afford to play Gideon too. So, it's difficult to say since I really haven't got to test with him much, but I really like his strength and versatility he provides as a board option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valtrix

I know that Jace is amazing, but in the sideboard has anybody considered, or more importantly tested, considered Gideon Jura? 5 mana is pretty steep, but he does a lot in those matchups where you can afford to get to that mana. His versatility to deal with creatures or be a quick clock is very strong. Plus, playing him down after a Jace is pretty disgusting, since they'll be forced to attack Gideon instead of Jace, and will probably have to do this several turns before they have any hope of getting to Jace.

Swords is often one of the weakest cards against the deck due to the insignificance/low number of creatures most miracle decks seem to run, so I imagine people will bring out some number of swords in boarded games. This also plays to Gideon's advantage, as a 6/6 that can't take damage can't be ignored and will be hard to answer in this case. He can win the game fast, and beatdown an enemy Jace quickly.

That said, perhaps the 5cc is just a bit too much. His synergy with Jace is pretty insane, and I feel like in most matchups where you could afford the 4th Jace, you could afford to play Gideon too. So, it's difficult to say since I really haven't got to test with him much, but I really like his strength and versatility he provides as a board option.

---

Ah...someone who also thought about using Gideon Jura. I consider him from time to time as a substitute for an Entreat the Angels. He is actually 'OK' and does get his job done, but not the type that would probably optimize a deck because of its price tag of 5cc and the argument of "might as well spend that mana for 3 4/4 angels". I guess, although not solid, he is an option...and if someone would have success running him in the deck...cheers! :cool:

Yesterday I bought two Vendilion Clique and tried them, and they are very good in this deck. I'm running 3 Jaces, 2 Entreat as win con, with CounterTop soft lock. Clique just adds a lot of pressure by itself if not dealt with. I would recommend everyone to at least give it a serious try. I also don't run any man lands, or Glacial Fortress. Straight up 2 tundras, 9 fetches and rest are basics which almost nullify land destruction.

4 Brainstorm
4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Sensei's Divining Top
3 Spell pierce
4 Counterbalance
3 Counterspell
3 Snapcaster mage
2 Entreat the angels
2 Vendilion Clique
3 Jace, the mind sculptor
3 force of will
3 terminus

2 tundra
3 plains
4 flooded strand
1 arid mesa
4 scalding tarn
9 island

I'm gonna switch the 3 Spell pierce for the 4th Force of Will and 2 Repeal. The Spell pierce will move to my sideboard.