Miracle Control

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valtrix

I've seen many lists running Wear // Tear in the sideboard; however, I'm having some trouble understanding exactly why this card would be preferable to oblivion ring. First off, based on what's currently being played I think that you will almost never get a 2-for-1 with wear//tear (except for against Imperial Painter), so I think it's safe to ignore this aspect of wear//tear for the most part. Now, oblivion ring can be used against anything wear//tear can be used against, so we'd want oblivion ring whenever we'd want wear//tear as well.
If somebody could help me understand why wear//tear would be preferable to Oblivion Ring currently, I would much appreciate it.

EDIT: Pretty sure creature heavy lists should have 4 Baleful Strix :P

---

This is a misunderstanding. You're comparing apple and orange here.

Wear//Tear is great because its interaction with CB. When you float Wear//Tear, you can reveal to counter cmc 1 or 2 via CB.

O-Ring is used really for Show and Tell deck. As long as you have Top in play, you can always hold Enlightened Tutor in hand, wait until your opponent Show and Tell, tutor for the O-Ring and draw it via Top. I don't recommend this as a game plan, but it can be your saving grace, when you cannot find counter magic. In all the other match-ups, it'll just hit something like Jace or Grindstone or an equipment, then eventually get Decayed or painter-Blasted. O-Ring is really a bullet for tutoring. If you don't run tutor, you might as well run 1 more Clique for that slot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee

EDIT: Afaik floating Wear//Tear won't counter 1 or 2 cmc cards, but rather 3cmc. You pick the card half you are playing, or you fuze, but if it's not on the stack, it's cmc is in fact 3.

---

From Gatherer: 4/15/2013 In every zone except the stack, split cards have two sets of characteristics and two converted mana costs. If anything needs information about a split card not on the stack, it will get two values.

It counters 1s and 2s with counterbalance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aetherick

From Gatherer: 4/15/2013 In every zone except the stack, split cards have two sets of characteristics and two converted mana costs. If anything needs information about a split card not on the stack, it will get two values.

It counters 1s and 2s with counterbalance

---

Isn't it actually that you need to choose which side you are using when revealing for CB? For high REL or if you get Mindslaver'ed, I think you can still screw it up if you aren't careful.

EDIT: I was wrong, you do not choose. CB compares the CMC of the card, you do not choose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valtrix

First off, based on what's currently being played I think that you will almost never get a 2-for-1 with wear//tear (except for against Imperial Painter), so I think it's safe to ignore this aspect of wear//tear for the most part.

---

Seeing Wear // Tear played against Painter is actually one of the reasons I decided to pick it up. I had previously been dismissive of the Mono-Red Painter MU since I've had a lot of experience against UR Painter in the past and found it to be very easy. Mono-Red is unfortunately a different beast and running 8 REBs throughout the 75 really becomes an issue, especially if they get Painter online.

I can see the case for running ORing over Wear // Tear if you are running Enlightned Tutors because being able to tutor a 3cmc for Counterbalance is really nice. If you aren't running Enlightened Tutor or if you are running Snapcaster Mage then I think the upsides of Wear // Tear are too good to ignore. Like other people have said, Wear // Tear does counter 1s and 2s off Counterbalance. It is never 3cmc except on the stack for its Fuse cost.

Sort of on the same subject... what if anything do people expect to cut in order to fit in Unexpectedly Absent? Wear // Tear and ORing or possible extra sweepers look to be the best slots to cut, but what does everyone think about it? I like the card a lot, but I'm not entirely convinced yet that it is actually better than anything we already have.

Someone gives you the Gatherer rule and you still contend it.

Okay that's fine.

Wear // Tear will counter 1s and 2s with Counterbalance. There's no choice and no way to get it wrong.

One thing to think about with Unexpectedly Absent is how much of an improvement is this over Vanishment in this deck?

Vanishment can easily be :u:: Put target nonland permanent on top of its owner's library at potentially instant speed. It can also be chucked to Force of Will. Absent can be cast anytime for :w::w:, but hitting miracle cost consistency is what our deck does best.

Absent should be tested, but I am thinking it has its limitation in this deck (though playing Absent in response to a shuffle might just be too good.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzra

Sort of on the same subject... what if anything do people expect to cut in order to fit in Unexpectedly Absent? Wear // Tear and ORing or possible extra sweepers look to be the best slots to cut, but what does everyone think about it? I like the card a lot, but I'm not entirely convinced yet that it is actually better than anything we already have.

---

I am cautiously optimistic about Unexpectedly Absent in our deck. I can see taking out the a main deck ORing for Unexpectedly Absent, and maybe putting another in the sideboard somewhere (in Wear/Tear's place probably). I feel like the Miracles builds utilizing a tutor package might be better off just sticking with the Oring though, as it is easy to find permanent removal (though Oring is lame against the BGx decks..). In my limited playtesting with Unexpectedly Absent the situation has arose a couple times where my opponent has a juicy target (a Liliana for example) and I am sitting on the Unexpectedly Absent in my hand just waiting for them to fetch, or waiting until I can stick a Jace and fate seal, only to have my opponent play a Thoughtseize and take my Unexpectedly Absent. It's a pain, especially considering that I have to leave open WW mana for the moment the shuffle effect occurs. Oring has an advantage in this situation as you can just drop it and take the Liliana immediately.

Of course there are other situations that do not require us to wait on a shuffle effect with our Unexpectedly Absent, like if we have a way to counter the bounced spell when our opponent replays it. Still, I think playing Unexpectedly Absent has enough contingent factors that it's effectiveness is uncertain.. I'm still very open to the card though, it is exactly the effect Miracles needs.

Testing Unexpectedly Absent is worth the shot maybe because it's an additional 2cc, but the hesitation is if it will replace a 3cc, and a utility card at that, and also the WW minimum price tag for a delay impact. Not too sold on it, but even if I have a slot to free up - adding a Ponder, or an Entreat, immediately comes to mind before this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blacknapkins

I am cautiously optimistic about Unexpectedly Absent in our deck. I can see taking out the a main deck ORing for Unexpectedly Absent, and maybe putting another in the sideboard somewhere (in Wear/Tear's place probably). I feel like the Miracles builds utilizing a tutor package might be better off just sticking with the Oring though, as it is easy to find permanent removal (though Oring is lame against the BGx decks..). In my limited playtesting with Unexpectedly Absent the situation has arose a couple times where my opponent has a juicy target (a Liliana for example) and I am sitting on the Unexpectedly Absent in my hand just waiting for them to fetch, or waiting until I can stick a Jace and fate seal, only to have my opponent play a Thoughtseize and take my Unexpectedly Absent. It's a pain, especially considering that I have to leave open WW mana for the moment the shuffle effect occurs. Oring has an advantage in this situation as you can just drop it and take the Liliana immediately.

Of course there are other situations that do not require us to wait on a shuffle effect with our Unexpectedly Absent, like if we have a way to counter the bounced spell when our opponent replays it. Still, I think playing Unexpectedly Absent has enough contingent factors that it's effectiveness is uncertain.. I'm still very open to the card though, it is exactly the effect Miracles needs.

---

Yes there is a reason why we play counterspell over memory lapse in this deck. Control decks need permanent answers to trouble things like library or liliana. Conditional answers that are dependant on opponents fetching is sketchy.

Another issue I have is the ww. If it was uw or w1 it would be much more manageable. I will come out and say it contrary to what it looks like, unexpectedly absent is not a tempo card. This is because if you test it, it is really hard to cast in a deck that wants to fetch basics the first few turns. The usual miracle plays would usually involve basic islands and plain off fetches the first few turns to dodge wasteland. This deck needs uu asap and the first 3 lands would usually be 2 islands and 1 plains. To use unexpectedly absent as a tempo card in the first few turns AND cast counterbalance reliably, we need to fetch tundras in the first few turns, which negates the deck's mana stability.

Double white is not an issue for entreat and elspeth because these are late game bombs. By the time we reach 4-5 lands, double white should not be an issue. The same applies to unexpectedly absent since it's double white. Assuming we follow the standard, safe mana development, we won't be casting unexpectedly absent in the first 3-4 turns. I would much rather have Venser or Detention sphere in the same slot Imo.

And that is rediculously awesome. So awesome.

Also, against most Decay lists I leave my Counterbalances in. I don't see why I would take them out.

-ABC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee

Also, against most Decay lists I leave my Counterbalances in. I don't see why I would take them out.

---

I agree. It's only one card and by leaving counterbalance in, you make their decision of what to decay just that much harder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee

Also, against most Decay lists I leave my Counterbalances in. I don't see why I would take them out.

---

It's not that I think Counterbalance is bad against Abrupt Decay decks.... on the contrary, it is always 1-for-1 or better. I leave them in against Jund and they work fine. However, my SBing plan against BUG is basically the same as my plan for Jund except that now I need to make room for REBs. The Counterbalance are probably the weakest of what I have left.

When they play Abrupt Decay on CB, CB essentially reads: "UU: Counter Abrupt Decay. Sacrifice CB."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee

When they play Abrupt Decay on CB, CB essentially reads: "UU: Counter Abrupt Decay. Sacrifice CB."

---

Haha. It's not the worst to blind reveal off the CB even if you can't stop the Abrupt Decay. Having a fetch or some other form of library manipulation can make small advantages like that pretty useful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzra

It's not that I think Counterbalance is bad against Abrupt Decay decks.... on the contrary, it is always 1-for-1 or better. I leave them in against Jund and they work fine. However, my SBing plan against BUG is basically the same as my plan for Jund except that now I need to make room for REBs. The Counterbalance are probably the weakest of what I have left.

---

Right, it's not that CB is bad, just that my sideboard cards are better. Shardless and Jund are much more of creature decks than anything, so just having more removal is often better than having counterbalance.

So totally unrelated, I thought I'd put down a few misplays and lessons from a small tournament last night. These are mostly for my benefit, but hopefully sharing will help others as well.

Don't underestimate Goblin's ability to get you for the last few points of damage.

I was setting up an Entreat and I had a really sick Pyroclasm in the works. I could have Pyroclasm'd a turn earlier but decided to go down to 1 life to preserve max value. I go down to 1 and on my turn wipe his board. Next turn he plays Lacky and I Entreat for 2 EoT. I have a Venser in hand, so I can block the Lacky and bounce whatever he draws for the turn. I swing with both Angels. Unfortunately, he drew Matron which allowed him to find the third body needed for a win. I was greedy on all accounts: on waiting to Pyroclasm, on Entreating when he wasn't attacking so I couldn't block for value, and on assuming he couldn't play two hasty Goblins in a turn.

Don't Spell Pierce High Tide's cantrips.

Even if they have a fetchland in play and are Brainstorming and it looks so good, your hand is stacked and you just want all the value... don't do it. Spell Pierce is just so much more valuable to counter a High Tide. Even if they can pay it, you are effectively robbing them of 4 mana to do so. They need High Tide to win, not Brainstorm.

Read the fucking cards for the love of all things holy.

Originally, this misplay was going to be about paying attention to combat tricks.... but no, I just need to read cards and not let them cheat. I'm playing against Death and Taxes. I'm at 10 life. They are dead to my return swing of Angels. They have a Thalia equipped with a Jitte (with three counters), a Mother of Runes, and one turn to kill me before dying. I do some math and figure there's no possible way to die. They swing with both. First Strike combat happens, I drop to 8 and Jitte gets two more counters. Before normal combat happens, they remove all the Jitte counters and pump Mother of Runes to deal me lethal. I stare at the board blankly for a while before moving to g2. Now, if I were a smart fellow, I would have read Jitte, "Equipped creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn..." Unfortunately, I had to work for my win over the next two games.

Wear//Tear vs Oring is debatable. Personally I run a split as both have merits. I'd like to discuss Detention Sphere vs Oring. Oring is obviously better against Reb decks and Jace mirrors but I'm still preferring Dsphere.

I feel that being blue and pitching to force in a bind is remarkably useful. Also being able to sometimes multiple for 1 is great. It's really good for sweeping empty the warrens tokens or pitching to force against Ant. I'm personally running Spheres instead of Rings.

I usually try to remind people (especially playing certain decks) that the MU has a tendency to get grindy, so we might want to speed things up a bit... but yeah, sometimes players just play horribly slow no matter how you prod them. I suppose you could say something like "Hey, want to move on to game 2? I feel like I have this one pretty much locked down." Sometimes they might ask to see the FoW or something before scooping, but I wouldn't just drop "all these" right off the bat. That could definitely come across as dick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzra

I usually try to remind people (especially playing certain decks) that the MU has a tendency to get grindy, so we might want to speed things up a bit... but yeah, sometimes players just play horribly slow no matter how you prod them. I suppose you could say something like "Hey, want to move on to game 2? I feel like I have this one pretty much locked down." Sometimes they might ask to see the FoW or something before scooping, but I wouldn't just drop "all these" right off the bat. That could definitely come across as dick.

---

Great suggestion Dzra. I'm going to SCG LA in November and will probably be playing a 3 CB list, so it'll be good to know how I can tell my opponent nicely that they're not going to go anywhere by trying to play it out.

Then again, some people are just dicks and want to punish for playing a durdly deck you by forcing a draw by going to time.