Printable View
LOL, I gave a chuckle on your last paragraph. Joe's is probably top dog not because of his list, it's probably because of him. It's a mistake to not run humility. People dislike Humility because lots of list use Angel as win condition hence Humility creating anti-synergy. Since your plan is mostly via Germ token, why not take advantage of Humility? Humility against Vial decks including TNN is good, the benefit against Sneak and Show is a bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverBoa
Yea I agree 100% hes been playing the deck forever. I just wanted to explore a different approach on the deck. glad I could make you laugh thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
Also valid, I just don't think you need it. If i were to consider it, I would replace the oring.Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
I think I'd rather do a SB plan more like this against Sneak Attack:Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverBoa
-3 SFM
-3 Swords
-1 Batterskull
-1 EE
-1 Entreat
-1 Supreme Verdict
-1 Terminus
+2 Canonist
+2 Flusterstorm
+2 MM
+1 Needle
+1 ORing
+1 Pyroblast
+1 REB
+1 Wear//Tear
Jace and some Terminus are still good because sometimes you have to be prepared to beat an Emrakul that ends up on the field. A t2 SNT that drops Emrakul can still be answered by dropping a land, then playing 4th land -> Jace.
Wear//Tear has a lot of value. Many times they'll try to SNT in Sneak Attack and a Pierce/Flusterstorm might not be able to stop them completely, but it can stop them from activating for a turn. Wear//Tear also isn't bad given the worst case scenario of Sneak Attack -> Emrakul -> wipe your board. Drop a Plains and destroy the Sneak Attack... not great, but a good contingency that will slow them down for a while.
Be wary of using Canonist, a lot of times you'll be the one trying to pro-actively resolve things like Counterbalance and Meddling Mage. Canonist can actually hurt you if deployed too soon. Needle + Karakas and CBTop with 3/4 on top are the best ways to lock them out. Leave up 3cmc when you can, especially at your EoT since that's when they are most likely to Wipe Away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
thanks for the advice, I'll be sure to test things out. I'm not 100% sold on the canonist/MM split, might possibly be better with just 4x MM but i figured it was worth at least a test. I never considered it to be nonbo and I could potentially lock myself out. I used to run 4x MM and didnt see anything wrong with it. A week or two ago when I first made this board I was running 1x tutor - hence the canonists.
I really like wear//tear and I might try and get a second copy in the board somewhere. its hard to think of sneak to be that dependent on mana, but realistically its not the easiest for them to have enough mana to SnT/Sneak + activate if there is any sort of counter-war. and if that's the case and you do tear the sneak then you feel like a champion.
Yeah, I really like the split fine, it's more that Canonist isn't at its best against Sneak and Show. They can still win through it without too much trouble by countering your lock pieces unhindered. If you have an extremely reactive hand or are all in on Pithing Needle then getting Canonist out early is fine, but if you are going for the KO with CB or MM then Canonist will be helping them. Canonist is an allstar against Storm, Omnitell, and Elves though and easily worth the downsides there.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverBoa
It's pretty common for them to go t2 Sol Land -> Petal -> SNT -> Sneak Attack -> Activate. Countering the SNT sometimes means that they'll have to burn the Petal to Pierce/Swan Song back. Sneak Attack comes in, but they are tapped down. Another common scene is them casting SNT on t3 or Sneak Attack on t4 with 2 mana open to play around Pierce. It's usually better to lead with the Pierce even if they can pay and you have the hard counter. If you lead with Pierce then 1) they are locked out of their own Pierce/Swan Song and 2) if they FoW your FoW then at least they are tapped down and open to ORing, Tear, and Clique on your turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverBoa
How do you board vs BUG? I feel im always entreating without reb protection (my hand is empty) and they have force...Quote:
Originally Posted by Einherjer
I would probably do something like:Quote:
Originally Posted by dsck
-4 FoW
-3 Snapcaster
-3 Spell Pierce
+2 RIP
+2 Pyroblast
+2 REB
+2 Supreme Verdict
+1 Clique
+1 Mountain
I could imagine wanting to cut CB instead of Pierce, but I'm not crazy about that. Maybe it depends on how much discard you see. I'm curious what Einherjer's plan is though. (Also, I don't understand the REB/Pyroblast split, Misdirection into your CB is a real possibility from Sneak and Show.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
The differences between Pyroblast and Red Elemental Blast are frequently misunderstood, which doesn't matter too much. Situations where the functions are actually different come up very infrequently. I'm not sure what exactly Dzra is referring to in the previous post, but against Sneak&Show I'm not aware of any interaction that would make one option better than the other.
It mostly comes up with pyroblast/hydroblast destroying permanents, when you can misdirect to land.
But Oarsman is referring to that you never reb/pyro any permanents against sneaky show, so they cannot misdirect to CB?
I guess looking at the SCG lists it may not be as common as I thought, but for some reason I've seen Jace from Sneak Attack a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by oarsman
Okay that's fair. Sneak&Show lists that sideboard in Jace would represent a case where Red Elemental Blast is superior.
Hydro Vs Pyro:
Both are modal, so Misdirection affects them both the same in Counter mode. Pyro can be Misdirected to a Land, REB can't. It's marginal, I say the correct decision is to play REB because it's got nicer art.
Leading with Pierce is most certainly wrong in the scenario given. Let's assume you go with your hard counter right away and see how this could evolve, but first let's be a little more specific about the scenario..Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
His mana ressources (all available):
2 Volcanic Island
1 Island
1 Ancient Tomb
1 Petal
Your mana ressources:
1 Tundra
1 Volcanic Island
2 Island
Your SnT opponent taps all except for 1 Volcanic and 1 Petal to cast Sneak Attack, leaving 1 Petal and 1 Volcanic Island untapped. Let's also assume their hand consists of 5 unknown cards.
Here is our hand:
1 FoW
1 Pierce
1 Ponder
1 Jace
2 Terminus
So you FoW their Sneak, pitching Jace...
* case 1.0) they don't have a hard counter (aka FoW, Misd., REB/Pyro) --> Sneak is countered
* case 1.1) they have one --> Sneak will resolve, but you Pierce anyway and force them to tap out [hopefully finding Wear/Tear with Ponder next turn :wink: ]
So you lead with Pierce...
* case 2.0) They tap out and pay --> you still have to FoW (resources spent, see case 1.1)
* case 2.1) they hard-counter your Pierce because they desperately want to go off this turn --> you FoW Sneak --> profit ... no skilled SnT player would take that risk against Control.dec though, which is why case 3. should be ignored.
As you can see leading with Pierce has no actual benefits, whereas leading with FoW can potentially save you a vital spell.
I think the point was them having a Pierce/Song as well as FoW.
1.1: pFoW -> oFoW -> pPierce -> oSwan Song -> Resolves with mana and we die.
1.2: pFoW -> oSwan Song -> pPierce -> oFoW -> Resolves with mana and we die.
2.1: pPierce -> oPay -> pFoW -> oFoW -> Resolves with no mana
2.2: pPierce -> oFoW -> pFoW -> oSwan Song -> Resolves with mana and we die.
2.3: pPierce -> oSwan Song -> pFoW -> oFoW -> Resolves with mana and we die.
Pierce allows them to misplay, otherwise we die anyway. That's the point, I think.
Give them a Pierce in addition to FoW - does not change a thing. And, given we do not know their hand, leading with FoW is certainly the correct play. Now if we had cast a Clique before and saw Swan Song + FoW + pitch card, then yes leading with Pierce would be correct - but that's such a fringe case - it shouldn't be taken into consideration really..Quote:
Originally Posted by YamiJoey
If I recall, can't misdirection change the target of red elemental blast or Pyroblast to target the Misdirection itself? As such, talking about being able to misdirect pyroblast to a land is pointless, since when misdirection is cast there is always a legal target already (misdirection itself). From gatherer:
Quote:
You can choose to make a spell on the stack target this spell (if such a target choice would be legal had the spell been cast while this spell was on the stack). The new target for the deflected spell is not chosen until this spell resolves. This spell is still on the stack when new targets are selected for the spell.
You can't cause a blast to switch modes. If it was targeting a permanent it still needs to target a permanent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtrix
Agreed. If they're running it out in that situation you have lost the counterwar before it begins.Quote:
Originally Posted by klaus
If you do see the above, would it be correct to take countermagic over a threat? They have to pay a lot more mana for their threat, possibly buying you more time. (Assuming you had more interaction in hand.) They could draw into more protection, but they could draw one of their other 7 business Spells in (probably) an equal measure. FoW/Misdirection also get worse in multiples, requiring more overall cards to actually work, so kicking the Pierce/Song may be the better plan there.
This was basically my point and tapping them down can be especially relevant when you have something like Venser or an ORing in hand to drop off SNT or when you wouldn't have enough mana to pay for their potential follow-up Pierce. Our Pierces lose value quickly against their Sol lands, but luckily many times it's enough to tap them down rather than having to actually counter their spell. If you have infinite mana and they are down on cards then there might not be a good reason to Pierce first, but I've found that tricking them into tapping down is more often useful than not.Quote:
Originally Posted by YamiJoey
Hey guys, I'm a tempo player (Delver variants/Thresh/etc) of many years looking to switch over to playing Miracles as my weapon of choice. For starters, I have a couple of questions.
1. How important is Vendillion Clique?
I personally dislike the card, and I would rather not play it if necessary. That said, I've been hard pressed finding a list that does not run 2+ in the maindeck. If Clique is an absolute in order to play a top tier variant of this deck, I will comply.
2. Is Back to Basics/Blood Moon more of a meta call, or is it best to always have 1-3 in your sideboard?
3. Has the Helm/RIP/Energy Field combo taken a seat on the bench, or is it still considered a viable win-con.
Thanks in advance!