Printable View
lol dammnnn straight ^. New Elspeth is the nuts in control, better than jace even cause jace got nothin on elspeth 2.0. It's just slow you know but our deck is full of answers anyways and we win by making our land drops plus our win cons shine when we have 4 + lands anyways so i'd say YES new elspeth is worth testing. Maybe even running 1 of each for the benefit of both... too bad its already hitting 40 dollars... wtf gayness
btw who is shake
-UW%28x%29-Landstill&p=486511&viewfull=1#post486511]Post updated, take a look.
Ajani vengeant is not an option in the control mirror, too? And it's good against a good variety of other Mu's too... I think we have cheaper ways to deal with jace and counterbalance... Sure IF he its the ground in the control mirror she is the nuts, but the old one is amazing too... I don't know, it does deserve a test I think, but I'm not really fond of her in terms of verasility, on the paper.
@ Gustha:
gratz on the finish.
+1 on that Tropical. It has never disappointed me: boosting EE and Firespout (which you should have sided in VS Zoo btw) and giving you Grip which is most needed against CB.dec which rarely features Wastelands.
Also: +1 on Jace #3 ;-)
--
If Ajani was good, don't you think he'd deserve a MD spot? (I got 1)
I do like Shackles, too and have one in the MD atm. Shackles #2 is an option indeed, though. Especially so, since it's a wincon.
Firespout is a meta call for sure - in my last tournament, I didn't really need it. So moving it to the SB could be a good move.
-
I'm currently experimenting with a Thopter combo inclusion - with semi satisfactory results though.
My current SB looks like this:
2 Faerie Macabre (still good imo)
2 Relic
1 Crypt
2 REB
2 Grip
1 Firespout (2/3 in the MD)
1 Path
3 Spell Pierce
1 flex slot
Finks have always treated me well but I've won most Aggro games without them, too. (Jace is the NUTZ VS Burnish decks). Give it shot and cut them, see what you can do with those extra slots ;-)
@klaus: thanks!
+1 on tropical and jace, of course. It was just a metagame choice, turns out tropical island >>> eternal dragons, and I simply can switch 1 island and 1 fetch in manadenial/nonmanadenial metagames.
As for what concerns Fspout, I've recently become very disappointed with them. FS agains flyers is good only vs faeries, and they have wasteland and stifle. I had them in the sb because I wanted to kick the ass out of every tribal decks and have something vs zombie tokens. I didn't face dredge nor merfolk, but I'm sure I would've sided them in against a more creature-heavy zoo and merfolk and goblin. Against that particular build of punishing zoo, shackles and spot removal were more than enoughe to keep my life total clean, and some helix by ajani would've helped too. I also love kitchen finks because opponents usually side out swords and thus i am able to go on offensive early against many decks, which diluite their game plan to stop our most expensive threats and they find themselves unable to deal with a fast clock as double finks on t3, with ajani clearing the way with helixes or simply denying resources, and shackles turning their creatures against them. Thus, in g2, they're facing a little more angry aggrocontrollish deck with a solid early game and a much more solid late game. (see uw tempo match: 8-turns win with alpha strike, almost a record I think).
Does ajani deserves a MD slot again? I think the answer is yes and no. I sided him in nearly every ruond, it seems. But that's it, opponents just aren't prepared for it to come in, and think to adopt a certain game plan against landstill. When they face ajani it's just: "oh, fuck, i was totally unprepared, now I'm gonna die with pain!" It's just another force-eater, wingamer, 4cc bomb, jace-raper in the sb, mainly because I hadn't the 3rd jace. Provided that next time I'll play with 3 jaces no matter what, I would probably still be playing him as a 2-of. Due that I expected lots of controllish decks at the upper tables, I opted for vendilion clique instead, and wanted a second THAT badly. Clogging up the 4cc slot is also dangerous because of the new cb.deck feat jace, that can contrast our wincons by leaving jace on top.
Also, i think you can switch pierce with negate, having a hard counter to bring in vs enchantress as well as combo and the control mirror (and NOprog, replacing some counterspell) and of course lands/loam, is really good.
I agree the deck is not that stylish and the sideboard may look a little horrid, but that was just see the metagame - put up the deck in 15 minutes before the tournament and win :) After the tournament I would probably have left out FS's for grips.
I've seen your PM, thanks, I have some work to do now, I'll respond later!
Grats Gustha,
I personally have upped to 3 Jace and not regretted it. 4 Jace is clunky and too excessive but 3 Jace makes you see them at 4 lands almost all the time with Brainstorms, and that's what I want to see. I personally use his Brainstorm ability more if my opponents don't play any bolts.dec. The extra best card a turn is super in control with a good board. With a bad board I fateseal to keep him up and my life in check as they try hard to get rid of him.
I'm not too sold on Shackles, trust me though, I love Shackles a ton but for my manabase of 3 Waste + Ruins + 4 Mishra's + 2 Plains, I don't get a chance to use it against much except for non-goyfs. I guess that's what you really need shackles for anyway: anything non-goyf e.g. merfolks/goblins. Shackles wrecks those decks. I'll give it a try again. Just StP anything bigger e.g. Goyfs.
I went undefeated 4-0 at my local tourney but in the top4 I lost to reanimator. I was playing UWr(b) Scepterchant and I think I had a decent chance against reanimator but my only graveyard hate that day was 2 Extirpate. Regardless, I beat the same reanimator guy in round 2 but lost to him in top4. I definitely made a ton of mistakes e.g. not counterspelling entomb thinking that the reanimation spell is more dangerous but forgetting that leaving creatures in the yard is more dangerous since he can reanimate them with any reanimation spells he drew. Also, since I made the deck in 30min as I woke up late before the tourney, my sideboard was subpar (missing diabolic edict). He told me that it made no difference sine he'll just reanimate again, but from my games against him, Edict would have made all the difference in grabbing two more turns (edict can also be sceptered).
My list was:
4 Flooded Strand
2 Polluted Delta
1 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
2 Plains
2 Island
1 Academy Ruins
4 Mishra's Factory
3 Wasteland
3 Tundra
1 ETutor
4 Brainstorm
3 Standstill
3 Orim's Chant
2 Scepter
3 Jace
2 Elspeth
2 Crucible
4 Counterspell
2 Cunning Wish
4 Force of Will
3 EE
4 StP
Changes I'll be making in the future:
-1 Chant, +1 Standstill
+1 HUMILITY (this is what I needed against most of my troublesome matches, 1 ETutor fetches this nicely, and 2 Wish as well).
I'm going to tinker in dropping red, and keep it UWb with black sideboard cards against aggro instead of the 3firespout/2REB i was running.
All in all, I think I had the chance to do better next time. The deck strategy with Chants is solid in games 1, and still wins games 2/3, even without Chants.
I am shakeQuote:
Originally Posted by whiteshepherdman
It is reasonable to be skeptical of the new Elspeth, I was intitally very skeptical of her, but the more I think on the topic the more I like her. The question isn't, is she good enough, but, is she better than Elspeth, Knight Errant? That is the part I'm struggling with.Quote:
Originally Posted by gustha
I gave her the hands down immediately, but I am rethinking her spot again in UWx landstill.
Trends that I observed with Elspeth 1.0 when playing landstill:
1) Great staller against aggro/goyfs. If you're faced against 1 creature, you can keep chumping and digging for answers. However, when faced against 2 or more creatures, she becomes a couple of Fogs as your opponents whittle her down.
2) Wins games (FAST, +3/+3 flying is one of the best)
3) Ultimate is relevant but only used about 10% in most games. I usually just race with +3/+3. Landstill doesn't have a ton of time in most matchups anyway.
Comparing with Elspeth 2.0 on the numbered points:
1) E2.0 is perhaps an even better staller, generating 3 creatures to chump. Her +2 ability can net you some life to stabilize, but it's not too synergistic with factories (involves tapping mana to activate, and sometimes you may need to leave mana untapped. However, noting that E2.0 is 5cmc, by then you should be able to free some mana to use her +2 ability). The only issue with E2.0 is that if you want to ramp her loyalty, you're not getting much by playing landstill even with Factories. You really want to use her -2 first to stabilize a board position, and start stabilizing your life total with her +2 to make it beneficial. Unless you're planning on blowing the board or really need 2-4 life, her first ability is not strong in Landstill until after her -2 has been used. This is the only design flaw I see her if she's played in Landstill.
2) Wins games SLOW. 1/1 soldiers aint too good compared to 4/4 flying ones or 5/5 flying factories. Also NOTE that since it's a -2 ability to generate tokens, you can't spam it unlike E1.0 where you just keep spamming 1/1s or flying attackers. E2.0 will be a more dominant board generator while E1.0 is a more aggresive card. However, three 1/1 soldiers is perhaps much more relevant in most situations in Landstill when faced against aggro, just 1 activation of this will buy about 2-3 turns, and this is huge for a control deck to stabilize.
3) Ultimate is much more relevant in Landstill than E1.0's. Re-usable disk is huge. Not to mention that unlike Disk, she cannot be gripped so she presents a big threat. Either your opponents overextends into counterspell-removal to kill her or they stall with their board, in both situations you win more.
From a brief analysis, we can see how much more defensive a card E2.0 is compared to E1.0, and personally I think this is the selling point of the card in Landstill. Landstill usually requires a defensive strategy before gaining a position to win. For 1 mana more, E2.0 covers much more defense than E1.0. I personally think this is a worthy consideration in Landstill. I personally think the split 3 Jace2.0 and 2 Elspeth 2.0 is great on the curve. Perhaps the 4cc,5cc bombs will be something like:
3 Jace 2.0
2 4cc bombs (FoF/Humility/WoG)
2 Elsepth 2.0
The nice thing about 2.0 is that she fits as a flex slot for traditional slots of Decree and WoG/Disk. I feel that she's a hybrid utility card of Decree + WoG mixed together. The power of Planeswalkers in Landstill is their plethora of abilities that gives the deck additional 'interaction' advantage. Many times a Landstill player can win on the back of a Planeswalker even at a board/card disadvantage because the planeswalker creates more interaction for the landstill players. Instead of just the opponents interacting with the landstill player's hands/life/board, they are now forced to dedicate their resources to answering the planeswalker, and since these planeswalkers dont die easy, it buys time for the Landstill player to set up strategies against those decks. E2.0 to me is potential move towards diversifying strategy interaction and minimizing redundant card slots (she combines effects of E1.0/Decree/Disk all in 1 card).
The important trend to note for which Planeswalkers make it into Landstill are:
1) relevant abilities that defend the player (Elspeth has 1/1 soldiers, Jace 2.0 has bounce or BS into removal/answers, Ajani has Helix and Icy ability)
2) Ultimates that gains a huge board advantage or win games (Elsepth 1.0 not too relevant since it requires another card to abuse this advantage, Ajani ggnub, Jace 2.0 ggfnub)
3) Ease of casting (cmc): E1.0, J2.0, Ajani are all 4cmc. J1.0 was solely played in older lists because it came down much faster.
E2.0 has the strong points for being a contender based on 1), 2). The only issue is 3). However, if we honestly ask ourselves, how many times have we almost won a game on turn 20 but failed in the end because we still did not stabilize? I feel E2.0 not only gives good board position to stabilize with her -2, but she restores the important hp boost with a 2-6pt life gain (on average) from her +2, and her ultimate just resets the board and we all know how resetting the board favors a victory for the landstill player. Her ultimate also hits anything: Artifacts, planeswalkers, enchantments, so it's an answer against any deck in Legacy: enchantress/stax/countertop/progenitus/emrakul etc. I just see her as a WoG on a Planeswalker with two very relevant abilities in the strategies of LAndstill.
Another thing to note that E2.0's ultimate is not cool with J2.0 but her -2 ability really makes her J2.0's best friend.
I think the answer, the more I look to her, is no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Shake
I appreciate crz87 analysis (and good for the list, try dropping black, plague diabolic edict ravenous trap extirpate are good cards to have in the sb, along with thoughtseize/duress - maybe add 1 more wish and pulse sb), but don't agree.
Yes, elspeth knigh errant is a GREAT staller, as long as only 1 creature is on the board. 2 or more creatures are on the board, either you gain a turn to dig for answers while she dies (maybe involving a bolt, so you have Xx1'd youe opponent), or either you have a path/stp/shackles/wrath/humility to stabilize the board again. As long as you can reach the ultimate, no one can ever pass through your soldiers! By spamming tokens, she add loyalty, and that means that every turn you take with her, she becomes more difficult to kill. On the other hand, elspeth2.0 spams 2 tokens, and doing so she fells in bolt range, and that's the primary point of dislike. Against swarm aggro decks, chances are that you go for tokens, they kill all the 3 tokens, you go for tokens again, you kill another 3 tokens, you pump her and she dies. Sure you can trade in the meanwhile, but she'll lose some loyalty in the process and, given her cost, it would be unlikely that you have untapped mana, or you have to path/stp anyway something, things you would've done with E1.0 as well, but having a free mana to do that in the same turns.
Sure, if the board is empty, E2.0 is better than E1.0. If you don't suspect bolt you go for token, pump, chumblock, pump, chumblock disk. Then she fells to 1 loyalty and you're probably facing one creature, ready to attack next turns. You have to invest other resources to keep her alive. And she can't stall forever like E1.0, that keep growing while spamming tokens. She can spam for 2-3 turns, and if they can get rid of the tokens, it's hard times. Sure you can set back your opponent and go -2 -2 +2 -2 +2 -2 +2 -2, but i think elspeth1.0 would've done the same.
Meh, I generally don't know. I think E2.0 is superior to E1.0 only with an empty board, and that means I see her as a great cards against the mirror and thinks like enchantress/stax. She may be also superior in MU's like the aggrocontrollish one, where you tipically can set the opponent back to one creature at turn via multilpe removal spells, and pump the ultimate very easy. But elspeth shines in that MU too, and E2.0 is still a cc5 card, that you have to play around daze, slowing down the deck any longer. I don't think she is better than E1.0 against other aggressive MU's, surely not vs zoo, slow as hell vs merfolk, irrelevant vs goblin. That doesn't mean shea doesnt' deserve a try, but it's a 5cmc card, fck! The fact is, I was skeptical about jace being 4cmc and now I can't leave home without him... Maybe for this new baby will be the same :)
I completely agree. I'm like 99% sure I won't be playing Elspeth 2.0 in my build, but who knows, maybe I'll be proven wrong. But I really like these analyses and I agree with them. The selling point for me is the additional manacost of Elspeth 2.0. It's hard enough to get Elspeth 1.0 to resolve through Stifle, Wasteland, Rishadan Port, Daze, and all that jazz. i don't want to make my opponent's job easier by playing a huge clunky 5 drop that rots out my hand since I can't cast it.
has anyone tried out e 2.0 on mws yet. it would be easier to come to a conclusion if people played the card
Elspeth 2.0 actually races faster than Elspeth 1.0 on a clear board btw. -2 +2 -2 -2 = 1 turn faster than 1.0Quote:
Originally Posted by crz87
Leaving a side, for a while, Elspeth 2.0: Has anybody tested Ghastly Demise as a 2 off? It would be in replace of PtE. I dislike the land drop that it gives to oponent. Off course i'm talking about the UWb version.
There are a couple of things that I really don't like about Demise:
-it doesn't target Tombstalker
-it requires black, a manasource that you usually don't have acces to, in the early
-it requires at least 5 cards in the yard to take out an early Tarmogoyf
I dislike the landdrop of PtE, too, but as a 2off it is still better then Demise in my eyes.
Actually I'd rather consider to play Diabolic Edict and a second USea befor I'm going to play Demise.
Took top 4 (4-0-1) split draw into Top 8 and split Top 4 at my local meta.
List I played:
4 Strand
2 Delta
1 Swamp (Should have been a scrubland against choke)
2 Plains
2 Island
2 Seas
3 Tundra
3 Wasteland
1 Academy Ruins
4 Factory
4 Brainstorm
4 Standstill
2 Cunning Wish
2 Isochron Scepter
1 ETutor
2 Chant
4 Counterspell
4 FoW
4 StP
3 EE
1 Humility
1 Crucible
2 Elspeth
3 Jace
SB:
3 EPlague
3 Extirpate
1 Diabolic Edict
1 Pulse of the Fields
1 Dismantling Blow
3 Negate (Super solid choice against control/enchantress/combo if you play the scepter build)
1 ETutor
1 Path
cant rmb last slot
Can't rmb all my matchups but I know all my game-1s were CRAZY!
Match 1: Jeff with Eva Green
I hate suicide/Land-D decks and eva really does a good job hurting landstill. Jeff's one of the best players in our group so this one's tough. He leads off with a ritual into a janky 1BB 4/4 that gets killed by Elspeth token. Surprisingly that dude gets in there like our classic Negator against control as he disrupts my hand and manabase. I stabilize maintaining card parity at about 5 life when I dropped Humility. We proceed to go card for card: his creatures my removal until I rip a Jace. Being a good player, Jeff sandbags his cards and drops 3 creatures turn after turn, putting the pressure. The following situation over the next ?10 turns were:
He drops 2 creatures (3 creatures on board), I remove a creature, drop Standstill bounce with Jace, maintaining 1 creature with me having a Factory to block (He had wasted 3 Factories so if he drew the 4th Waste for Factory I'd be dead any moment). This series of play repeats itself twice as I chain into Standstill + Removal. So Jace + 1 removal + 1 Standstill won me the game, stabilizing me at 1 health. It was funny I had to hard cast FoW on Gatekeepers twice just so that he only has 1 creature on board. He did draw too many lands so I was lucky he was not applying as much pressure as Eva could
Game 2: -1 Counterspell, -4 Standstill, +3 Negate, +1Path, +1ETutor
My mistake in my sideboarding was: should have kept at least 1 Standstill in. I forgot how I deboarded and Etutor turn 1 for a Standstill but could not find any, so I picked up an EE, that you know was obviously discarded later. That damned 1BB 4/4 got in there again...
Game 3: went to time since game 1 was epic and took forever. Jeff blames me for the draw I blame him for not killing me Game 1!
Match 2: Jon with Enchantress
Why do I get paired against the most annoying matchups that take 2 hours?
Game 1: Epic game. I won't describe every detail but it involves me decking the Enchantress. Towards the end, he could win with Words of War which I counterspelled. He replenishes and I cunnign-wish->Extirpate on Words of War: Hot! He has a couple of Angel tokens that can kill me but I have two EE and a Chant on a stick (I can't target him since he has Leyline of Sanctity in play but I can still kick to fog). He had a Solitary Confinement out and 2 cards in library and 7 cards in hand. I forgot that he won't deck in awhile. So to play safe, I EEed for 3 to get rid of the Confinement, and he died over 2 turns to decking.
Game 2: He mulled to a risky 1 non-basic and leads it off with a Utopia Sprawl. Wasteland hits the land and he was without lands for 3 turns. Jace + Elspeth + Standstill curved out on me and gg.
Match 3: Aggro Loam
Supposedly a tough matchup but for some reason he's playing quite a subpar list. He REBs my Standstill and I get annoyed. Who plays REB maindeck in aggro loam with Chalices??? Who plays REB in aggro loam??
Anyway, he gets the loam going over turns not putting out any threats so I was very happy. As much as I hate the loam engine ongoing, I hate it more when there's a threat on board. He tells me that he does not have goyfs in deck so I'm relieved that it's going to be much favorable for me.
Both game 1/2s involve Jace coming in and winning the game, obviously I'm smart enough to keep FoW reserved on Seismic Assault and not waste them on creatures like a noob control player.
Match 4: Drew with Imperial Recruiter
Game 1: Drewlius on the IR thread on the Source, one of the important figures on tweaking and perfecting the deck, always a pleasure to play against a good friend, and to fight against the hated Blood Moons. He resolved Magus and Blood Mooon. Sweet, and obviously my EEs don't get drawn so this game starts getting epic from here.
The highlight was me ripping a Scepter off the top of my deck like a champ (I had Chant in hand) and 1 basic plains. So I scepter-chanted him out. NOW: This is where you should not concede a matchup even if it seems loseable. Drew did not concede where others would and proceeded to naturally grind me with the grindstone in play (I got the Chant-lock right before he could play Painter after recruiting it). So naturally grinding me, he hits my EEs in my yard :( I have not seen StP at all this game and one grindstone grinded 12 blue cards, leaving me with 4 cards left in the library. Knowing what's left in my deck, I still had a brief hope before losing. It was tough as hell to play under moon since my only hope on surviving is to get my Ruins/EE recursion going so I won't deck myself but Ruins was locked under both Blood Moon and Magus.
I thought for awhile and figured I had an out. I just have to hope that he doesn't have REB against my Wish, which he didn't. So the plan goes:
1) Crucible returning basic Island from Graveyard
2) play Island Cunning Wish->Dismantling Blow hit Blood Moon
3) StP Magus, start recurring EE@1 and not die to decking
4) Drew scoops.
Epic game 1 again, obviously took a god-damn long time
Game 2: He got the moon going again, but Scepter is just that good against Moon.
I got a StP on a Scepter, but he had quite the nutty hand. He plays around Scepter on StP and has double blast in hand to blast the Scepter and have enough mana to grind me with Painter in play.
I let the Painter resolve since I have 2 FoW (no blue cards in hand). If he paints blue, I will have 2 FoW counters in hand pitching Factory and Ruins in hand while having StP/Scepter on board to deal with the Painter. He attempts to blast my Scepter, I FoWed, he blast, I FoWed, and I won this. Was a tight matchup and surprisingly I functioned with entirely colorless mana that game against a good Imperial Painter draw. This is where Scepter would have helped a tough matchup where classical Landstill has to battle through Blood Moons with much more effort.
Match 5: Jeremy with Bant Aggro and we drew into Top8.
I think this is quite a favorable matchup for me but I wanted to do some trading :D
Match 6 (Top 8): Jeff with Eva again:
Why do I have to play against Sinkhole/Waste/Hymn again? Ugh
Game 1: 1BB 4/4 attempts to resolve, I plow it cause I hate him now. His disruption got in there and roflstomped me bad.
Game 2: I won this but can't rmb why, probably just from stabilizing and with Jace.
Game 3: 3 Standstills MD because it's just that good at stabilizing.
This game was a very close one too. I can't rmb too much but that annoying 1BB 4/4 sticks in play as I removed/countered the more troublesome threats (Tstalkers, hippie, goyfs). He hymns in an attempt to discard my Elspeth and I rip lands like pro against his Land-D and hymn misses Elspeth. Elspeth comes in, stalls the game, he draws worse than me since he's not playing blue and I won it after using Elspeth's ultimate and getting in with 6/6 flying factory (double factory to pump).
Top 4: We split Top 4 (Me: UWb Scepterstill, Jeremy: Bant Aggro, ugh can't rmb the other two decks).
Highlights:
- 61 cards as always cause I'm a noob (but really, the 24th land as 61st card has really smoothed my land draws).
- 1 Etutor acting as 5th Standstill, 4th EE, 2nd Humilty, 2nd Crucible, 3rd Scepter. Has been solid maindeck but I would hate to have 2 Etutor MD. Although in a lot of tougher matchups e.g. combo/enchantress I boarded the 2nd ETutor MD and it's important. ETutor MD is not too ideal due to card disadvantage but in matchups where you need the speed to get the relevant items (EE, Scepter), this is where it shines.
- Last week I lost to reanimator after going 4-0 undefeated into top4, made me realize how important Humility was. Also, I had some tough time with no WoG/Humility MD. It's not really needed anymore but I think Humility still steals a ton of games.
- When Elspeth 2 comes out, I will be testing her heavily. Out of most matchups I played, I feel that her 5cmc is still justifiable except against the Suicide decks packing WAY too much Land-D. Stifle is not a huge problem since I can play arond it, but not sinkholes. Many times I was wishing Elspeth 1 dropped more than 1 token so that I can have more room for strategies. When you can only chump 1 Goyf at a time, there is a huge risk of your opponents drawing a 2nd creature and just sealing the game. I was lucky enough that this didn't happen to me too often. I feel the main selling point of playing E2.0 in Landstill is that she holds herself and yourself well without any secondary cards. Elspeth 1 is superior if you can pair her up with a card e.g. StP/Disk/Wrath/Humility, but without any of these, she is weak in stabilizing with her 1/1 soldier. E2.0 will not only buy 3 turns worth of E1.0's 1/1 soliders, she will also stabilize about 4-6 life in the process. All this is huge, and her ultimate is the main reason why I would play her. I'm excited to test her, and I think she'll be in a much more defensive and controllish-Landstill build. Although I am working on a personal control deck that may turn out to fit my playstyle a little more. Not sure yet though, I have yet to find a control deck that fits my playstyle that's better than Landstill.
P.S.
How do I convince a stubborn friend that Landstill has a favorable matchup against Countertop? And I'm not talking about aggro Countertop (Bant, NO). Talking about the Countertop that runs like 6-8 win-conditions (Goyf, Jace, Cliques). It's obvious for us since their creature win-cons are dead to our massive removal, and EE takes care of Countertop easily. With such a deck not applying much pressure, I don't see how it's not a favorable MU for us. The Bant/NO Countertop might be problematic though. It's just one of those friends who have the false believe that Countertop is THE best deck in Legacy. As far as I know, this is not Standard with any best deck. This is an awesome format with lots of diversity in Top8, sometimes janky homebrew decks that eventualy become established decks.
Crz87,
Nice report. Scepter SMASHES blood moon and company.
As for your question about how to convince your friend. You can either beat the hell out of the countertop junk with EEs, OR you can just.let him keep thinking that way and prey on his deck in tournaments. Either way, have fun with your scepters!
Yeah out of perhaps 20 games I played, Scepter was bad in 1-2 of them (i.e. having nothing to imprint). Even imprinting Brainstorm on a Scepter felt good, netting a good card every turn until it is removed.
I personally find aggro loam and eva-greenish decks the most difficult matchups with this decklist.
Do you feel that Scepterstill warrants its own thread? I think the bulk of the deck is still landstill-based so it should belong here, but I feel that only a few people are playing it and it's not deserving enough attention despite being successful in the meta at the moment (from your results and my own personal small tourneys 10-20 people) and seems to be pretty strong 50-50 against game1s in the metafield.
You might want to start a thread and primer if you feel it needs attention and recognition of a different form of Landstill. I'm at least an advocate of it, although I might not play it if I find a more comfortable shell. There are some complaints with the playstyle of the deck that I dislike (i.e. sometimes having to rely on Scepter-Chant to stabilize because those slots can be filled with other bombs that solve certain problems, but I do attest that Scepter-Chant solves those problem just as well, but in a more delaying-strategy than a solve-the-problem-not-the-symptoms manner).
Eh, I would probably say that it doesn't deserve its own thread because I consider it a Landstill deck above all else. During certain swings in the metagame I have certainly considered just swapping out Scepters, Chants, and Fire/Ice, for more traditional Landstill elements and cutting red for black, like you've done. I think it's just a Landstill deck with an unexpected package unlike the usual angle of Humility and WOG and such.
Which brings me to my next point: the ridiculous numbers everybody I know put up with the deck, yet so few people seem willing to pick it up. It's never really bothered me because it always allowed me to run under the radar and encounter little to no hate because of it. It's just an interesting observation my friends and I have laughed about for the past few years while we clean up local tourneys with the deck. It's probably just differing play styles that keep people away from the deck just like it's my play style that makes me want to desire to play this and next to nothing else. (I'll be honest though, I've picked up Doomsday from time to time for the surprise factor.)
I don't play U/W/x Landstill but U/B/g Landstill, but regardless I've experienced the same reactions since I built it last month: People surprised I didn't pick up one of the many aggro or combo decks that are more popular, and asking "Why do you want to play THAT deck?" in that cocky tone of voice. Since no one plays Landstill really, there's no presence in Top 8's relative to the amount of T8's you see by other decks. Yet it is insanely strong with only a few bad match ups that aren't too terrible.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiiMagic
The number of people who like to goldfish or play dudes hoping to win, far outnumber the amount of people who enjoy playing reactive style decks that enjoy the long game.
Yupp I agree, Landstill has fallen off the radar and the common people who don't engage in these decks scream out "Countertop is the best deck in the format", and I chuckle to myself.
I do agree that Countertop is the best performing deck in terms of matchups against various forms of decks. It is also much easier to play than other decks. Countertop is stressful but playing it correctly ain't too hard. Decks without the benefit of such win-easy games strategies e.g. Landstill (control deck that doesn't rely on a win-engine like Countertop) has a much higher learning curve.
It's not for me to say that Landstill is a tough deck to master, that's just the bare facts. From underperforming with the deck months/years ago to recently doing well, all I can say is that I have finally understood the important elements of control: Not everything needs to be FoW'd, countered, removed etc. Everything in a pure control deck without cheap-wins (countertop lol) involves a lot of futuresight and planning, knowing the matchup and opponents, weighing the costs and benefits on letting certain spells resolved to be dealt with later, roughly calculating the chances you draw into future answers/removals. Each decision costs you. Some decisions are pretty straightfoward: plow that lackey, EE a board of 1/1s, but others involve a much tougher choice.
I think the main barrier currently to playing Landstill is the fact that it's a tough deck to master, and there isn't really a good netdeck list out there. The UBg versions have somewhat streamlined, while the UWx versions are still in the fluid zone. Personally I find the fluidity of UWx a big attraction. I have been appealed by UBg to test out the raw power of Pernicious Deed and 4 Jace, but I feel that all in all, playing UWx build tends to teach me a lot more about control in the format. These lessons also tend to let me experiment some form of personal control decks (most of them being failures, still trying hard to work a 27 land Maze + Mox diamond control deck in, not working out but a list seems to be brewing up with Elspeth 2).
And in all honesty, Landstill is a great deck in today's format. We are no longer plagued by once-popular suicide decks, and most decks have slowed down by 0.5-1turn, making Counterspell much more relevant and powerful than before. The slowing down of combo by 0.5-1 turn also gives the deck a much more favorable position in a big meta. I used to be scared of bringing Landstill in my local tourney due to combo game 1 and having yet the risk to lose game 2/3 since it is just not as fast as countertop decks packing Dazes. However the format slowing down just that little is a huge boost to this deck, and its diversity of answers and strong 50/50 matchup really makes it a competitive choice for tournaments. The only issue holding back is: "Why do I have to play Landstill, a steep learning curve deck, when I can play other decks that easily place well without that much effort?"
And the control players that do play Landstill know why they play the deck: when played correctly, you shore up most 50/50 matchups to at least 60/40. And you would also probably say "Because creatures suck and I like the challenge to stabilize, and dominate with sheer card and board advantage, and crush your dreams when you thought you would win by hitting me down to 1 life, or close to decking me"
lol
The reason Landstill is not played more (in my opinion) is because there are some hands/series of draws that will just not win against certain matchups/lines of play. Since it is the most reactive deck in the format, digging for answers is a must, but sometimes the answer is not found on top. I will be playing Landstill in every tournament I take seriously for the foreseeable future, but I also understand why others are not playing it. Sometimes it is just nice to force your opponent to "have it," and when they do not, that is a free win. Landstill pretty much does not have that going for it.