[Deck] UW(x) Landstill

@cr87

Congrats on the top 8! However, I disagree with your boarding plan against Eva Green, however:

Quote:

---

Game 2: -1 Counterspell, -4 Standstill, +3 Negate, +1Path, +1ETutor

---

Why not take out Wish instead of Standstill if you are bringing in Path and Enlightened Tutor? Wish is extremely slow against them and only has one decent target after your boarding plans in the form of Diabolic Edict. Dismantling Blow can answer Choke if they play it, but 3+3 mana is hard to get against Choke, and even harder with their Sinkholes and Wastelands.

Also, Standstill is insane against them, as they generally play out a single threat at a time and they generally don't come down in the at the first few turns of the game, (they want to be playing discard or LD at this phase) so turn two or three Standstill is very achievable.

Edit - Also, Sensei's Divining Top is absurd against Suicide decks if you run into a lot of them.

Yupp I did board out wishes obviously, it's way too slow and nothing much to hate. I actually brought in +3 Negate, -1 Counterspell due to the UU being tough against them.

In the past I ran the 2 Top configuration and that really did best against Suicide decks, but since I'm not expecting much suicide decks (only 1 deck in my meta, and in general suicide won't be too popular in today's meta, i'm playing without tops).

@Have Heart: you hit the heart of the problem: Landstill just doesn't have the oops I win factor. However, I tend to disagree. I believe that all the 4cc bombs in Landstill are an oops-I-win factor. Ever since the printing of Planeswalker, Landstill has a win-condition that is hard to remove outside of Maelstrom Pulse/Vindicate. It doesn't win instantly, but it does win over turns combined with card/board advantage. The difference between landstill's ggfactor and other decks is that ours is not instantaneous, and requires many turns to set up and secure, but once secured, it serves the same purposes as any other ggfactor .e.g NO-Prog, Countertop etc. Jace 2.0's printing has been a tremendous resource and win-condition boost for the deck. We don't have a fast and easy ggfactor compared to other decks, but we still have the win-conditions that are at the same time a resource against your opponent's resources. But you hit the heart of the problem very well. I just wanted to point out from our perspective that we do have a similar win-condition, just that it is developed over a series of many turns and interactions.

I started thinking a bit about my deck after not playing almost the entire summer. I really loved the Ubg deck which seems to be more popular now. However I feel its matchup against vengevine madness isn't too great, and that seems to be the hot deck atm. Because of this I'll just stick to my UWb version. I'm going to try running wish in it though, it's cute :3

My current set-up:

Maindeck: 60

// Card Advantage & Quality: 9
4x Brainstorm
3x Standstill
2x Sensei’s Divining Top

// Removal & Board-Control: 10
4x Swords to Plowshares
1x Path to Exile
2x Engineered Explosives
1x Humility
2x Vindicate

// Counters: 10
4x Force of Will
3x Spell Snare
3x Counterspell

// Win Conditions: 4
2x Elspeth, Knight-Errant
2x Jace, the Mind Sculptor

// Multipurpose: 3
2x Cunning Wish
1x Enlightened Tutor

// Lands: 24
4x Tundra
1x Underground Sea
1x Scrubland
2x Plains
2x Island
4x Flooded Strand
3x Polluted Delta
4x Mishra’s Factory
3x Wasteland

Sideboard: 15
4x Leyline of the Void
3x Engineered Plague
3x Extirpate
1x Enlightened Tutor
1x Pulse of the Fields
1x Tsabo’s Decree
1x Blue Elemental Blast
1x Diabolic Edict
-

The things I'm not quite sure about are:

Mainboard:
- Only 3 Standstills.
- Top.
- Jace.
- E.Tutor targets. Should I try to get a Moat and split 1/1 with humility? Should I run 1/2 humility?
- Cunning Wish. Play 0,2,3?
- 24th Land. I used to play 23, which do you think is right? Possible a trop for Krosan Grip side & EE for 4?

Sideboard:
- Number of Wish/non-Wish Slots.
- The wishboard. I think this can be improved a bit still.

3 Brainstorm can be played but only if your deck is highly redundant. I would probably not do it in your build. 2 SDT, 2 Wish are cards that help you set up and are not able for use immediately. I don't think this deck can function as well without Fact or Fiction. Some people prefer multiple Jaces, I haven't tested that but I guess it apparently worked for UGB players.

That said, I don't think Jace, TMS is necessarily a replacement for Decree of Justice, I still run 3 DoJ and I haven't looked back. Your only source of pure card advantage outside of the singleton Jace is 3 Standstill, and having 3 Decree as a safety blanket for when you drop it does help. It also is another win condition.

I don't think your philosophy on Cunning Wish is necessarily correct, having less cards to board in will decrease your win percentage in a number of matchups post-board to begin with. Having a "catch all" is not as effective sometimes as having the ability to sideboard well with the correct selection. When I played with Cunning Wish a long time ago, I had only 4 wish targets:

Enlightened Tutor
Pulse of the Fields
Ray of Distortion/Return to Dust
Extirpate

Usually that is enough, I had an actual sideboard that consisted of Path to Exiles, Negates, etc. Obviously those can be wished for as well. Some food for thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morbid-

3 Brainstorm can be played but only if your deck is highly redundant. I would probably not do it in your build. 2 SDT, 2 Wish are cards that help you set up and are not able for use immediately. I don't think this deck can function as well without Fact or Fiction. Some people prefer multiple Jaces, I haven't tested that but I guess it apparently worked for UGB players.

That said, I don't think Jace, TMS is necessarily a replacement for Decree of Justice, I still run 3 DoJ and I haven't looked back. Your only source of pure card advantage outside of the singleton Jace is 3 Standstill, and having 3 Decree as a safety blanket for when you drop it does help. It also is another win condition.

I don't think your philosophy on Cunning Wish is necessarily correct, having less cards to board in will decrease your win percentage in a number of matchups post-board to begin with. Having a "catch all" is not as effective sometimes as having the ability to sideboard well with the correct selection. When I played with Cunning Wish a long time ago, I had only 4 wish targets:

Enlightened Tutor
Pulse of the Fields
Ray of Distortion/Return to Dust
Extirpate

Usually that is enough, I had an actual sideboard that consisted of Path to Exiles, Negates, etc. Obviously those can be wished for as well. Some food for thought.

---

Game-1 often takes a while as well, causing sideboarded games to be of lesser importance than with slow decks.
I don't really want to play too many cards with 4+ manacost. I have 2 Elspeth, 1 Jace, 2 WoG, 2 Humility = 7 atm. FoF & DoJ are also 4+ and I don't really want to cut any of those other cards except maybe for 1 humility because of the wishable E.Tutor. Speaking of which, should I drop a humility for the 4th brainstorm, which I guess would be better to have after all (also increasing blue count to 20).
The only thing I wouldn't mind having an extra normal sb card against is storm, but without mystical that matchup has improved a bit, and I don't really want to cut any wish cards (I actually want to play more :P). Some of the cards are also sided in as singletons sometimes, if that matters.

The numbers of this list seem to be really questionable. Your only 4 ofs are FOW and STP and your draw suite doesn't seem strong enough to allow you to dig for what you might need at the time.
I would NEVER play less than 4 Brainstorms, and I feel like your 4 drop slot is a little heavy with those 7. I'm probably speaking from my bias against Humility, but I'd cut both of those suckers.

Hi Jamie, choosing card slots for UWb Landstill is a pain indeed and I always end up wasting 1-3 hours on the last 3 slots depending on meta, but a few notes:

4 Brainstorm always. I used to buy the 3 Brainstorm + 2 Top configuration but when you start getting to understand the purpose of Brainstorm in a control deck, it's not to be used freely. Save your Brainstorms ONLY when you need to use it e.g. (dig answers when you don't have answers in hand, set up land drops). Many players in my group enjoy Brainstorming turn 1 which I feel is a weak play since the power of Brainstorm becomes stronger as the game goes on and players' cards decreases. Therefore 4 copies of Brainstorm is a must.

I debate on 3-4 Standstills and despite issues where it cannot be cast favorably sometimes, I stil go with 4. Why? This is what I noticed in Landstill. You lose most of the time because you don't end up stabilizing, you trade cards 1-1 until your opponent wins the top-decking or drawing mode and you don't have enough raw card advantage. However, 4 Standstill is weak if your maindeck isn't tuned to use it. I say 3 i the best amount in a general deck now, but I would go with 4, tune your deck to support it (more paths, decrees, wastelands) etc.

WoG is pretty relevant now although I'm a fan of Humility over WoG for decks with 2 Elspeth and enough removal. In Cunning WIsh builds especially, I forgo Wrath since you can Wish->Etutor->Humility or Wish->Pulse to gain back some life. I would cut WoG for the 3rd Vindicate and 3rd EE. 3 EE IS A MUST!! I cannot stress how this card stabilizes games and sweeps a board of creatures/non-creatures to put you in a favorable position. It's huge against Zoo, Merfolks, Goblins somewhat and is the thing that puts you over the top of Countertop (no pun intended).

3 Spell Snare, 3 Counterspel is a nice configuration although I prefer 4 Counterspell. UU is sometimes an issue (I run 8 cololress in 24 lands so it's an issue sometimes against wastelands). The main reason I play 4 CS is because I play 2 Scepters in my deck now.

3 Jace if you can squeeze it in. Every game that I saw him, I tend to win or put my opponents in a tough situation. Jace with sweepers is a great combo provided you hit up to 4 lands safely. A reason why I like Crucible maindeck these days. It really screws up tempo deck strategies. Hitting 3 mana isn't too hard against them unless they're packing Sinkholes Vindicates but who plays those decks anyway these days? We are having more mid-range slower aggro decks focused on 2cmc and 3cmc than we used to in the past. 2 Crucible has been amazing for me. It's a card and board advantage engine, returning lands from yard so netting a card in your hand if you can play a land from your yard every turn, also it sets up wastelocks and stills some games. It's hilarious to note that against aggro loam, if you get Crucible online and have the counter on their Maelstrom pulse, you are the one dominating them with land destruction since Crucible > Loam due to the free cost of returning lands.

Either way the list looks good, only issue I have is: 4 Brainstorm, at least 2 Jace, cut Wrath/Vindicate don't play both, probably cut Wrath. In your list I actually would like to go, -2 WoG, +1 Vindicate +1 ETutor (which acts as a pseudo 4th Standstill, 3rd EE, 3rd Humility). Also find room for the 3rd EE, it's the best card outside of planeswalker and FoW in Landstill.

Nice post crz87 :)
So cutting both wraths for 1 Etutor & 1 Jace. Cutting the second humility for brainstorm, with a tutor main as well. Guess I can give that a shot.
What do you think about the sb? Cut 3 wish targets for Spell Pierces or something?

Sounds like a good change, but make sure to test it against your meta. Card slots are flexible according to meta for this deck, meta-tuning is what breaks and makes the deck work, shoving your mostly 50-50 matchups to 55-45 or better.

Your SB:
4x Leyline of the Void
3x Engineered Plague
1x Extirpate
1x Enlightened Tutor
1x Pulse of the Fields
1x Tsabo’s Decree
1x Ravenous Trap
1x Mindbreak Trap
1x Blue Elemental Blast
1x Diabolic Edict

My SB for UWb Wishstill
3 EPlague
3 Extirpate
1 ETutor
1 Pulse of the Fields
1 Diabolic Edict
3 Negate
1 Dismantling Blow
2 Flex slots (BEB, more GYhate, Perish etc, Path)

I think Leyline is a little subpar in the deck. When I build landstill, I want my SB to be as diversified as I can. The big selling point to playing UWb instead of other UWx list is perhaps strictly due to Extirpate. If you noticed, the more popular UGb Wishstill lists are all packing 3-4 Extirpates. Extirpate used to be discussed to be a weak main-deck card, but I have really liked it so far. Unlike Crypt/Leyline/Relic, Extirpate is not a dead card against non-GY based decks. I usually board in Extirpate against mid-range decks, control decks as well. Extirpating when your opponents Brainstorm or Top/cash-Top is quite brutal. Personally, I'm just a fan of this card in certain matchups (GY, control, mid-ranged). The ability to Peek at your opponent's hand is quite crucial to determine the next turns of play.

Negate v.s. Spell Pierce is a matter of preference and meta-gaming. If you're worried about vials/survival/stax/combo, go with pierces since it's faster. After playing with the Scepterstill builds, I personally like Negates better since 2 Chant MD serves to answer bulk of the troublesome matchups (combo) so post-board Negates on Scepter makes for the 4-7 hard counters in the deck. Even without scepter, I still prefer negate, but pierce wins in faster metagames.

If you're playing Wish, you definitely want an artifact/enchantment removal target. I like Dismantling Blow since it's the most easily casted under a bloodmoon and the kicker is nice (draw 2 cards) though not usually used. I have lost games due to not having a Grip effect in the wishboard. I'm not a fan of Tsabo's Decree. You should have a good shot against tribal postboard with EPlauges so Tsabo's really a 5B win-more card IMO. I never played it, it's brutal tech though. I tested the cute wish targets of Ravenous Trap/Mindbreak etc but I realized I just don't need them. Mindbreak Trap especially is usually a wasted slot in the SB since against combo, I never want to keep wishes in (too slow) and I board out wishes and go for a straightforward more-counterspell, more-extirpate approach.

For my SB strategy, again stressing the redundancy of dead cards and having the SB slots be as flexible as possible, I board accordingly:

tribal: +3 EPlague, +1Edict, +1Path
control: +3Negate (wow), +3 Extirpate
combo: +3Negate, +3Extirpate (although Meddling Mage is usually much stronger than Negate since you want pro-active solutions to combo instead of reactive ones due to them playing Chant)
aggro-loam: +2Extirpate (keep one in wishboard), +1 Path
Dredge/vengevines: +3 Extirpate (this hits vengevines hard! Also against Dredge, just pate their Bridges, plow ichorids, FoW Dread Return, EE Zombies and play a more tricky control game)
stax/enchantress: 3 Negates, 3 Extirpates (good against Wasteland/crucible/replenish)

As you can see, Extirpate is quite the solid choice for black-builds. For a control deck, hitting multiple copies of a spell that you don't want to see increases your net answers in future turns. Although the only drawback is that sometimes they don't have the target in the yard. However, since I mentioned that Extirpate really shines against control, mid-range decks and these decks are the ones taking more turns, you get more chances to see cards in the yard for targets. Extirpate is still decent against combo due to the ability to mess up Brainstorm/Top piles, and hitting their Rituals/LEDs when they go: Ritual AdNauseam, potentially weakening their post AdNauseam draws. A more deep analysis on the combo player's play with Extirpate would be to observe their manabase and see how they play their spells. Example:

Turn 1: He duresses your only FoW/counter
Turn 2: He leads with a Ritual, you rip Extirpate.
You analyze his play by assuming he's going off with Ad Nauseam since he feels he is protected after taking your FoW and would most likely go Ritual Ritual Ad Nauseam. This is a good time to Extirpate the first ritual after priority is passed to you.

This is an example of a less-obvious use of Extirpate that can win games, there's obviously a lot more small situations, all very specific depending on what's in the yard, but this is a good example of an opponent dumping a spell and making a legal and relevant target in the yard for Extirpate to be used. I have been wrecked by Extirpate when using Brainstorm, and it is a strong reason to play Extirpate against control, mid-range decks as well, since reshuffling their 2-card knowledge provides a little more advantage as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crz87

Turn 1: He duresses your only FoW/counter
Turn 2: He leads with a Ritual, you rip Extirpate.
You analyze his play by assuming he's going off with Ad Nauseam since he feels he is protected after taking your FoW and would most likely go Ritual Ritual Ad Nauseam. This is a good time to Extirpate the first ritual after priority is passed to you.

---

You're not going to be able to Extirpate anything relevent here if I'm understanding what you're saying correctly. So let me be more clear.
Turn 1: Irrelevent
Turn 2 Opponent: Dark Ritual. Dark Ritual. Ad Nauseam.
In this scenario, after the first Dark Ritual resolves he gets priority back. He will cast the other Dark Ritual and then the priority is yours again, but apparently all you can do is Extirpate when there is BB and a Dark Ritual on the stack with an Ad Naseam in the grip which means you're probably dead.

Has anyone tested Peacekeeper? 2W 1/1 During upkeep pay :1W: or sacrifice Peacekeeper. Creatures cannot attack.

After reading Atog Lord's UBw Dreadstill report, I feel that Peacekeeper is akin to old lists running Preacher as tech. Peacekeeper would probably win much slower but it is a hard lock on the following decks:

- Merfolks
- SnT/Reanimator
- Dredge
- Bant Aggro packing only StP as removal (counter it)

Out of these few matchups, Merfolks/SnT/Dredge are perhaps the more troublesome matchup out of Landstill's aggro matchup (we handle Zoo fine, gobs depends if they waste/port us to death).

I think I will be testing him, but so far Scepter-Chant acts as a pseudo Peacekeeper but requiring casting spells that can be counterbalanced. This is more out there for the people not running Scepter-Chants in their Landstill lists. Seemed like that tech did very well for Atog Lord (14-1-0) and shored up his bad matchups (merfolks).

Similar to his strategy, we go UWb with W for Peacekeeper owning the above mentioned aggro matchups, and B for Perish/EPlagues on Gobs and Zoo/Bant matchups. As such, just fine-tune your deck to beat the other matchups (Countertop/Control/Combo out of which Landstill already has favorable matchups aside from combo).

Peacekeeper has a drawback that you cannot win as well though, unlike Dreadstill which can quickly win with a Dreadnought after Peacekeeper. However from Atog Lord's report, it seemed that he is mostly winning with Peacekeeper + Jace lock. And since I have myself up'd the Jace count to 3, I think he's a strong inclusion (cheap yet more powerful option to moat).

Last week I made Top8 at my local tourney. Lost to Hypergenesis (Him Terrastadon, Me Humility, it gets blowned up as verified by cdr on the rulings here. I didn't drop Humility to hope to cast it later, but Terrastadon nukes my WW, and I don't draw WW in the next 2 turns). I died to the classic flaw of Humility: "Grip alpha strike with Teeg + Goyf + Predator eating my Scepter". I definitely made some mistakes but it taught me the power and fragility of Humility. It seriously shuts down a ton of decks, but any decks packing green, you cannot rely on the option.

The same issue applies to Moat. Moat/Humility is in general a stronger choice over WoG since its effect applies continously, but there is a risk on losing the game once this is dealt. WoG is certainly viable but I like the static permanent removal choices over it. Humility/Moat are prone to Grips, which costs you the game since you cannot counter Grip. Peacekeeper on the other hand is a creature (that is untouched in the aggro matchups mentioned above) and cannot be gripped or killed by split second (only split second card played in Legacy mainly is grip/wipe away), in addition, most aggro decks tend to side out creature removal against you, so in a field of unsuspecting players not prepared against a less-popular Landstill deck, this tech may steal some wins.

I'm going to be testing Peacekeeper over Humility in the SB option, knowing it'll give me the straight win against UG, UB, Mono-U Merfolks, SnT/Reanimator and sealing most aggro games where opponents do not run heavy removal, or board out removals against Landstill. Although Preacher is as strong an answer, although against Reanimator/Progenitus/Inkwell/Shroud it fails. It is brutal against any other aggro decks with light removal though.

@Chii yeah he has priority there, I guess if he's careless and passes it back to me, or if he played a different spell, I can sneak that Extirpate in :P

Yeah dude, I think Peacekeep is pretty sick. I got to nab all of them from my local store for 55cents each. Its 100% an upgrade over Firespout in the Merfolk matchup which was needed. I haven't gotten to test him out just because of a lack of tournaments but I definitely plan to play him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChiiMagic

Yeah dude, I think Peacekeep is pretty sick. I got to nab all of them from my local store for 55cents each. Its 100% an upgrade over Firespout in the Merfolk matchup which was needed. I haven't gotten to test him out just because of a lack of tournaments but I definitely plan to play him.

---

Typically the claim of something being 100% better than something else comes AFTER thorough testing with results to compare against previous results... but I must say your approach of making sweeping unproven generalizations is, if nothing else, to the point.

Peacekeeper was brought up months ago on salvation, and AFTER testing, the determination was that he was terrible, almost strictly worse than Preacher (who, you know, lets you WIN THE GAME) against Merfolk.

Seriously think about it, letting Keeper die and then alpha striking with 1/1 creature tokens seems pretty far fetched... and the "pray my Jace resolves" plan is dangerous on multiple levels...



On a side note, I haven't dropped a match against the 'folk since adding Preacher to my board, so maybe I'm biased.

4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
2 Sensei’s Divining Top
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Path to Exile
4 Force of Will
4 Standstill
4 Counterspell
2 Firespout
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
3 Engineered Explosives
2 Decree of Justice

4 Flooded Strand
2 Scalding Tarn
3 Tundra
2 Volcanic Island
1 Plateau
4 Mishra’s Factory
3 Wasteland
3 Island
2 Plains


I haven't come up with a sideboard, but what do you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RogueMTG

<Stuff about Peacekeeper>

---

The other thing I'd like to add is that it isn't necessarily a hard lock against anything, notice for example how Merfolk, Reanimator/SnT, and Dredge have access to bounce spells. Not sure about Bant Aggro, as there are many forms of it, but let me say that when we start devoting resources to protect our win conditions, it creatures a very fragile situation and you don't want to be progressing into that position from the beginning of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lorddotm

<List>

---

Why 4 Ponder? What does 4 Ponder / 2 SDT give you that 3-4 SDT + 2-3 Business cards don't?

I think we need to restructure this thread a little bit, to be honest. I was speaking with a former MTG player from the glory days of The Drain, and he mentioned that the productivity of the discussion highly increases when a standardized core of a deck is established as much as possible, and the flex spots are discussed more in detail. This way, we don't focus on reiterating what's been said multiple times already. Personally I think the core of the deck can be as high as 45+ cards, with the remaining 15 tailored for the surrounding metagame. I have tried Ponder before and that's not what you want to be doing with this deck.

I saw someone comment about how this deck needs certain answers, I feel that Ponder does that very well. Especially since we don't run very man fetchlands.


Then again, I play mostly combo, so I have no idea what the in's and out's of this deck are. Aren't multiple tops terrible?

I played a couple of Ponders not too long after they came out. Top fills this role better, as it's better in the early game against mana denial, since it can find multiple landsl and better in the late game because you can use it repeatably. Ponder is blue and pitches to Force, but you can make lists with sufficient blue cards and Tops so it's not a problem.

Quote:

---

Then again, I play mostly combo, so I have no idea what the in's and out's of this deck are. Aren't multiple tops terrible?

---

No, they are pretty easy to get rid of if you play 7 or so shuffle effects. Fetchlands turn uneeded Tops into pseudo-Impulses. Also, it's nice to draw into additional Tops in blue matchups in case they counter or Grip one. I played at the Minnesota 5k without Tops after running a playset at the STL one, and I definitely regretted not having at least a pair in the list. Landstill needs some sort of manipulation other than Brainstorm, whether it's Top, Loam, Crucible or Dragon to give it "deck velocity" to survive late game top decks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RogueMTG

Peacekeeper was brought up months ago on salvation, and AFTER testing, the determination was that he was terrible, almost strictly worse than Preacher (who, you know, lets you WIN THE GAME) against Merfolk.
On a side note, I haven't dropped a match against the 'folk since adding Preacher to my board, so maybe I'm biased.

---

I have absolutely NO idea why you would think Preacher > Peacekeeper. They are identical in cost and in P/T so its only their abilities that we can be disagreeing on. Why is gain control of your opponents worst creature better than creatures can't attack? I'll worry about how I'm going to win the game after I've dealt with not losing the game first. I don't understand how Preacher, you know, wins you the game by commandeering a Cursecatcher while you get islandwalked by a few lords, but I'm sure you've tested Landstill more than I have, so I'll just take your word for it.
Moving along...

Quote:

---

I think we need to restructure this thread a little bit, to be honest. I was speaking with a former MTG player from the glory days of The Drain, and he mentioned that the productivity of the discussion highly increases when a standardized core of a deck is established as much as possible, and the flex spots are discussed more in detail. This way, we don't focus on reiterating what's been said multiple times already. Personally I think the core of the deck can be as high as 45+ cards, with the remaining 15 tailored for the surrounding metagame. I have tried Ponder before and that's not what you want to be doing with this deck.

---

I'll start this off then I suppose. Here's a list of cards that I think cannot be omitted from any UW Landstill deck while still being able to be called that.
4 Force of Will
4 Brainstorm
4 Standstill
4 Swords to Plowshares
3-4 Counterspell
3-4 Mishra's Factory
4 Flooded Strand
2 Blue Fetches

This is only like half of a deck, but I feel like any other card I can think of, I know some people would say it is not a MUST. I feel that Elspeth and Jace, TMS are musts with the current state of the format, but I can respect other people's decisions to not include them. I guess we could start to discuss what other cards everybody else feels are musts.

Preacher > Peacekeeper in Merfolks is true to some extent. I didn't disacknowledge preacher and in fact I mentioned that Preacher maybe better than Peacekeeper specifically to Merfolks since you have a non-grippable Shackles effect.

But take note that althouh Preacher can win you games, Preacher only wins you games if the board positions that are still somewhat favorable for you e.g. 3 creatures out, Preacher wins games, anything more, Preacher sucks. Peacekeeper IGNORES board position, and is strictly better from an overall situation. It's the same reason why I am not giving the axe on Elspeth 2.0 since despite the fact that Elspeth 2.0 costs :1: more, she is strictly better from an overall situation and much better in ugly board positions than Elspeth 1.0.

Peacekeeper does not care if your opponents board position. It is a little safer than Humility in all honesty since a Grip has split second that you cannot deal with and you lose games but nothing kills Peacekeeper at split-second speed that is Legacy playable except Wipe Away but that kills ANYTHING (preacher/peacekeeper/Humility/Moat) so Wipe Away isn't a good argument in our scenario. Reanimator/SnT has bounce and Bant etc has StP, but Peacekeeper still shines in those matchups where opponents aren't playing Gobs/Zoo (aka little removal aggro decks). If they have bounce/removal, you just sandbag counters and win on the back of Jace. Unlike Preacher, Peacekeeper can just ignore the board whereas Preacher still requires you to play carefully and keep the board under control, not to mention Jitte being a huge problem against Preacher.

Also, Peacekeeper is very strong against Survival Madness. I feel that it is overall the stronger card. Preacher also costs WW, which might be an issue against Wasteland/Merfolks. I don't advertise a card without strong reasons. Atog Lord's UWb Dreadstill report sums up the strengths of Peacekeeper in Dreadstill, and in all honesty, he is perhaps even stronger in Landstill that packs an even more diverse Maindeck, making him a stronger as a sideboard/supplement card.

About Landstill's core:
4 Force of Will
3-4 Brainstorm
3-4 Standstill
4 Swords to Plowshares
0-4 Counterspells
3-4 Mishra's Factory
0-3 Wasteland
0-2 Elspeth 1.0
0-3 Jace 2.0
0-3 Decree
0-2 Top
3-4 EE

What I mentioned above is a collection of lists that run a common combination of cards above, although I think with today's choices/meta, the following below is what really makes Landstill Landstill:
4 Brainstorm
4 Standstill
4 Swords
3-4 Counterspells
4 Mishra's Factory
2-3 Jace
3-4 EE
flex slots

These are the things that you cannot deter from. Any major change would shift it towards either non-Standstill approaches, Speedstill (more snares/Vindicates). Flex slots are always tuned to the meta, and this is what makes this deck appeal to people playing it, i.e. the ability to adapt and tweak for a meta.

Comment on 3v4 Standstills
For people running 3 Standstills, and buy the argument "Standstill is no longer good in the format": You are not playing an optimal deck running 4 Standstills. Aether Vials and all that do suck, but if you suspect such a meta, pack more EEs etc and plan out your plays so you resolve Standstills. I as on the verge on agreeing that Landstill's Standstill is no longer viable, but after more practice and maturity, I begin to understand that making such a statement is simply an excuse for not being able to design and pilot the deck well.

I tried the Top-Predict approach. It's cute and nice, but I think the draw is even more conditional than Standstill, and requires you to setup for Top/Brainstorm Predict which takes more effort than going for an UNCONDITIONAL turn 2 Standstill when the deck is designed correctly.

It's really hard for me to defend Standstill v.s. Predict because my friends don't play Landstill and only bitch about Standstills when I chain them and then make all the arguements that Predict > Standstill because it's not a situational draw. There's a reason why chaining Standstills feels overwhelming because it's 3 friggin cards per Standstill. Have you felt overwhelmed when an opponent 'chains' Predicts/Brainstorms? I don't think so but you feel overwhelmed when someone chains a second Standstill. 3 Predicts (each attempt to drawing 2 cards being conditional) nets 6 cards, which amounts to two resolved Standstills.

Let's assume that Predict isn't all that situation (which it really is and a mana-intensive draw with Top + topping + Predict), drawing 3 cards off Standstill and 2 cards off Predict is a HUGE deal for a control deck. The only benefit that Predict has over Standstill is that it's run in a shell with Counterbalance, so seemingly it seems more powerful when evaluating the card but the truth is its unsituational card advantage is only positively felt because it's in a shell that is netting pseudo card advantage. WotC has yet to print a card that trumps Standstill's card drawing power, not to mention the synergy it has in a control deck.

Making landdrops and sculpting a hand under standstill for 0-3 turns is also crucial for Landstill players to slow the game down a little. This is part of the strategy and big advantages to playing Standstill. If your opponent doesn't crack it, you set yourself up for more lands and cards. If they crack it early, you're in a good position again. Now, there are cases where Standstill does suck, but even Predict/Top is too slow (or draws 1 card) against Turn 1 Aether Vial Turn 2 standstill against Merfolks and other fast decks.

I'm nagging a ton, but that's an argument why 4 Standstill is completely viable in today's meta, and just wanted to dispell a myth. But if the meta is infested with vials, obviously play 3 Standstills. But even against Merfolks/Gobs, if I'm on the play I would play 4 standstills. On the draw that's a different issue. And if you're that worried about vial decks, then just pack more MD Paths. Your fear of not resolving standstill corresponds 1-1 to the dominance of vial decks, and to beat those decks, just metagame accordingly. That's what the flex slots are for in the deck anyway.

And an observation to Landstill:

Landstill is all about card advantage and stabilizing early game. Every extra card you can draw is a resource for a deck that doesn't has a 'cheaty' win-condition e.g. Countertop, Natural Order, Show and Tell.

Every card in the deck should play out synergistically and emphasize the point above. Every card needs to fulfill roles that x-1s opponents.

E.g.
- WoG x-1 although there are better options like EE.
- Planeswalkers (esp Jace 2) are good examples on how 1 card translates into more card/board/interaction advantage for the Landstill player
- Crucible is an old-school huge card advantage engine netting 1 card a turn when you have lands in your yard
- Isochron Scepter when resolved is another card advantage engine
- Cunning Wish gives flexibility
- Vindicate/StP 1-1s, but these are needed for obvious reasons.
- Standstill nets 3 cards.

Basically in the early game, you are doing the following:
- FoWing spells (you lose 1-2)
- Counterspell/StP (1-1)
- EE (maybe 2-1)

Landstill's challenge is to learn how to do 1-1 trades (sometimes 1-2 from FoW) intelligently and accurately while keeping in mind the options that the deck will draw and try to stabilize against the decks that have stronger early games/win-conditions.

During the process of stabilizing, cards like Brainstorm/Standstill will give you future options, refill your hand. And when the turn comes to resolving the card advantage cards listed above, namely planeswalker, this is where you will start gaining huge advantage over turns and simply win because of that. The reason why Standstill (and hopefully you see my point why 4 is a good number if you can aim for that in a meta) is stil strong is because of this very fact. You need to recouperate the resources that you exchanged against decks and keep yourself fueled defensively until resolving the engines that net you more card/interaction advantage. At that point you will start to win games.

Many decks are really designed to play against other decks e.g. I build a legacy deck keeping in mind Gobs/Merfolks/Countertop/Combo, but who builds a deck keeping Landstill in mind? This is one of the hidden strengths of the deck, being under the radar. Just as ChiiMagic pointed out, ScepterChant being under the radar will steal you some games. Given that most decks are now preparing against Jace 2.0, still nothing much can be done DIRECTLY against him outside of REBs. And you on the other hand as a Landstill player, is sculpting the deck that keeps him alive, knowing that he keeps your hand and your game alive.

Recognizing the weaknesses and strengths of LAndstill, you can begin to understand why certain cards can play well e.g. Peacekeeper argument.
- Weaknesses: stabilizing early game, often losing card/interaction advantage since you are dealing with decks that are usually very strong in the early game.
- Strengths: accessing card/interaction advantage engines e.g. Planeswalker/Crucible/Scepter/Standstill that give you a stronger mid-end game.

Peacekeeper will shine in mostly offsetting the weaknesses of the deck. He will single-handedly buy you turns just as Humility would (Except that not even 1/1 can attack), giving you time to hit the Strengths of the deck, and start winnign from there. Preacher does the same as well, but I think Preacher is weaker on the Weakness aspects of the deck, but is stronger on the Strengths of the deck. So his inclusion over Peacekeeper has to deal with how the deck itself was designed.

E.g. Peacekeeper's main lock is to win through Jace 2.0 since your creatures cannot attack as well, although you can setup an army of 1/1s from Elspeth 1.0. So playing 3 Jace maybe needed to support Peacekeepers in the SB if you plan on not going to time. Interestingly, Peacekeeper is quite absurd and synergistic with Elspeth 2.0. Net some tokens under him, then blow him up with her ultimate and swing in, perhaps leaving enough loyalty for another disk activation