[Deck] NLU_Extended Port GP Chicago Winner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anusien

Because it isn't necessary? Or because I hate exposing dual lands to the decks that have Wasteland. Doing so on turn 3-4 is much better than doing so on turn 1.

---

So you're saying that waiting to get rid of a Goblin Lackey or Dark Confidant is better when you can use a Sower or Shackles on turn 4 than when using a Swords on turn 1?

Much of the time, you won't have the required mana to use Sower or Shackles. Swords is much better in those situations.


On a side note, why did you travel all the way from Texas to merely judge at the GP? I would have thought that someone as focused on Legacy as you, a 'pillar' (I assume) of the community, would have jumped at the chance to play in domestic Legacy GP; an event that comes around very infrequently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Ocho

So you're saying that waiting to get rid of a Goblin Lackey or Dark Confidant is better when you can use a Sower or Shackles on turn 4 than when using a Swords on turn 1?

Much of the time, you won't have the required mana to use Sower or Shackles. Swords is much better in those situations.

---

Sure. Of course it depends on the situation, but Shackles is a much better answer to Dark Confidant than Swords to Plowshares because I start getting card advantage instead of trading one for one. And of course I'd rather Spell Snare it than Swords it. Of course I haven't been impressed by Dark Confidant in the CounterTop Goyf deck in quite some time.
Against Lackey I'm fine Forcing it turn 1 because that doesn't present me to Wasteland. Obviously Swordsing a Lackey is fine, but I feel like it makes your deck worse in the mirror. Playing this deck is both a gamble that you think Goblins won't be 50% of the field and also that you think SB Pyroclasm/Fallout/Firespout/Plague is good enough.
The only creatures I'm worried enough about to include StP are Tombstalker, Goblin Lackey and Spiritmonger. Not having StP has worked out well enough for me so far that I don't have any incentive to change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Ocho

On a side note, why did you travel all the way from Texas to merely judge at the GP? I would have thought that someone as focused on Legacy as you, a 'pillar' (I assume) of the community, would have jumped at the chance to play in domestic Legacy GP; an event that comes around very infrequently.

---

Being a judge is very important to me, as important if not more than playing. I felt like I could make a big contribution on the judge staff since I knew the format very well. It also helps that I knew I'd be up or even on the weekend rather than down if I didn't money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anusien

P.S., who is interested in a report by Finalist Andrew Probasco? Help me peer pressure him into writing.

---

I'd be interested as well.

Thanks jeanbathez

One question: Why do you guys think Probasco ran 1 U.Sea for 3 Duress in the side.
What was their function exactly?, I mean, what make him choose them instead of 3 pyro/REB for example.
Thx.

P.d : I know, both of them have their pros and cons against the GP metagame -REB>Merfolk, NLU? Duress> Combo, etc- but I'd like to know what make him go in that direction specifically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironstickman

One question: Why do you guys think Probasco ran 1 U.Sea for 3 Duress in the side.
What was their function exactly?, I mean, what make him choose them instead of 3 pyro/REB for example.
Thx.

P.d : I know, both of them have their pros and cons against the GP metagame -REB>Merfolk, NLU? Duress> Combo, etc- but I'd like to know what make him go in that direction specifically.

---

I don't think he really respected Merfolk as a deck, and I think he figured he had Firespout in that matchup (it used to be Pyroclasm). I think he was much more worried about combo.

It used to be 2 Sea, but the 2nd Sea got trimmed for the 3rd Trop. It's not like combo is going to Wasteland you.

I think that this would make a great hybrid idea:

lands//21
3 mutavault
4 flooded strand
4 polluted delta
4 underground sea
4 tundra
2 island


creatures//12
4 spellstutter sprite
2 vendilion clique
2 sower of temptation
4 dark confidant


spells//28
4 swords to plowshares
3 bitterblossom
2 vedalken shackles
4 brainstorm
3 sensei's divining top
2 ponder
4 force of will
3 daze
3 counterbalance

sideboard//
4 engineered plague
3 meddling mage
4 staff of progenitus
2 disenchant
2 pithing needle


You trade green (predator/grip/goyf) for more stability (easier to access your colors), better threats (bittertblossom is an amazing threat, and a 3/1 flier can go a long way)... The addition of mutavault allows the deck to fuel sprite (hard counter in this format, making the hard counter count 8), and allows us to increase our agro-plan once we have gained control of the game.

The creature control is almost excessive in this deck as well:

1. swords
2. bitterblossom
3. sower of temptation
4. potential back swing on your turn


With the potential to smash with a bunch of dudes (flashing in a clique EOT can add to a significant clock)...

Anyways, what do you guys think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironstickman

One question: Why do you guys think Probasco ran 1 U.Sea for 3 Duress in the side.

---

The duress are specifically for combo (where they're much better than REB), I don't bring them in any other matches. I certainly wouldn't say I didn't respect merfolk as a deck, I just wanted space in my sideboard specifically for combo. In retrospect, combo didn't have an amazing showing though, so it's possible those slots were wrong.


On a tournament report: I'm not sure a tournament report would be that great a vehicle to say anything about the deck, I'm not sure how accurate it would be, and I haven't been offered anything to write it. If you guys want me to do like a direct QnA or discussion thread here on The Source I'd be happy to, but I'm not super familiar with the forum rules/policies and what/where you would want me to post.

I also have a question about Probasco's list, in particular about the mana-base.

Would it be possible to change the 2 Academy Ruins (I guess you never want to draw both) into something like

-1 Academy Ruins
+1 Tolaria West

Tolaria West would also have the advantage
- to provide blue mana with Choke on the board
- to fetch EE (or Crypt G2+3) without relying on Trinket Mage
- to fetch a Basic Forest, which would be an answer to Blood Moon effects (EE @3, constant green mana for Grip, Goyf etc.)

Maybe one could cut one Volcanic or Tropical for this single Forest.

My answer to Blood Moon was always some complicated manabase restructuring that involved fetching basic Forest for Goyf or playing Demigod of Revenge. His is just having enough basic Islands to Shackles or Sower their threat through Blood Moon. I think that plan works much better. Sideboarding Disk if you're that worried is probably a better answer than Tolaria West.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taurelin

Would it be possible to change the 2 Academy Ruins (I guess you never want to draw both) into something like
-1 Academy Ruins
+1 Tolaria West

---

The double Academy Ruins isn't just in the list so you find it faster, you actually want the redundant one in some matches, particularly anything else with Ruins, where you may need to legend rule one of them away. If your meta hasn't "figured out [Academy Ruins] yet" or just doesn't like it, the 2nd one probably isn't necessary.

As for Tolaria West, I haven't tested it, but it doesn't sound horrible. I will say though, that one Tolaria West isn't going to win you a match against resolved choke, you need dedicated sideboard answers for that (which I have been forced to run in my regular meta, but didn't think would be necessary for the GP.) In situations where you're Westing for an EE, if it's an anti aggro measure, Trinket Mage is much better, but I could see TW being nice in the CB mirror. Anusien pretty much summed up my feelings on the Blood Moon issue.

Thx for the input, Anusien.

And thx for the explanation, BrassMan. Such information is very interesting and useful and can't be found in an "official" coverage of the deck's performance.

@Brassann: I'd actually like to see what you consider the weaknesses of this deck and what your sideboarding was like in most matchups. So far I've played the deck in one local tournament and came in 6th place of 25 people after losing to dreadstill in the top 8. (Had beaten it 2-0 in the swiss.)

I have to say that I was surprised how well I did against goblins despite not having actual removal in g1. However I am not even sure whether CB/Top should be boarded out in the goblin matchup as otherwise sower can not really be protected and there is quite a lot of cc3 and 4 stuff in the deck to make CB relevant. In those games I played against goblins I took the balances out though, because I couldn't come up with much else.

My boarding against goblins was:

-4 CB
-1 Top
-2 Krosan Grip
+3 Firespout
+2 Ancient Grudge
+2 Hydroblast

What do you think about that?

for weaknesses of the deck, I'd say it depends on how you build your sideboard, with all the card filtering it's easy to find almost anything post board, which makes simple a lot of matchups that would otherwise be trouble. At the GP both of my swiss losses were to Ritual->Tombstalker, backed up by heavy discard. That combination does seem to be pretty problematic for the deck.


my plan against goblins with the GP sideboard would more likely be:
-1 Counterbalance
-2 Krosan Grip
-3 Spell Snare
+3 Firespout
+2 Hydroblast
+1 Pithing Needle

Snares probably get the nod over CBs if you see extra 2 drops (Tin Streets or Sparksmiths could ruin your day), but just countering Piledriver isn't that impressive.

Note that Needle answers Vial as well as Grudge can for one less, and can also hit a number of other strong cards out of goblins (Gempalm Incinerator is a favorite of mine to call). If the goblins deck in question has actual nonvial artifacts you're worried about, bringing in the grudges would make sense, but I can't think of anything like that out of goblins I'd be worried about.

Depending on your meta it might be worth it to add more anti goblins cards. Clasm, Firespout, and Hydroblast are my favorite, but your mileage may vary

Whoa, I would never post in this thread otherwise, but I see Andy is actually posting on the Source!!!! Good to see! You should really upload a bunch of your altered cards. But anyway, part of the reason why his SB plans work so well .... is because Andy has a really bad habbit of drawing exactly what he needs at exactly the right time :) I have repeatedly asked him to show me how to do this ... but he won't! Perhaps it is best left unspoken for fear of me bringing TES or ANT up there every week and drawing exactly what I need!!!!

How is NLU doing vs Aggro Loam, Survival and Merfolk?

Is NLU a good choice for a meta game with those three archtypes dominating?

...

2 Versions of this deck took first and second at the largest legacy event ever. I'm sort of surprised that the conversation about them has died down.

I have been playing the 2 decks and I LOVE them.

If Brassman is still monitoring this thread I have questions for him:

1. How do you handle small resolved dudes and random aggro? I realize you have some normal answers, goyf, explosives, shackles, and something more unique Sower.

2. Was this deck a highly tuned metagame deck? I see how you would murder every thresh/dreadstill/Aggro-Control deck you faced. W/o swords it looks like you are missing your early spot removal. What would you change if you went into more random meta?

3. Did you have an issue without raw CA (except for trinket mage) other decks use DC and landstill, you just have a massive amount of virtual and tempo. Since you finished undefeated game 1 I assume it was enough.

4. You are known as a very good player winning moxes and such. Do you feel that this deck is really that good or do you feel that your playskill overcame deficiencies in the deck (if any)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xfrt

How is NLU doing vs Aggro Loam, Survival and Merfolk?

Is NLU a good choice for a meta game with those three archtypes dominating?

---

Against aggro loam basic islands and sowers can win a lot of games by themselves, Needles are really nice in the matchup, shutting off cycling lands, wastelands, seismic assault.

Survival is just something I've never been to worried about, but it's possible I underestimate the deck. I've yet to see the Survival deck that can function well without a survival hitting, and between snares, needles, and counterbalance/force, it's not too hard to keep them off of that.

With my specific list merfolk is a little scary. Firespout is amazing, but Shackles and Sower are pretty atrocious against Lord of Atlantis.

Honestly against those three decks, Nassif's maindeck with Swords might be better. My list is fine against those decks, but it's mostly built for the counterbalance/tarmogoyf mirror, whereas swords makes your deck more general-purpose.

Quote:

---

1. How do you handle small resolved dudes and random aggro? I realize you have some normal answers, goyf, explosives, shackles, and something more unique Sower.

---

Goyf + Force hands can often buy you a lot of time, but this deck is really built for games 2/3 more than game 1. Firespout and Blue Blasts are critical in matches against little guys.

Quote:

---

2. Was this deck a highly tuned metagame deck? I see how you would murder every thresh/dreadstill/Aggro-Control deck you faced. W/o swords it looks like you are missing your early spot removal. What would you change if you went into more random meta?

---

It was metagamed, yes, for sure, but in a balanced metagame I still think it's strong. Counterbalance and Goyf are just so much stronger than other strategies that it'll get you there a decent amount of the time. It's not that I expected a LOT of the threshy decks at the GP, it's that I thought they were the strongest decks, and the most difficult to beat, so the most worth dedicating cards to. If your metagame is skewed specifically against CB decks, without many of them going around, then yeah I could see some metagaming being right. I will mention, however, that against most of the format, swords is one of the weaker post board options, (as opposed to the cards I ended up running, mostly)

Quote:

---

3. Did you have an issue without raw CA (except for trinket mage) other decks use DC and landstill, you just have a massive amount of virtual and tempo. Since you finished undefeated game 1 I assume it was enough.

---

This was on purpose, and in my opinion one of the major strengths of the deck. I've won a lot of games hugely behind on physical cards, because the cards I drew and played were stronger/more important. An opponent who draws 2 lands, 2 swords, 2 vendillon cliques AND 2 more draw spells is STILL going to lose to 1 Shackles. Counterbalance wars are a huge part of this, as using cantrips to get and stick a CounterTop NOW is much more important than drawing 5 cards in a few turns. The majority of those cards will be completely invalidated by the top that's in play, nowhere is this more dramatic than in the case of Swords to Plowshares, which is completely dead against an opponent whos plan is to drop Counterbalance before anything else.

Quote:

---

4. You are known as a very good player winning moxes and such. Do you feel that this deck is really that good or do you feel that your playskill overcame deficiencies in the deck (if any)?

---

Thank you! people who know me personally know that I'm incredibly pessimistic, and probably downplay the factor of skill in any of my wins, so take this with a grain of salt. I attribute most of my success, at this GP but also in vintage, to deckbuilding and tuning, rather than any particularly fantastic play. Without trying to sound arrogant, I really think it was the right deck for the event.

Two things:
1) BrassDeck is sick. I've punted into so many wins anyway with the deck because it is so powerful. Honestly, card advantage often is irrelevant except where it comes to landing Counterbalance, because in many matches you are a straight-up Counterbalance combo deck.
2) I haven't been afraid of Aggro Loam in a long while when I was playing any Counterbalance deck. They're almost completely cold to it, and they have so few relevant cards without being able to Loam for two or three turns.

I don't know if I agree with your second point, getting CB/Top is very powerful against Loam decks G1 but they run a decent number of 3cc threats (Terravore/Crusher) which you can't always stop with the CB/Top combo. I'll agree though that getting an early CB lock goes a long way to winning the matchup. But post-board they most assuredly have 3-4 Krosan Grip to deal with Counterbalance/Shackles which makes things harder. Are you only referring to G1 or post-board as well?

@Gekoratel: Having played a TON of aggro-loam and about the same amount of NLU in Legacy as everyone here except Brassman I feel moderately qualified to address the matchup.

Nassif's build falls prey much more to wasteland, and only has a Grip for a resolved chalice at 1 MD. I can see this being a tougher matchup but you still have Sower.

Brassman's deck looks like it was set up to pwn aggroloam. First he has a ton of basics. Second he has a Trinketable explosives MD, and can even shut off something via his MD needle. Lastly, the more successful aggro-loam (at least at the GP) lists have very little spot removal so a Sower steals Terravore and you proceed to win from there. If you play his deck how do you not pwn aggro-loam?