2 Miracles players are 9-0 at GP Vegas.
Printable View
2 Miracles players are 9-0 at GP Vegas.
That's brilliant!Quote:
Originally Posted by Minniehajj
So bad no Miracle match was streamed in twitch day one:frown:
Wizards didn't want to deal with the twitch chat lobbying for a Portent and/or Predict ban.
Very exciting! Interested to hear some specifics on the builds when the time is right (Mentor vs. ETA; UW vs. UWr; etc.).Quote:
Originally Posted by Minniehajj
* * *
Not as interesting as the GP, but I just got a chance to play this for the first time (no MTGO and have been out of town), going 2-1-1 at my local Thursday night Legacy. Wins vs. BUG Delver (Hymn) and Nic Fit; one loss and one draw vs. D&T. Losses were due to flooding against D&T, a greedy keep vs. BUG Delver that never found a second land, getting swarmed without finding a Terminus by D&T (with Prelate on 1 in one game), and plenty of my own mistakes as well. Two mistakes that stand out in particular are [1] not saving an UA for SFM in response to its trigger; and [2] keeping a one-lander on the draw and leading with Ponder instead of Portent out of habit, then not finding the land and having to Portent on turn 2, where I found a land but was unable to play it that turn. I also felt somewhat lucky to find ETA or Mentor fairly early in most games, which helped me close out games quickly. Playing 3 decks without countermagic also made things a bit easier I'm sure. I won two games directly with Jace, and every post-board game with Mentor or Mentor + ETA, though Jace played a role in probably 5/7 of my wins.
I'm on the UWr build and am still working out sideboarding plans. Unfortunately I didn't play any matchups where I brought in Blasts, so I couldn't evaluate the red splash for those. (I didn't bring them in against BUG Delver since I don't have a basic Mountain, but maybe I should have?) I liked having Blood Moon for the BUG matchup: even though it ate an Abrupt Decay with floated mana, that cleared the path for a Mentor which won the game. I'm not sure it's correct, but I brought in Mentor in every match. I'm also not sure how much my opponents actually boarded out their removal, which makes me question whether it's worth just putting Mentor in the main deck... Will have to test more, to be sure.
Overall, the deck was a lot of fun. More fun, probably, than Counter-Top Miracles, even though it's not as strong. I really enjoyed how complex the lines of play and interactions are, with UA, Portent, and Predict standing out in this regard. Portent in particular was great -- I cast it on my opponents close to half the time, either because the board was clear and I had a Predict in hand or because I had Jace out. It felt pretty great to have that much control over my opponents' draws, and even better with Jace or Predict to complement it.
With any luck, I'll be able to play two times next week (three if I forego Modern) and get some more reps in.
Just saw Matthew Chung on UWr Miracle defeating Lukas Blohon on Grixis Control under camera.
Matthew Chung proceeded to 10-0.
Games were insane! Go Miracle:tongue:
One of the best matches I've ever seen. Easily the highlight of the coverage this weekend so far. Go Matt and Sam!!Quote:
Originally Posted by entreri_fans
Sam Roukas and Matt Chung are paired against each other this round, sadly. Out of this, 1 will remain undefeated.
EDIT: Sam wins. Sam is now 11-0, Matt is now 10-1. They are both still on the fast track to the top 8.
Let's go guys !
Wheels fell off in the end as all of the Miracles players played against one another and led to all of them getting knocked out from top 8 contention :(
Still, excellent showing for the deck considering how far it had come from the ban, and there is much work left to be done!
I'm not particularly a fan of Blohon, but actually to me it seemed one of the worst match coverages and quite a new demonstration of why people hated miracles.Quote:
Originally Posted by MinniehajjOne of the best matches I've ever seen. Easily the highlight of the coverage this weekend so far. Go Matt and Sam!!Quote:
Originally Posted by entreri_fans
It was a show of topdecking a blind terminus, then topdecking a blind jace after his hand was stripped away, then topdecking a blind pyroblast for opposing jace... and in the end a very timed topdeck of mentor in both games. Also, I would note how he always didn't miss a land drop for exactly four turns and then drew only spells, while the opponent went flooded both times. I just saw plenty of luck on miracle side.
Also I think we should note that while Miracles didn't reach top16, two UW control list got there (and a BUG depth crop loam list quite crazy)... I would be curious to know the numbers of day2 representation in the metagame of these archetypes. Obviously numbers are too low to have statistical significance, but it seems an indication that actually UW controls could be better positioned than Miracles... in the real world outside of MTGO.
Well UW Stoneblade is a strong deck, and I always found that splashing for Esper wasn't really needed.Quote:
Originally Posted by talpa
Miracle still managed to go to a 10-0 before starting to be paired each other, any decks that is undefeated day 1 is powerful enough. You can't top deck 9 rounds.
I am just sad they didn't make the finish, it was very important that Miracle get some coverage in a big top. Still congratulations to them.
No Miracles decks in the Top 16 whatsoever.
At least now Miracles is exactly where it should be - just another Tier 1-1.5 deck among many instead of being the de facto best control deck/blue deck/everything.
I'd say Miracles with Portent is definitely playable and strong but not any stronger than Stoneblade, or Deathblade, or straight Ux control without Miracles. Just different.
I see this from a different point of view. We dont have the metagame data, but I am pretty sure there wasnt many miracles playing the event at all. Top 64 its a impressive finish for a deck we just start building. Remember Roukas lost his top8 finish in the last round.
By the way, got a 5x0 finish playing mentor sb. Ps. I am using relic because I dont have the tix for surgical yet. list is up o mtggoldfish.
Seriously?Quote:
Originally Posted by Minniehajj
I enjoyed watching the match. It was interesting and intense, but not even close to top50 best matches I've ever seen and easily very far from a highlight of coverage. The Miracles dude had just the sickest topdecks of all times, while Blohon drew crap after crap after crap despite tons of looks.
I particularly liked how he never found anything good with his JTMS-Brainstorms, while Miracles just needed 1 (!) JTMS-Brainstorm (after plussing for ages) to find all the cards needed. That being said: MtG is still a card game with variance involved. It was a fine match. I just really didn't think of it as a strong showing of the deck, but rather a strong showing of how luck can turn around games you really shouldn't win. Everyone thought Blohon would win g2, then Miracles topdecked the most insane Brainstorm ever, while Blohon bricked again... Whatever... I agree that Miracles seems in a decent spot right now. Strong, not busted and still room for improvement.
That's how I see it too, I think the overall win % of the deck will be very high, especially considering the deck is still 'new'.Quote:
Originally Posted by laywer
Congrats on the 5-0! Was wondering about the Relic, thanks for explaining.
The MatchQuote:
Originally Posted by talpa
I understand your argument. On the surface, it seemed like the Miracles player topdeck-ed luck into victory. However, how did he put himself in that position to receive such luck? In many matches against Grixis, you could have simply get blown out by YP + Therapy early, or just die to TNN coming from the side of Grixis. In any matches, if Miracles players were good enough to navigate into the mid-game with relatively clear board and land-drops, the deck by design has stronger power hitters like Jace and Mentor. It's always one cantrip away from establishing overwhelming advantages, even if he or she has no hand after the early game.
The Meta
The lesson about the GP result is how powerful TNN can be in the fair match-up. I find that especially true against Lands and DnT.
Imo It was not a luck based match. Grixis failed to close the game fast and transitioned in the lategame territory where having 3-4 more cantrip+predict+more impactful cards made the difference.
Sent from my MI 5 using Tapatalk
Well, it did help the miracles player that Blohon found 0 of 3 pyroblast allthough cantripping a million timesQuote:
Originally Posted by Drzed
THanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitefaces
Just got a 4x1 right now. I am not liking mentor MD. Are you using 2 main?
2x0 ANT
1x2 BUG Nic Fit - he had some great draws, like Nissa and JTMS
2x0 UR Delver - pretty dificult MU like all the one involving a lot of burn spells. Do you side in EC against them?
2x0 Grixis Tezz
2x0 BR Reanimator
Also to twdnn....Quote:
Originally Posted by Drzed
You guys must be kidding. Seriously you believe he played well, or that miracle deserves winning automatically when you reach turn x?
It was a kind of control mirror. Blohon had many outs and always played to maximize the cards seen.
While the miracle guy always fatesealed, going directly for the win way too early before establishing the control of the game. If one deserved to see the pyroblast, that wasn't him.
Seriously guy, that's why people hates miracles: always denying the evidence, be the unfairness of his strength before the ban, or the luck in this game (while playing the opposite of optimum)
We got your point. Can you move on ?Quote:
Originally Posted by talpa
If you got my point, then fine, I'm good (though I am not so sure my point was taken, since after the first comment at least other two people joined the conversation to say how good was that match).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestalim
I wasn't the only one to say these things: MorphBerlin and Nicklas apparently saw the same match in the same way I did.
So I don't think that my point is spam. On the contrary, I think it focuses on the very purpose of this forum (and I mean the forum, not the thread).
If I come here it's to read content that can improve my understanding, and where we can share information in order to become better players. Maybe I haven't time to test so extensively, or my experience seems to show something but I'm not so sure it can be a general case, if maybe my playstyle is influencing the results, or maybe I'm afraid I could be thinking with some bias. So I accept an exchange not only of facts, but also of impressions... but it has to come from someone whose judgment I trust, which means, someone who is speaking the more objectively he can.
If this becomes a place where one describes the events with partisanship and wishful thinking (I want miracle to win, so if it does, then I think everything was good; I want to think that miracle is a great deck with inevitability against everything, so instead of focusing objectively on what are its strenghts and what are its weakness, I think that if you manage to get to the lategame you always win), the forum loses its very purpose.
EDIT: Also, and of course this can be a very personal preference, I don't see the usefulness of continuous posts which just post a list, maybe with just 2 cards changed, maybe even not tested, just with an assumption "i think this could work". And maybe even without a motivation of why this change should work better. Then there are posts which describes the results of a noob of the deck in a tournament of 3 rounds of swiss.
In Italy we had a forum and we had two pillars: 1) first test then speak 2) list + nothing = nothing.
What instead I think could be very useful, are discussion of how you think the deck should be played and why. So the question with that game was pretty in-topic: do you think that if you face a Grixis delverless list you should start fatesealing with jace immediately or should you prefer brainstorming? If then the opponent also has a Jace, does this change your approach?
I am open to such kind of a discussion. Though it seems to me almost obvious, as a control player, that you should prefer building advantage instead of rushing for the win, until you have means to ensure that neither the board could degenerate nor your win condition can be put in danger. Of course this is a delicate point, to understand the moment when you should change gears, in order to give the opponent the less turns possibile before you close the game.
The only reason I can see for starting to fateseal are if you need to ensure that he doesn't draw something very specific, or if you think that you already won. I think that in that match the miracle player either wasn't playing optimally or was conviced to already have the game in his pocket, and if so, I think he was very wrong.
Regards
Sorry if i didn't argued my post better. The thing is that I didn't meant to say that the match was a beautiful match (I love grixis control deck on par with miracles actually, if being a Fanboy is what bothers you) nor that the miracles player played it well, as u pointed he was rushing too much for the fateseal win imo. The thing is I always find that even if u start in a good position with grixis control decks, miracles often gets you anyway as the deck lategame is more robust and they have the tools to keep up with pretty much all your threats and CA. I think the best thing to do for the miracles player was to brainstorm with jace to strengthen his position but it's just my opinion. The result was probably a mix of not-so-great matchup and variance but this is still just my opinion.
Sorry if I sounded rude or if my English is not perfect.
Peace
Ps. I really think that your right about the conversation being a bit stale with only decklists post and "hey guys look we can still terminus to 5-0 result" post with small conversation or criticism about card choices.
I don't think that the core of the deck is near to being figured out in the new configuration.
I know its a bit of a deep dig with this thread, but we are not only happy that these decks are being posted with great results but we have each expressed our thoughts on why card choices and numbers matter on a strategic base level. You're right, the core is nowhere to being finished, which is why we argue card choices and numbers all the time. To be fair, this is fresh and exciting for us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drzed
When I first formulated the deck, I was having troubles with win con choices while I had a single EtA in the main. Eventually I was recommended by Minniehajj, to run 3x Monastery Mentors in the sideboard in addition to the single EtA main. Eventually I liked them enough that I moved them all to the main and the community followed shortly after.
I don't have very much time to play Legacy but when it comes to the up to the minute updates, I am thankful for this community when it comes to openly providing technology and data. The rest of the community started playing Mentors main and I dont even feel bad I had zero influence in that inclusion. I could feel validated (which I do a little as an armchair theorist), but am definitely more grateful that the Miracles community is on a quest for truth regarding this deck. They test quite often, and that data definitely helps.
So please try and understand why the next 5-0 list being posted on here should be seen as a narrative to the evolution of Miracles. Each new list being posted has so far taught us many new things. Whether it be how much we can tax our cantrip suite with thin sideboards with medleys of 1-ofs and 2-ofs to our understanding of handlings of generic/versatile cards played in redundant quantities, these questions will get solved.
Anyways, enough of my /<3rant
Edit. @talpas: You made the observation that the Miracles player had not only missed land drops for four turns but also had a hand full of business. It would be smart to observe the fact that this deck also runs 4 Portent as well, and should attest to the fact that variance is the enemy when it comes to Magic: the Gathering (if the banning on Sensei's Divining Top wasnt obvious enough). If we run more cards that reduce variance while at the same time run powerful undercosted haymakers like Terminus, it could stand to reason that the card quality in this deck is on par with the Grixis Control deck without having to suffer the frequencies in "bad luck" which Blohan had to suffer either through flooding or having to creating haymakers to come back from behind. Without Top, variance plays a slightly higher role in creating inconsistencies in the deck, but that should be expected.
I understand both decks operate differently, but if pushed I would rather put my money on Miracles.
I know this might be a bit premature but what do you guys think of this card?
http://mythicspoiler.com/ixa/cards/e...ingmelody.html
It might not be good in the main but its a 2 mana dominate for lage seems fun.
Taking a Deathrite Shaman would smooth out our mana. Might be too narrow but I wouldn't dismiss the card.
Thinking about changing the 2 main deck UA for 2 EE. UA cost of WW sometimes is a problem and I do think EE is more efective dealing with chalice of the void and multiple creatures on the board that shares the same CMC, specially when you ponder about the massive presence of Young Pyromancer in the meta.
Anyway, people are using only one UA in the MD when playing mentors in the list. What do you think?
I like that option and will be trying it out soon. Then again, I'm a maniac who runs 2 Entreat main and hasn't been happy with Mentor.Quote:
Originally Posted by laywer
I think we're in agreement. Nah, your specific points are true, I'm not defending that particular player's misplays. I'm making a more generic statement as to other people's reaction to the perception of Miracles players' apparent top-deck luck, when we know it's not as simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by talpa
This is consistent with my comment earlier about the WW requirement. Another issue is UA targeting Sword of Fire Ice or other equipments, making opposing blade player to shuffle/bottom that away, then a SFM would just undo everything UA did. This is particularly annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by laywer
From the opposing (non-miracles player) PoV I can say that EE seems scarier than UA. UA has weird "lol you have to repeat your turn" effects sometimes, but it's usually not that different than drawing your next card. I had a blowout from Esper-Control against me the other day with EE popping both a Jitte and a Bitterblossom. Blossom being an obvious way for me to win that game, but the fact it was a 2-for-1 instead of a "replay one of your cards you already got value from" deal is quite big.
It also deals with tokens, is a good E-Tutor target for those of you running tutor-boards and honestly including a bad-land or two (ruins) is not unreasonable IMO. That softlock is pretty good. Lastly, UA is pretty meh against things like D&T where you're unlikely to even cost them mana nor actually get rid of the permanent, but EE casts through Thalia without taxation and the ability to hit Mom + Vial is an experience I've enjoyed many times in other decks.
While I'm sure none of you are the most-excited-you-will-ever-be about Ruins; EE is quite reasonable, with it's only real weakness being Revoker and giant CMC dudes; but between Terminus and Plow, I think you're better covered running EE's for potential CA and outs to bad permanents than running UA and potentially just buying yourself a single turn.
So I got 64th at GP Vegas and I decided to write a quick recap and thoughts on the deck!
Land (20)
1x Arid Mesa
4x Flooded Strand
4x Island
2x Plains
4x Scalding Tarn
3x Tundra
2x Volcanic Island
Planeswalker (3)
3x Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Creature (6)
3x Monastery Mentor
3x Snapcaster Mage
Instant (20)
4x Brainstorm
2x Counterspell
4x Force of Will
4x Predict
4x Swords to Plowshares
2x Unexpectedly Absent
Sorcery (11)
1x Supreme Verdict
4x Ponder
3x Portent
3x Terminus
Sideboard (15)
1x Blood Moon
1x Containment Priest
1x Disenchant
2x Ethersworn Canonist
2x Flusterstorm
1x Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1x Izzet Staticaster
3x Pyroblast
2x Surgical Extraction
1x Vendilion Clique
R1 - Omni-Sneak - Lost game 1 to a turn 2 Griselbrand. Game 2 Mentor was able to win 1 turn after resolving. Game 3 Boseiju led to a turn 3 omni + emrakul.
0-1
R2 - UR Delver - A very weird match. My opponent kept answering his phone and while boarding he asked if he could make a 5 minute call. I said no and he conceded.
1-1
R3 - BUG Delver - Has the game 1 classic Delver, Daze protect plan. Game 2 Mentor wins the game 1 turn after coming down. Game 3 he has a turn 4 JTMS with counter backup for my JTMS.
1-2
R4 - Burn - Actually a very difficult match. Won game 1 at 3 life and game 2 at 1 life thanks to a STP on a prowessed monk. The main deck Mentors are what helped me win before they drew 1 extra burn spell.
2-2
R5 - Esper Delver - Game 1 was at 8 life and stabilized. Game 2 I won thanks to Blood Moon which seems to be a 1 card win con for the matches I bring it in for.
3-2
R6 - D&T - This is a comically easy match. Never worried at one point. The Mentors, again, make the match much better.
4-2
R7 - Mirror - An absolutely brutal match. Game 1 was able to win with a 1 hit from the Mentor and tokens, followed by snap beats. Game 2 his Snap beats got me. Game 3 we each had a lot of cantrips. I decided to try out bringing in one surgical. He turn 2 EOT BS. So I EOT Surgical it. See his hand is Snap, land, land. His turn is Snap target Ponder, so I Snap Surgical his Ponders. He concedes to a Gideon and Jace in the turns.
5-2
R8 - Mirror - Got crushed game 1. Game 2 he conceded at 19 life to a Mentor. Game 3 Gideon won it again. We discussed boarding an he cut 4 FoW where I cut 2 STP, plains, and UA. I think that helped me a lot.
6-2
R9 - Noble BUG - I somehow come back from 1 life while facing a JTMS with 11 counters and a TNN. Quite an insane comeback that included Snapping a Terminus. Game 2 he has DRS > Library > Lily which wasn't the worst, but also a daze for my JTMS. Game 3 I take control of the board, have him at 2 life with a Gideon and a Jace in play, 6 cards in hand versus 0 non land permanents and no cards in hand on turn 5. I asked him to concede since x-2 had a shot at the PT and he didn't.
6-2-1
R10 - Eldrazi - Opponent shows up 2 minutes late and doesn't get a loss. During the game I STP a Reality Smasher and he says "go to resolution", I say "OK", he says "it is countered". We call a judge. The judge says we'll put the trigger on the stack and I appeal. Head judge agrees. During the match he also cast a Warping Wail after cleanup so he got a warning for that. I lose that game after he Wails my Snap before blocks. A judge was watching the match since we had some issues. As we started game 2 the judge gives him a slowplay warning since it took him 7 minutes from game end to keep his hand. Game 2 I stop all his creatures and play a Mentor, then cast things into Chalice to get Monks and win with them. Game 3 Gideon basically wins it single handily. But not before my opponent payed 3 for an Endbringer with and Eye of Ugin out.
7-2-1
R11 - D&T - This match is basically a bye. He conceded at 33 life game 1. Game 2 Mentor crushed it.
8-2-1
R12 - Aluren - He has a turn 3 Aluren. I don't have FoW and I lose. Game 2 I keep the board clear and win with Mentor. Game 3 we go to time after he Deeds away my Mentor and tokens. I had a FoW in hand and he had nothing in hand.
8-2-2
R13 - Noble BUG - Game 1 I keep the TNN's off of the field and Mentor wins it. Game 2 Blood Moon wins the game by itself.
9-2-2
R14 - UB Landstill - I don't like a lot of the cards main. End up getting crushed. Post board this improves heavily. Mentor is able to get there pretty easily as he couldn't Revolt his Push. Game 3 I Clique him on turn 3 and see Push, Push, Ponder, Ponder, Factory. I'm able to slam a Gideon. He uses 2 Pushes to put Gideon to 1. He can't ever touch Gideon again and it wins by itself.
10-2-2
R15 - 4c Control - I had no idea what he was on until 5 turns in. I only have seen Trop, Island, Badlands, Probe, Ponder, Therapy. Finally I see a DRS and a Lavamancer. Supreme Verdict 3-for-1's him and JTMS takes it over. Last game was Mentor wins the game.
11-2-2
I loved everything about the deck. Maybe swapping a UA for an EE. If anyone was curious about specific sideboarding, let me know.
For those of you ranting about the Stoneblade decks who made better placings than the Miracles guys I would just like to point put that there was one single matchpoint in difference between place 16 and 65. So I'd pretty much say that it means diddly squat :-)
This is totally ok. But I hope that they both investigate, as this is a serious case of cheating if proven.Quote:
he says "go to resolution", I say "OK", he says "it is countered". We call a judge. The judge says we'll put the trigger on the stack and I appeal. Head judge agrees.
Not to be rude but... am I the only one thinking "ofc a person like that plays Eldrazi...." ? :tongue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestalim
Sorry for being dense but what angle was this guy shooting at? Was he basically not giving you a chance to discard a card to plow the Smasher?Quote:
Originally Posted by kentheide
Yes, the judges ruling here seems correct. This would be like, "Does my Spell Pierce Resolve? Yes. Ok, your spell is countered because you didn't say you were paying." If this person knows how it actually works, he's cheating and should be DQ'd.Quote:
Originally Posted by koten
If he says Go to resolution, and you say okay, that's sounds like he missed his Reality Smasher trigger. It's your opponent's responsibility to remember his own triggers, not yours. He basically proposed a shortcut to where your STP resolved without demonstrating awareness of the trigger. So if a judge was called you'd be asked if you want to put his Smasher trigger on stack. You may refuse.Quote:
During the game I STP a Reality Smasher and he says "go to resolution", I say "OK", he says "it is countered".
Edit: Also if it it seems he was voluntarily "missing" the trigger and is aware that doing so is illegal, that can be grounds for getting disqualified.
All that being said, I may be missing something that may have caused the judges to rule differently in your case.
The best scenario may be snatching a Marit Lage, but this deck has plenty of answers to depth anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1987
That card does seem powerful, but it is also very far away, so we can probably discuss it during the proper spoiler season if it is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1987
I decided to try Monastery Mentor maindeck during the Legacy Challenge yesterday insead of my usual 1:of entreat, since there have been so much talk about that lately.
I don't know if I'd give an Eldrazi player that much credit :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestalim
I'm half serious though. He probably thought it was like Tabernacle instead of like Chalice. I realize it's hard to believe that given that he runs chalice, but again.. there's a not unreasonable chance he's in the 6-2-1-ish bracket purely on Chalice/Thorns-ing Storm/Delver/etc. and a reasonable chance he's not judge-level at rules and a very good chance he's never played another legacy deck
The main local stompy player seems reasonable at rules and plays a host of Stompy decks, but he also played D&T for awhile so I'm not sure if he picked up his rules-understandings there or just happens to be a rules-nerd.
Regardless, if the guy goofed on the end-step stuff I'm liable to believe that he's just trying to play at a higher level than he is and emulating things that other players do to get tricksy. With chalice someone may have gone "Plow your guy" and said "go to resolution" or something, and he may have missed his trigger. Or similarly, he could've just gotten hosed by forgetting Tabernacle triggers (I think there was a huge feature match a year or two back where the missed trigger caused the guy to lose a bunch of stuff and the game?) so I'd just expect he was doing better than he "should" be, and nerves got him playing like a try-hard.