[DTB] Blade Control

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadMaximus

My sideboard strategy against maverick is basically:
- removing the whole stoneforge package
- removing a couple 'o' spell snares
- boarding in 2 path, 1 additional else, 2 wrath of god, 2 engineered explosives, 1 - 3 surgical extraction (depending on their build, mainly for punishing fire, when they have red splash, which is popular)

my problem with that:
I rely heavily on my planeswalkers to close the game and that's pretty slow...
So, I probably will get to game 3, but then I can't close the game, what do you think?
Should I consider boarding the stoneforge package back in after game 2?
Seems reasonable, ain't it?

---

Makes perfect sense. Removing all your artifacts to blank artifact hate is a good idea. However, against Mav, this might not be the highest value play, as their artifact hate is usually Qasali Pridemage and he's pretty useful in other situations. However, against decks like Zoo or RUG, this can be very powerful, as it will usually leave them with 2-3 dead cards, like Ancient Grudge or Krosan Grip.

Removing all my artifacts doesn't work for me, as I have Mishra's Factories, so they always have artifact targets, so I usually just leave in my SFM package.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

Makes perfect sense. Removing all your artifacts to blank artifact hate is a good idea. However, against Mav, this might not be the highest value play, as their artifact hate is usually Qasali Pridemage and he's pretty useful in other situations. However, against decks like Zoo or RUG, this can be very powerful, as it will usually leave them with 2-3 dead cards, like Ancient Grudge or Krosan Grip.

Removing all my artifacts doesn't work for me, as I have Mishra's Factories, so they always have artifact targets, so I usually just leave in my SFM package.

---

That was something I didn't have so much on my mind 'til now xD
Anyway, I'll try a different way in the future I think, although the strategy to remove nearly all of my creatures to get the highest value out of wrath of god seems huge against decks like maverick (where you need wrath and elspeth for sure against thrun) or elves.
Problem with wrath of god is, in which matchups will you surely bring it in, I mean, there aren't many decks that overextend and run into it.
Most of the time it's only like dealing with 2 creatures and therefore the spot removal is more important.

So, question to all of you: In which matchups do you side in the wrath of gods?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadMaximus

My sideboard strategy against maverick is basically:
- removing the whole stoneforge package
- removing a couple 'o' spell snares
- boarding in 2 path, 1 additional else, 2 wrath of god, 2 engineered explosives, 1 - 3 surgical extraction (depending on their build, mainly for punishing fire, when they have red splash, which is popular)

my problem with that:
I rely heavily on my planeswalkers to close the game and that's pretty slow...
So, I probably will get to game 3, but then I can't close the game, what do you think?
Should I consider boarding the stoneforge package back in after game 2?
Seems reasonable, ain't it?

---

Removing sfm against punishing lists (or anything with that much removal available) seems like a good idea, as keeping Stoneforge alive is tough. However, as you say, the equipment *really* helps in actually winning this game if it sticks (even cast, if you have the removal available to stick around that long). Non-punishing lists are shorter on removal, and it probably depends on what they're boarding in (one could always put them back for game 3).
Post-board matchups of both variants remain on my "things to test" list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

Hello all, my teammate Merrin went 5-0 on a (very) small local tournament with UWr Punishing Blade. Basically a UW Stoneblade list that splashes red for Punishing Fire.

Check out his tournament report: clicky.

---

Good summary. But there is one thing bugging me:

Quote:

---

By this time Gijs has acquired three Bridge from Below in his graveyard. I think for a while in his draw step and decided to wait for a bit more to see what happens. He replays his Cabal Therapy and some Bridge-triggers went on the stack. I decided that those zombies weren’t allowed to enter the battlefield and used a Punishing Fire to kill my own Vendilion Clique.

---

This is not possible, unless I have been playing wrong for quite a while. Can someone back me up, or tell me I am wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artlee

Good summary. But there is one thing bugging me:


This is not possible, unless I have been playing wrong for quite a while. Can someone back me up, or tell me I am wrong?

---

"Whenever a nontoken creature is put into your graveyard from the battlefield, if Bridge from Below is in your graveyard, put a 2/2 black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield."

That 'if' condition means the Bridge has to still be in the graveyard when the triggers resolve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

To start with, read these articles:
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/l...toneforge.html
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/l...hould_Too.html
And you can watch these videos, too: http://www.teamadhd.nl/wp/?p=335 http://www.teamadhd.nl/wp/?p=62

General strategy depends on what you are playing against. If you are playing against Combo, you want a heavy counter hand to counter their combo pieces. Mid-range, a mix of removal and counterspell. Against another control deck, you want to drop a Jace or Geist to gain card/board advantage.

Regarding brainstorm, ideally, you want to be able to use a fetchland to shuffle cards away. For example, brainstorm, put two worthless cards back on top, crack fetch, shuffle and draw a new card during your next draw step. Brainstorm also depends on what you are looking for. Early game, it may be a land, mid game, a Swords to Plowshares, late game a Jace, WOG or Batterskull to finish out the game.

---

Thanks for the response! The SCG posts helped me so much and I'm actually enjoying this deck even more.
One more thing: it's always wrong to tap out playing stoneforge if I have a FoW backup? Or should I wait until I have 3/4/5 lands in play so I can rely on more counters?
I actually play spellstutter sprite but they don't get the job done. It's a bad idea to take them out to put in 2 mana leak?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

5-0 with UWr Punishing Blade

Hello all, my teammate Merrin went 5-0 on a (very) small local tournament with UWr Punishing Blade. Basically a UW Stoneblade list that splashes red for Punishing Fire.

Check out his tournament report: clicky.

---

My thoughts:

- His report seems to indicate he's playing against relatively inexperienced players. For example the Counterburn player misplays his Surgical Extraction (and apparently, that's the only Extraction he faces all day? This is why I've chosen not to go the Leyline route for the Dredge matchups). He comments "I’m quite convinced that a lot of other players would do the same." Now, I'll admit I've made the same mistake with Purify the Grave the first time I played someone with a Punishing Grove combo, but that was the last time I'll make that mistake, and with Punishing Maverick making the charts, I wouldn't count on a lot of other people making the same mistake. A properly-timed Extraction will remove half of the removal from his deck and render six of his lands superfluous (the Groves become less than useful at that point: they're basically providing colorless mana and giving the opponent life for the privilege). Also, his Bant opponent apparently didn't make good use of the KotR/Ith combo (attack with the Knight, use the Maze to untap after combat damage, and then pump), indicating he also was probably not too experienced.

- His mana base looks extremely vulnerable. He's only running 1(!) basic. Against a Wasteland-heave aggro deck his mana base is going to get torn up early, and he won't recover. Aggro decks can usually get away with few/no basics because they apply quick pressure and don't need as much mana. Even this "Punishing Blade" deck needs at least 4.

- Given that he only has 4 red spells main, and all 4 are Punishing Fire, for which he really wants a Grove available, I think his number of red duals/fetches is overkill. I would probably ditch the Plateau, and maybe even one of the Volcanics). I'd probably also trade a couple of the fetches (the Arid Mesas) for more Islands and at least one Plains (especially when running 2 Elspeth's main, which also seems like overkill).

- No Wastelands means no way of dealing with problematic lands from the opponent, such as Maze of Ith, Tower of the Magistrate, opponents' Groves, etc.

- He mentions how the mirror/control matchups tend to hold onto their Wastelands to use on the Grove. That's not surprising; I think that's the right move on their part. A typical Stoneblade deck isn't looking to play mana denial anyway, and he doesn't have anything else worth wasting. They would probably hold onto those Wastelands for a while regardless of if he was playing Punishing/Grove. They can still be tapped for mana in the meantime, though, so I'm not sure how that helps in his development, other than not getting his duals wasted, which is probably a bad move in general for a Stoneblade deck to try to do.

- I find his logic of swapping out Path to Exile for Phyrexian Metamorph to be a little weak given that he's got 3 WoG in the SB which hit Thrun and Geist just fine (not to mention 4 Snapcasters that also can hit Geist on attack), and at best the Metamorph is only one mana less than WoG. If he's really only concerned about problematic legends, Phantasmal Image sounds better at 2cc... at least I could see a justification of that even with the WoG. Neither is likely necessary.

- Overall, without Knight of the Reliquary to fetch Groves (plus a Knight could fetch a 2nd Grove in response to an attempted Extraction), I feel like Punishing/Grove is just a trick here. It's relatively easy to disrupt with a well-timed Extraction/Purify/Wasteland, rendering his Punishing Fires either non-existent or an expensive and slow Shock. Honestly, I don't see a lot of advantage to Punishing/Grove in UWr Stoneblade versus just running 4 Lightning Bolts: the bolts are cheaper, do more damage, and can be snapped back with Snapcaster. Realistically, is he going to be recurring Punishing Fire enough to justify it over (snappable) bolts? Given the various ways Punishing/Grove can be disrupted, I doubt it. Plus, getting rid of the Groves will help is mana base and/or allow some utility lands like Wasteland, Mishra's, Tower of the Magistrate, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

"Whenever a nontoken creature is put into your graveyard from the battlefield, if Bridge from Below is in your graveyard, put a 2/2 black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield."

That 'if' condition means the Bridge has to still be in the graveyard when the triggers resolve.

---

Artlee, you are correct. The Bridge triggers go on the stack and even if the Bridges are removed afterwords, your opponent still gets his/her Zombie tokens. The only way for matunos to remove the Bridges without the creation of Zombie tokens is to Punishing Fire his Clique at the end of his opponents draw step.

For example, your opponent chooses to Dredge during his/her draw step. You see some Bridges and a Cabal Therapy, Dread Return or other sacrifice outlet hit their yard. You Punishing Fire your creature during your opponent's draw step (after priority is passed to you) and the Bridges remove. If you allow your opponent to go this his/her Main 1 and he/she flashbacks Cabal Therapy or Dread Return, the Zombie tokens will be made even if you kill your creature in response or remove the Bridges using a card like Purify the Grave or Surgical Extraction.

For cards like Narcomeba, Ichorid or a Dread Return target, you can Purify/Surgical the creature in response to the trigger because this creature does have to be in the graveyard at the time of resolution to come into play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanadell~

Thanks for the response! The SCG posts helped me so much and I'm actually enjoying this deck even more.
One more thing: it's always wrong to tap out playing stoneforge if I have a FoW backup? Or should I wait until I have 3/4/5 lands in play so I can rely on more counters?
I actually play spellstutter sprite but they don't get the job done. It's a bad idea to take them out to put in 2 mana leak?

---

Regarding tapping out to play Stoneforge, it totally depends on the match up and board state. Sometimes, I will tap out to play SFM knowing he will die just to get an equipment in hand. Against some decks, it his very hard to keep him alive. For example, against a deck like Zoo, which has 12 'Lightning Bolt' effects, it's hard to keep SFM alive, but you may get lucky, so sometimes it's worth the shot. Also, if I have a 2nd SFM in hand, oftentimes I will run the first out as a sacrificial offering in hopes that the 2nd will survive. Additionally, sometimes I use SFM to fetch Batterskull with the plan of hitting 5 mana and hard casting Batterskull. Against decks like Dredge, which really have no way of killing SFM, it may be a good idea to run him out early (although be aware of Cabal Therapy naming the Equipment your opponent knows you just put into your hand). Sometimes I'll cast turn 2 SFM for a Sword or Jitte, hardcast the Sword/Jitte turn 3 and then try to flash in a Snapcaster EOT to catch an opponent off guard and attack on turn 5. The biggest reason I don't cast SFM is so I can have mana open to counter my opponent's spells. For example, against any combo deck, you want to be very careful when you tap out, because you need mana up to stop them from going off. It's always a fine line between starting a clock (applying pressure) and keeping mana open for counterspells. All I have to say in summary to this long and rambling answer is that there is no right or wrong answer. Giving a particular situation, there is a 'best' answer (the answer most likely to produce a favorable outcome to the game), but this comes with experience and some guesswork based upon your opponent's likely holdings and strategy of attack. For example, I've had Burn opponents not Lightning Bolt SFM because they would rather point that Lightning Bolt at me in hopes of a quick win. A final note, most removal in Legacy is 1cc. Keeping mana open for a Spell Snare doesn't offer much protection for SFM, unless you are trying to stop a SCM from giving a 1cc removal spell flashback.

Regarding Spellstutter Sprite, I've removed them in my deck, replacing them with either Mana Leak or Counterspell. Spellstutter shines against Hive Mind, which isn't too popular right now (the Spellstutter Sprites allow you to counter your copies of the Hive Mind Pacts while not allowing your opponent to copy the effect). Additionally, Spellstutter affects the build of your deck, usually you have to run 2 Vendilion Cliques and 2 Mutavaults to create extra Faeries on board. If you remove the Spellstutters from the deck, you can replace the Mutavaults with Mishra's Factories, which is a more powerful creature since it may be pumped. You can also replace Cliques with Geist of St. Traft, which is very powerful right now (or run both Geist and Clique, if you like to do that - Clique tends to be better against Combo, Geist against control/tempo.).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

Artlee, you are correct. The Bridge triggers go on the stack and even if the Bridges are removed afterwords, your opponent still gets his/her Zombie tokens. The only way for matunos to remove the Bridges without the creation of Zombie tokens is to Punishing Fire his Clique at the end of his opponents draw step.

For example, your opponent chooses to Dredge during his/her draw step. You see some Bridges and a Cabal Therapy, Dread Return or other sacrifice outlet hit their yard. You Punishing Fire your creature during your opponent's draw step (after priority is passed to you) and the Bridges remove. If you allow your opponent to go this his/her Main 1 and he/she flashbacks Cabal Therapy or Dread Return, the Zombie tokens will be made even if you kill your creature in response or remove the Bridges using a card like Purify the Grave or Surgical Extraction.

---

Please, read the card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

"Whenever a nontoken creature is put into your graveyard from the battlefield, if Bridge from Below is in your graveyard, put a 2/2 black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield."

That 'if' condition means the Bridge has to still be in the graveyard when the triggers resolve.

---

This is correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinefol

Please, read the card.

---

I just created a new thread in Card Interactions and Rulings regarding this question, so we'll see the response.

However, in reading the card, Bridge from Below would be in the graveyard when the creature entered it. The creature enters as part of the sacrifice ability (i.e. Dread Return, Cabal Therapy, etc.), which occurs when the trigger goes on the stack, not when it resolves.

Using this ruling, the only time a player could Punishing Fire his/her own creature would be in response to an Ichorid EOT trigger or some other phase (Draw phase as mentioned above, declare blockers, etc.)

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdr

Bridge from Below has an intervening-if clause (", if Bridge from Below is in your graveyard,"). This means the condition is checked again on resolution in addition to when it triggers. If the Bridge(s) leave the graveyard at any time before the trigger resolves, you get no zombies.

---

I stand corrected. However, I really want to playtest this on MTGO. I swear I've been burned by this before (killing my own creature with zombie token triggers still on the stack and my opponent still getting zombie tokens). If anybody is up for that, PM me on here or online (same name online). I won't be on for about the next 6 hours, however.

You have to burn your guy with the zombie trigger on the stack still, obv...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

Honestly, I don't see a lot of advantage to Punishing/Grove in UWr Stoneblade versus just running 4 Lightning Bolts: the bolts are cheaper, do more damage, and can be snapped back with Snapcaster. Realistically, is he going to be recurring Punishing Fire enough to justify it over (snappable) bolts? Given the various ways Punishing/Grove can be disrupted, I doubt it. Plus, getting rid of the Groves will help is mana base and/or allow some utility lands like Wasteland, Mishra's, Tower of the Magistrate, etc.

---

I completely agree with what you said above. I think the major reason to run red in UW is for 'Blasts coming in out of the board. Secondarily, a few (2) Lightning Bolts main deck may be worthwhile if you expect many small creature decks. Like you said above, I think it is best to cut the Punishing Grove, stabilize the mana base and add some Mishra's and Lightning Bolts / Geist of St. Traft.

I think you could play Punishing Grove in a UWRG list (like the old Trinket Mage/Counterbalance lists which were popular about a year ago), but I would at least like to see some other use for the green like Tarmogoyf or KGrip/Trygon Predator from the side.

So, I want to hear everyone's opinion on the punishing fire engine.
In theory it seems like a good idea against maverick, the deck I'm caring about most atm.

The problem is, as matunos, I think, earlier said, that the manabase gets very vulnerable to wasteland.
But you could leave out the mishra's factories (they are anyhow not so overwhelming in a metagame full of spot removal, losing your land to spot removal sometimes really hurts and can decide the game) and incorporate 3 groves and 3 punishing fire (4 were overkill, given you having 4 stp and additional pathes to bring in after boarding).
Second thing you would need to trim is the counterspells, I would run 3 in a version without punishing engine, but 2 just seems fine then (for the mid-lategame).
Riptide lab can also be left out, because I suppose cutting 1 snapcaster seems good in a version with punishing fire, because you don't want to flashback punishing fire, ain't you?

So, let me hear what you think ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

- His report seems to indicate he's playing against relatively inexperienced players.

---

That's true, with the exception of Gijs, all others are relatively inexperienced or bad players. In spite of that, I think the report showcases the capabilities and potential of the deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

For example the Counterburn player misplays his Surgical Extraction (and apparently, that's the only Extraction he faces all day? This is why I've chosen not to go the Leyline route for the Dredge matchups). He comments "I’m quite convinced that a lot of other players would do the same." Now, I'll admit I've made the same mistake with Purify the Grave the first time I played someone with a Punishing Grove combo, but that was the last time I'll make that mistake, and with Punishing Maverick making the charts, I wouldn't count on a lot of other people making the same mistake. A properly-timed Extraction will remove half of the removal from his deck and render six of his lands superfluous (the Groves become less than useful at that point: they're basically providing colorless mana and giving the opponent life for the privilege).

---

I agree with you and disagree with my teammate. But the point is moot: yes there is a chance that you meet players who makes these kinds of mistakes in the first three rounds of a tournament, but after that, if you do well, chances diminish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

Also, his Bant opponent apparently didn't make good use of the KotR/Ith combo (attack with the Knight, use the Maze to untap after combat damage, and then pump), indicating he also was probably not too experienced.

---

I know Ayolt, he's an experienced player and a very nice guy. He's just also a bad player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

- His mana base looks extremely vulnerable. He's only running 1(!) basic. Against a Wasteland-heave aggro deck his mana base is going to get torn up early, and he won't recover. Aggro decks can usually get away with few/no basics because they apply quick pressure and don't need as much mana. Even this "Punishing Blade" deck needs at least 4.
- Given that he only has 4 red spells main, and all 4 are Punishing Fire, for which he really wants a Grove available, I think his number of red duals/fetches is overkill. I would probably ditch the Plateau, and maybe even one of the Volcanics). I'd probably also trade a couple of the fetches (the Arid Mesas) for more Islands and at least one Plains (especially when running 2 Elspeth's main, which also seems like overkill).

---

We went down to 1 Plateau in exchange for a Volcanic Island. We tested a bit yesterday against a Stifle/Wasteland Tempo deck, even with 3 Wastelands and a couple of Stifles the deck held up because it has quite a few mana sources (23 lands) and 6 cantrips. Wasteland can screw you, but as long as you get up to 3 mana again, you'll be fine in most cases. And this deck can do that. But do not underestimate the abundance of red sources. Punishing Fire requires alot of red mana. The more you have, the more often you can use it in one turn. It really becomes a tertiary win condition then (after creatures and Jace).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

- No Wastelands means no way of dealing with problematic lands from the opponent, such as Maze of Ith, Tower of the Magistrate, opponents' Groves, etc.

---

You don't have to. You can win through Jace or Punishing Fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

- He mentions how the mirror/control matchups tend to hold onto their Wastelands to use on the Grove. That's not surprising; I think that's the right move on their part. A typical Stoneblade deck isn't looking to play mana denial anyway, and he doesn't have anything else worth wasting. They would probably hold onto those Wastelands for a while regardless of if he was playing Punishing/Grove. They can still be tapped for mana in the meantime, though, so I'm not sure how that helps in his development, other than not getting his duals wasted, which is probably a bad move in general for a Stoneblade deck to try to do.

---

This is where the 4 Swords to Plowshares help out. And the abundance of other red sources. The deck isn't crippled if the Groves are being targetted, it just means you can win through another plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

- I find his logic of swapping out Path to Exile for Phyrexian Metamorph to be a little weak given that he's got 3 WoG in the SB which hit Thrun and Geist just fine (not to mention 4 Snapcasters that also can hit Geist on attack), and at best the Metamorph is only one mana less than WoG. If he's really only concerned about problematic legends, Phantasmal Image sounds better at 2cc... at least I could see a justification of that even with the WoG. Neither is likely necessary.

---

I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matunos

- Overall, without Knight of the Reliquary to fetch Groves (plus a Knight could fetch a 2nd Grove in response to an attempted Extraction), I feel like Punishing/Grove is just a trick here. It's relatively easy to disrupt with a well-timed Extraction/Purify/Wasteland, rendering his Punishing Fires either non-existent or an expensive and slow Shock. Honestly, I don't see a lot of advantage to Punishing/Grove in UWr Stoneblade versus just running 4 Lightning Bolts: the bolts are cheaper, do more damage, and can be snapped back with Snapcaster. Realistically, is he going to be recurring Punishing Fire enough to justify it over (snappable) bolts? Given the various ways Punishing/Grove can be disrupted, I doubt it. Plus, getting rid of the Groves will help is mana base and/or allow some utility lands like Wasteland, Mishra's, Tower of the Magistrate, etc.

---

Punishing Fire/Grove = control over creatures. It's very stong in this nearly Goyfless meta. If creatures become too strong you either counter them or Plow them. Your Snapcaster can now be used to snap back Plows, Brainstorms or Spell Snares. He doesn't have to worry about Bolts, Punishing Fire recurs itself. But ofcourse, as I said, it's good in a creature heavy meta where not every creature is a Tarmogoyf like it was two years ago.

Had a bad time at scgdc he past weekend. After getting some suggestions here and Playtesting with my friends I was pretty confident with my deck. Ended up going 0-3 drop. I swear the deck shouldnt have too much variance, but it just bricked on me.

Round 1:
Game 1: against rdw
Game 1 he had 3 goblin guides in his first hand, and i only got one stp and one counter to try and hold him back.

Game 2:
This I completely blame on not getting my morning coffee before playing.
Stp his turn one guide, and surgical end of turn. Yes, i used a surgical extraction and he showed me his hand and library. It was only after i took the goblins out that i realized my mistake and called a judge expecting a gameloss. We both got a warning instead because my opponent didnt keep the game state intact, and he still lost the guides. I didnt think that was fair, and offered to concede. He said its fine since he only wanted to play, so kept playing and he still won the game in the end. Had a good laugh about it during the match anyway.


Round 2: painter combo
Never played against this deck before so i wasnt sure about my plays
Game 1: turn 1 ancient tomb made me peg him as some metalworker deck, the turn 2 blood moon (FOWed thankfully) had me think otherwise. Stp on painter, and landing clique with jitte had him concede afterwards.

Disenchants into the mb and paths
Game 2: i used spellpierce, paths, mana leak, and snapcaster on snare to keep him from getting blood moon and combo pieces on board until he landed a koth. I had a sofaf on board ready to beat face but he gets koth emblem before i drew another creature or factory to use the sword 6 draws later.

Game 3: first 7 was 5 lands and creatures, next 6 no counters, my starting 5 had brainstorm, fetch and snare. Thought i had 2-3 turns to get more counter or removal in hand. Turn 2 bloodmoon was countered, but turn 3 he plays sevant and grindstone, and brainstorm showed me 3 lands fetched, and only got a mana leak next draw.

Round 3: No Bant
Game 1: he plays land and gsz for arbor dryad. Turn 2 he plays ancient tomb, which surprised me and casts natural order which i counter. Turn 3 he casts show and tell. I had sfm and snapcaster on hand so i figure i could race with sofaf. He plays emrakul instead...

Game 2:
He didnt get the initial NO and instead had show and tell put progenitus into play. I had the batter skull in hand. Landed sfm next turn to fetch sofaf and equipped afterwards. He conceded after his 2nd NO was countered since he needed a blocker to prevent lethal.

Game 3:
Mulled to 5 fromm a no land 6 and 7 hand, and got 2 counters and 3 lands. I could only counter enough spells when he had 2 natural orders and 2 show and tells wih an emrakul in his first hand. Turn 1 gsz for arbor. Turn 2 ancient tomb to natural order countered. Turn 3 Show and tell resolved and him landing emrakul and me just playing land. And he still hand another 2 natural orders in hand.

I was really upset because of how i ended up losing to 2 combos, which the deck should have been able to answer. After constant playtesting i Was more afraid of maverick than combo, since 11-13 counters plus snapcaster was a lot, but just losing to bad starting hands was underwhelming.

On a different note, i didnt notice this until i had the cards in hand. Wasteland on my factory, in response tap to make it a creature then cast path to exile on it. Lol

The SCG@DC Top 16 (here) is interesting. Lots of combo (2 Reanimator, 3 Storm, 1 SnT, 1 Elves), 3 RUG Tempo, 0 Stoneblade, 0 Maverick.

Makes me wonder about a transofmative CB sideboard plan again (which 2 rug decks actually did).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anwei

The SCG@DC Top 16 (here) is interesting. Lots of combo (2 Reanimator, 3 Storm, 1 SnT, 1 Elves), 3 RUG Tempo, 0 Stoneblade, 0 Maverick.

Makes me wonder about a transofmative CB sideboard plan again (which 2 rug decks actually did).

---

Until they release a "Too Much Information" about SCG:DC, it will be hard to tell what decks did well versus which decks were highly/under represented. I agree, SCGDC's Top 16 is much different than SCGLA's Top 16.

Why not run a deck like this: http://decks.mtgoacademy.com/Decks.aspx?ID=78478 to begin with? It's basically Countertop with SFM to find Batterskull/Sword of the Meek. Traditionally, this deck does very well against combo and control, so it may be a good call for the SCGDC meta.