i know this isnt the exact same deck,but i was wondering how come no love/discussion for gearhearts deck?
for a reference point here is the link
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/new...?Article=21286
Printable View
i know this isnt the exact same deck,but i was wondering how come no love/discussion for gearhearts deck?
for a reference point here is the link
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/new...?Article=21286
I'll wait till missteps are legal before I post my misstep list. But as it looks now, I'll probably cut a Foundry, a sword of the meek, needle (this always names vial anyway) and a Jace for 4 missteps. The format will involve alot of misstepping misteps so being quicker is very important. So far, a ton of basics + plenty of lock pieces/combo components has been working for me. Counterspell is often too slow and daze/pierce/snare are just too conditional. I see no reason not to play 4 misstep (though this applies to like 80% of legacy decks).
But you will weaken the Counterbalance curve at cc2, and Pithing Needle is too valuable as it can call Qasali Pridemage, E.E. at 2 and other annoying stuff...I agree in cutting Counterspell just because is often too slow, but I think that Spell Snare must be preserved in the list.
Long time lurker of this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by neckfire
I was actually hoping that we could discuss this version more too. I have built the deck and the card quality in it is the nuts imho. At a recent tournament I saw a humility being played against bant with pride mages and thought WOW. Having 4 counterbalance in the side against combo is awesome as well and tezzeret 2.0 is exactly what this deck needs against aggro.Its a deck for an unknown meta like mine. Everybody who plays legacy over here in the netherlands can build different decks easily so its better to come prepared against a very diverse field.
My question is the following: looking at Gearhart's list, what would you take out to include 4 mental misstep? I chose 1 sword of the meek, 2 thopter foundry and 1 Jace, the mind sculptor. Why? 1) for the sword and the foundry we have tutors in the deck and we are already running a lot of CA with 4 brainstorm, 2 JTMS, 4 SDT and 3 Tezzeret 2.0. i don't see a requirement for the 3rd Jace. Would you agree?
So I sleeved up this list and took it to local Legacy: and tied for 1st:
4 Flooded Strand
3 Polluted Delta
5 Island
2 Plains
1 Seat of the Synod
4 Tundra
3 Underground Sea
1 Academy Ruins
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Pithing Needle
1 Moat
1 Humility
1 Ensnaring Bridge
1 Sword of the Meek
3 Thopter Foundry
2 Counterbalance
3 Counterspell
3 Spell Pierce
3 Sensei's Top
4 Brainstorm
4 Swords
4 Force of Will
2 Jace TMS
4 Enlightened Tutor
Board:
1 Warmth
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Tormod's Crypt
1 Arcane Laboratory
1 Cannonist
1 Pithing Needle
2 Extirpate
3 Engineered Plague
1 Serenity
1 Energy Flux
1 Oblivion Ring
1 Back to Basics
Round 1: Frodo with UR Painter
This was a pretty disappointing two games. Both games, I had the board locked down but couldn't complete the kill. In the first game I had him off the combo, but Jace ultimate didn't kill him and he Millstoned me. Ugh. Game 2 I couldn't find anything, and died to two Trinket Mages.
Record: 0-1
Round 2: Edward with Elves!
Game 1 I blow him out with Turn 3 Combo online with an EE preset on 1, taking out his guys. I win soon afterwards.
Game 2 I run out Arcane Laboratory, then Humility, then get the combo online with Jace going. He concedes.
Record: 1-1
Round 3: James (Plague Sliver) with NLT
A grueling set of games against a master Thresh player. He Stifles and Wastelands the hell out of me, but I hold on for dear life. Eventually, I remove his stuff and manage to barely land the Combo through a counter war. He doesn't see his hate.
Game 2 I lose horrible to bad beats.
Game 3 is long and drawn out since everyone is also watching Game 7 of a Hockey final (Canucks vs. Chicago, Game 7). The game goes long but I manage to hold on and get the last combo piece and get there. He fetches and brainstorms infinite times, but is unable to find his 4 Pithing Needles.
Record: 2-1
Round 4: Nick with ANT
Nick's an excellent ANT player, but he'd been drinking beer all night, so I figured that might give me some percentage points. He'd just blown out my friend playing Bant, so I was wary. I kept a double Force, double Pierce hand and got there. I slowly assembled the CounterTop engine, then rode Jace to victory.
In game 2, I kept an alright hand and we were both off to a slow start. I topdecked a much-needed Spell Pierce to protect my hand, and I managed to counter a critical Ad Nauseum. In the middle of the game, our team won, leading to dice going everywhere and cards all over the place. We continue our game, and I manage to Extirpate a countered Burning Wish, then lay Arcane Laboratory. He scoops.
Overall, I got a whole $5 for my effort, but I made my money back!
-Matt
I'll be at thescg nc open this weekend with both tezzeret and adams version probably playing the tezz version in the legacy challenge to see if I like it still,iv had it since he won his gpt with it.its spicey,I jst like the sword varient adam has
I guess I don't understand the value in making your manabase vulnerable (note: the referenced Gearheart list plays ZERO basics), while playing a bunch of cards like Chrome Mox/Mox Opal in order to justify Tezzeret. You state that Tezzeret is exactly what this deck needs versus aggro. I don't understand this at all. What exactly is Tezzeret doing versus aggro that Elspeth can't?Quote:
Originally Posted by slaydo
Also, Gearheart's list doesn't have Counterbalance anywhere in it's 75, so I'm not quite sure where you're getting the "4 Counterbalance in the sideboard" thing from. Despite CounterTop not doing well versus Vial aggro decks, people tend to forget that CounterTop (particularly Thopters thanks to E Tutor + 3cc and 4cc spells to tutor up for Counterbalance) can actually lock the opponent out of the game as early as turn 3. Midrange decks, opposing CounterTop decks, random stuff like Burn, and various combo decks all are pretty cold to an early CounterTop online.
I really don't see the need/reason to make the manabase vulnerable to commonly played non-basic hate cards, the need to play conditional stuff like Chrome Mox/Mox Opal/Mirrodin lands in order to make Tezzeret worthwhile, and I don't understand what Tezzeret does for Thopters that Elspeth and Jace already don't.
Check out his new version,you play 4 counterbalace 4 ethersworn canonist in the sb
And what tezzeret does is give you a combo kill out of nowhere.
Hi All,
I am planning to play this deck in a big tourney during the weekend and I am having difficulty in designing my sideboard. Could the vets of this deck give me tips regarding the sideboard plan? A few concerns I have are:
Is Krosan Grip needed in the sb or could 2 aura of silences in the board take care of null rods and needles, as well as, being a good sb card vs enchantress which is a top 8 staple where I play.
I play 2 spouts main because of the high volume of zoo and merfolk deck where I play. I only play 3 tops, 2 counterspells, and 3 enlightened tutors. The logic was that I replaced them with sweepers like EE and firespouts as a means to handle fast aggro where counterspells and the counter-top combo is weak. I commonly play against these decks, and this how I compensate for not having moat in my 75. Does this make sense?
Also what are the common bad match-ups for this deck so I would be wary of what decks I should be prepared for. Though I haven't experienced lop-sided loses with the deck, I seem to have noticed that I encounter difficulty against decks like Rock, Thresh Variants, Team America, as well as other decks that's main game plan is to keep me off being able to establish a favorable board position. What other decks did I miss?
Thanks for the inputs guys!
@sdematt: haven't you considered cutting 1 Undeground Sea for a Swamp or another Island? Are the 3 black duals really necessary?
Wasn't sure if 3 were necessary, but I liked having them. I'm sure it could easily be changed, though, since my black count is low.
-Matt
The list you referenced was http://www.starcitygames.com/php/new...?Article=21286. Linking a list, then discussing something other than the linked list doesn't really help. I still don't know which list you're referring to.Quote:
Originally Posted by neckfire
Also, if we were going to be using cards regardless of Tezzeret's inclusion, that'd be one thing. Jace is a great example of being able to stick 1-2 maindeck and not altering a single thing about the deck; manabase, spell set, etc remains exactly the same. Tezzeret is the exact opposite, you need to include janky stuff like Chrome Mox/Mox Opal/Mirrodin lands in order to justify his inclusion. You also start opening yourself up to non-basic hate, something that is a major strength of traditional UWx Thopters.
I suppose the question becomes; how many games do I win using Tezz's ultimate versus how many games I lose because my opponent's non-basic hate keeping me off mana and the fact that Chrome Mox/Mox Opal are largely useless (assuming Tezz is not in play). Also, the absense of Counterbalance maindeck leaves you at a disadvantage in the mirror and against aforementioned decks.
I played a modified version of this list in SCG Boston. I started off beating affinity, then losing to Merfolk while at 39 life because he ripped the Lord of Atlantis (I know, it happens, I'm not complaining, just saying how I lost), then realing off a few wins in a row. I also dropped a round to Team America, which should be a good matchup, but my Top just didn't get me there (no fetchlands/shuffle effects, etc. etc.), and was sitting at 6-2 in the last round before being paired against Eli Kassis, who happens to be a pretty decent player for those that don't know, and we had tested the matchup earlier--it was terrible for me, especially considering the voluminous amount of hate he had post board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
Anyways, enough about that, and onto responding to these comments. Ironically enough, Eli also looked through my deck the day before and we made some changes, including adding 1 basic Island over 1 Chrome Mox, changing 1 Enlightened Tutor to 1 Lim Dul's Vault (extra blue cards for Force) and taking out 1 Jace to maindeck a Counterbalance (I also ran 3 more in the board, but no Ethersworn Cannonists). So, my list was quite similar, although not exact.
I, too, am confused by the comment about Tezzeret being there specifically for aggro decks, but we'll get to that. The main advantage of this build, in my opinion, is that it is more proactive than the countertop build. Allow me to elaborate: the reason that you run both Tezzeret, and the artifact packages, is so that the deck can deploy the combo more reliably and quicker than the old list. Against aggro, they most likely have nothing other than maybe a Pridemage or a Vindicate to stop you from assembling Thopter/Sword game 1. The Moxen and artifact lands serve to help you accelerate it out, rather than casting them later on in the game, and even needing to tutor for them. This deck regularly deploys the combo by turn 3, but can have it on turn 2 with the right hand. This lessons the reliance on lockpieces (which I might add can also be dropped significantly earlier in this version), and allows you to assume control of the game at a much higher rate of speed and frequency. This gives you an increased edge in otherwise extremely close matchups. For example, I played against burn twice, and was only able to get there thanks to my fast assembly of the combo. It's also better against the "cat sligh" versions of zoo. Casting a Humility on turn 4 doesn't do nearly as much against those types of decks as either having the combo in operation, or casting Humility a turn (or 2) sooner, which is entirely possible. So, the point of the artifact acceleration is to be faster and more proactive. I don't think that is totally surprising, but you, arsenal, seem to miss that advantage of this build.
Additionally, the Moxen help you to play around land disruption a bit more than you might think. Achieving metalcraft is an absolute certainty with this deck, and it often occurs on turn 1 or 2. A Wasteland might set that back a turn, but chances are that this will also allow you more time to develop since they spent the turn disrupting you rather than applying pressure.
Tezzeret, I think, fulfills two functions quite nicely in the deck: 1) he helps you assemble the combo, or locate a needed lockpiece with greater regularity (e.g. casting him on turn 3, impulsing for your missing piece, and then comboing off); and 2) providing an alternate win condition under more pressured circumstances. It is also not uncommon to use him to find more artifact lands. If you've ever played with the Thopter/Sword combo, you know that once you've got it, every land you draw helps you tremendously as it provides an additional 2 point life swing per turn (at least). Being able to insure land drops in crucial situations when your life is low is another added bonus. Often, once you have the combo going, you won't want to take the time to cast Tezzeret unless they have some way of preventing you from winning with it (e.g. too many blockers, although this probably never comes up), but you do always have the option of dropping Tezz, fogging for a turn with Thopters, making dudes and ultimating for the win. He is almost always a 1-turn clock in the deck, and is a must-answer regardless of board state. I have also needed to make 5/5's before, and that is not an irrelevant ability. Elspeth accomplishes none of these (accept maybe making blockers/a token, then pumping it to swing), and has no place in this deck.
As far as nonbasic hate being an issue, the only decks where I think it matters significantly are those than can actually assemble a lock with Loam or Crucible, but you can even beat those with Moxen (I beat Mono White Stax with Wasteland/Crucible assembled after Armageddoning my lands in the SCG open). Otherwise, we're talking about decks like Team America, Goblins, and Merfolk. Team America is a really good matchup. They have no way to disrupt your combo besides keeping you off of mana, and they are so threat-light that you can easily buy yourself the time you need to work out of their Stifle/Wasteland. Merfolk is the toughest of the group in that their 1 wasteland can set you back the turn it takes for them to win before you establish control, but they also have no answer to Ensnaring Bridge (except maybe an Echoing Truth or 2 post board). But Merfolk has to have the perfect mix to beat you: fast aggression, timely counterspells, and Wasteland. If they don't have just these things (or if you get into a drawn-out game where you see half your deck but no way to tutor for Ensnaring Bridge, and then they rip their 3rd Lord of Atlantis after you countered one and swordsed one the turn before you're about to kill them) they lose. Same with Goblins. They absolutely have to have Lackey into something sick with you having no answers. Piledriver is troublesome from them, but easily answered enough. The point is that you make the sacrifice of mana stability for greater speed and proactivity, and this tradeoff has a lot of positive effects that outweigh the additional potential of mana disruption in my opinion.
To give you an example of how powerful the mana acceleration is, I played against Tendrils (straight u/b), and drew the nuts game 1. Guess what that is? Turn 1 Counterbalance and Top. Now, I only have a 1-of Counterbalance main, but this is the plan postboard, along with other disruption. You can also turn 1 Thopter Foundry, turn 2 Sword of the Meek-make a dude, which I did against burn in game 3. If you want to mix tutoring in, do the math. It's simple: the deck has much more powerful starts this way. You sacrifice a touch of consistency, and mana stability for brokenness. I'm not the first person to say that Counterbalance isn't good in today's meta. The old deck could afford to sit back and protect itself with Counterbalance. That doesn't work so well anymore. So why not be more proactive if your ability to protect yourself is compromised? Isn't that the natural progression? This deck still has all of the tools available to it that the old one does (lockpieces, one-of answers, etc.), but now it also has speed.
I'll end by reiterating a question asked earlier: what are people's thoughts on Mental Misstep and how it affects this deck? I, for one, am not as sold on this card as others are. I think that it will only shine as a strategy-specific tool, rather than succeed as a broadly-adapted tool. For example, I don't think that this deck wants to play them at all. The only 1 casting cost spell that you're even remotely scared of is Pithing Needle, and that's just an inconvenience. By the way, please don't respond to my question by saying that the reason this deck wants Mental Misstep is to counter other people's Mental Missteps. I reject that theory for a few reasons: 1) the card you're most scared of them countering with it is Top, and while Top is great in this deck, its most important spells are higher on the curve (yes, I know that Brainstorm and Swords and E-Tutor are important, but you won't flat-out lose the game if they get countered under most circumstances, not like they just cast Progenitus and you need a Bridge or you're dead); 2) If they are playing Mental Mistep, they had to take something else out of their deck, be it Daze, Spell Pierce, or even a threat. Once you identify what they sacrificed for the Mistep, you don't have to worry about that card. For example, when you're casting a Jace, you have to worry about Daze, Pierce, and Force. If everyone is playing Misstep, they are going to be lacking at least 1 of those, so even though your earlier curve is hampered, your later curve spells will be easier to set up; 3) The deck (both versions) are already card disadvantageous enough without running a situational 4-of (for the countertop version, Misstep might make more sense given that 1-drops give the deck serious problems); 4) It simply isn't worth sacrificing 4 other cards in the deck for Missteps. The large number of Thopters and Swords are for redundancy and speed. You lose this when you cut some number of them. I'm already at 2 Jaces because I main a Counterbalance, so that's not an option. I've already covered the artifact acceleration and the Tezzerets. What's left? Your tutors? Your tutor targets? I guess my question is how do you think other decks (Merfolk, specifically, as I think they are the scariest Misstep deck, with Team America variants, and possibly Bant variants as the other archetypes most likely to benefit from the card) will peform against this list with Misstep, and does this, in general, make the deck less viable and, if so, by how much?
Wouldn't have Turn 1 Top, Turn 2 Counterbalance against Burn have gotten there? That's pretty much how I've beaten Burn, regardless of the deck that I was running CounterTop in (Supreme Blue, Bant, etc). ThopterSword assembled early is fantastic, but you make it sound as though that's the only out versus Burn in the early game, which it is not. But since you don't run 4 Counterbalance, I suppose you'd have to rely on early ThopterSword to beat Burn.
I understand the concept of mana acceleration, I just don't agree that it should come at the expense of basic lands. Also, Elspeth is a win condition entirely independent of the rest of your deck, which imo, is an asset, not a drawback as you've implied.
radome task, you made good and excellent points but I do say that I disagree with you. in regards to say your commit about tezzeret . I am sure the card is good but does it not take up to much economic card space and in all reality is not worth it. you also say that he makes the deck less reactive and more proactive and I am sure he does . but you must keep in mind that mana is like power plants in times of war . if your country does not have the resources to commit to the charge and to the assault then you will not be in the war that long.
also in my testing you really do not need tezeret to assemble the combo in fact i have been playing the counter top version with a 4/3 split and it has been doing marvelously .
on the side of mental misstep, I do agree some sentiment on this front however I do think that some versions of the deck need to play this spell because it is such a efficient way to deal with cards such as vial or just stupid things like wild nacatl. in your version of the deck mental misstep does not belong. and I also think that mental misstep is not really the control messiah that it has been made out to be . it is only exceptionally good in only a few decks eg landstill and probably some type of tempo decks, and to be honest anyone saying that this card will be played in aggro decks are probably doing something Illegal in there free time. I do not think goblins wants this for the same reason it does not want the trap. and all of zoos cards are really interchangeable due to there power and just pure repetition
I'm with most of the other posters here. Tezzeret 2.0 is the epitome of "in danger of cool things". The weak manabase, Multiple Opal draws, dodgy metalcraft enablers (it's going to be pretty hard to maintain metalcraft vs a bunch of wastes/pridemages) all seem like really heavy sacrifices to play Tez. I play 3 walkers (Jace TMS) and it already seems like alot of Gas for me.
I learned alot of things while playing the Gearheart lists and that list does have its merits. For example, being proactive-> reactive. I agree on this point. So I just upped by Thopther sword split to 4/2 and upped by bridges to 2 while playing no Counters other than Force. I achieved the same "proactiveness" without exposing myself to the weaknesses I mentioned above. Just check out my list from the previous page. It runs 10 basics, and consistently ramps up to 3/4 lands without having to drop a single dual.
One thing that I want to be clear about is that I'm not certain that the deck plays the artifact lands and opals, etc. to justify Tezz's inclusion; I actually think that once you make those steps the Tezz inclusion seems natural. I will undoubtedly be playing some version of this deck in Providence, and determining which version is best is important, so I'm interested in your comments, and this discussion. Tezz is definitely on the borderline of the legacy power threshold, but he's at least as good as Elspeth, I think. I played Elspeth pretty much the whole time she was in standard, so don't mistake my disregard for her for the deck as lack of acknowledgment of her power. But, to be honest, I didn't even play her in the straight up countertop version. I started out trying to play her, but I just wasn't impressed enough. There are very few decks that she is great against (for example, Goblins and Merfolk plan on swarming; one blocker per turn doesn't help with this problem), and you can't even pump a token and beat under a bridge, although she's definitely good under Humility. I will say that if you go in the artifacts direction, I still think Tezz makes more sense because he pretty much never misses, and because they have to answer him or they just die.Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanpei
In response to using him to assemble Thopter/Sword, I agree that he is not necessary to do this, but he does make it easier if you don't have a tutor. When you say that you "ramp up" to 3/4 lands, what you mean is that you play them in consecutive turns. This is great, and the deck can definitely still function that way, but the artifacts version actually ramps its mana, and will have 3/4 mana by turn 2/3 with high frequency. When I played the countertop version, one of my favorite aspects of it was the relative immunity to mana disruption, and the ability to play cards like Blood Moon or Back to Basics to disrupt others mana. This is certainly an advantage, and one worth a great deal of consideration. In response to the burn comment, playing Counterbalance on turn 2 is still good, but you have to admit it's still better on turn 1. Assuming that you need either a fast combo assembly or countertop by turn 2 against burn, which is probably close to true, I think that the artifact version is more likely to be able to accomplish these things.
After some thought, I actually think that Mental Misstep goes straight into the countertop build. The basic fundamental point of my argument is that being proactive is currently better considering the meta, which makes the artifact version more appealing, but I do expect some changes post-rotation, for sure, and I think that Misstep could potentially prevent the need to be as proactive as I want to be now. It answers many problems with not being as proactive, for sure. What I'm worried about, and what I think is worth thinking about is how decks will react to Misstep being a part of the game. If they are now more worried about resolving 1-drops, do they shift focus to bigger spells (e.g. Green Sun's Zenith) in order to counteract the effects of Misstep, or do they just accept that Misstep exists, and try to fight through it? The thing is, if they shift their focus slightly, making Misstep worse, then the natural progression is to also make Counterbalance worse because they will push further along the curve. And if this happens, then I think that being more proactive is still the preferable strategy. But, if they just keep the same constructions, then maybe Misstep makes Counterbalance good again, and the more controlling build is the way to go. I'm not by any means a master at metagaming, but these seem to be the two potential outcomes of the card becomming widely adopted, so your thoughts are welcome.
My end argument is that if it's the case that decks adapt in such a way as to limit the value of Misstep, this naturally limits the value of Counterbalance, and if this occurs, then being more proactive is most likely the favorable strategy. On the other hand, if the card is not properly planned for, then I'd prefer to be on the more controlling side because you've now gained a tool to prevent the things that give you the most trouble from giving you trouble. I am not alone, by the way, in my desire for proactivity, as players such as Adam Barnello or Gearhart himself have also tried to move in that direction. You want to be able to crush aggro decks (except Merfolk will always be tough, obviously, and they get MUCH better with Misstep), and tempo decks, so whichever form of the deck is most likely to be able to achieve this while still maintaning decent matchups otherwise, I'll get behind. I will say that the artifact version is seriously dependant on Top, doesn't have the room or desire for Misstep, and could be seriously hampered by that card if they have it at the right times, but I'm going to stick with it until the rotation at least, and I'll let you know how it goes and if I learn anything else. There's a GPT at Diehard this Sunday, which will be the last tourney I'll play this in (I think) before Misstep becomes leagal, so we'll see how that goes. Also, anyone that's been doing post-rotation testing, feel free to let us know how Misstep has affected your build/game play.
I don't share the same uncertainty as you. I am in the camp that unless you're running Tezzeret, you're not naturally running 3-4 Mirrodin lands, 2-3 Chrome Mox, 2-3 Mox Opal as a standard mana/spell base.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomTask
Of course it "seems natural", because you've now altered your deck to the point where his abilities are now relevant whereas before, they were too conditional and too inconsistent to warrant his inclusion.Quote:
I actually think that once you make those steps the Tezz inclusion seems natural.
For wide-open metas where you can expect anything and everything, I think traditional UWx is the way to go. Tournament results also reflect this. I suppose that if you know the meta, specifically aggro-oriented, then a case can be made for UBx Tezzeret, but Providence will be a large, wide-open tourney, not a finely tuned weekly tourney that all the regulars know what to expect.Quote:
I will undoubtedly be playing some version of this deck in Providence, and determining which version is best is important, so I'm interested in your comments, and this discussion.
Of course Tezzeret will be better in a deck that you're running a high number of questionable artifacts in; all of his abilities are artifact-related. This much is obvious. The question is, why would you run Tezzeret version in the first place? You claim that it should be better due to less reliance on CounterTop, faster combo assembly due to Moxen, and yet, the traditional UWx version is the only version I'm seeing consistently top8/top16. Perhaps this could be because nobody is running the Tezzeret build, or it could be that UWx is just better equipped to deal with a large, diverse field of potential opponents than Tezzeret is. I suppose only time, and tourney results, will tell.Quote:
I will say that if you go in the artifacts direction, I still think Tezz makes more sense because he pretty much never misses, and because they have to answer him or they just die.
But you're not playing Counterbalance on turn 1 in the first place (again, I'm still using the SCG list neckfire linked until someone links/posts a decklist that they're talking about so I can follow along). Also, by the time I get to untap on turn 3, I should still be at a reasonable life total (10-11 versus normal Burn draws), so I don't agree that I need to have turn 1 Counterbalance in order to live.Quote:
In response to the burn comment, playing Counterbalance on turn 2 is still good, but you have to admit it's still better on turn 1. Assuming that you need either a fast combo assembly or countertop by turn 2 against burn, which is probably close to true, I think that the artifact version is more likely to be able to accomplish these things.
Coincidentally, Nightmare placed 11th at SCG Boston running a slightly unconventional, albeit still traditional UWx ThopterSword deck. Sort of like a hybrid Cawblade-Thopter deck, but it's shell very closely mirrored the traditional UWx Thopters list. No Tezzeret, only 2 Mirrodin lands, no Moxen. Before that, he placed 12th at SCG Edison running a Tezzeret-less list that did run Mox Opal, 5-6 Mirrodin lands, and stuff like LED. As a good player, and someone who has top 16ed with both styles of decks, I'd be interested in getting his take on the advantages/disadvantages of each build.Quote:
...as players such as Adam Barnello
Talking about the new "free" counterspell, I don't like mental misstep in this deck. I mean, I find it great in other countertop builds with many undercosted creatures, such as dark confidant, tarmogoyf and the like, but in a deck with zero creatures like this I find more valuable to run other cards, such as removal or simply combo pieces or silver bullets. Misstep is a good card that will of course see legacy play, but in decks with at least 8-10 creatures, which will surely benefy from it. I can think of some decks that will highly improve adding this card: Baseruption, TA, Threshold style decks, Merfolks... But in decks like thopters, landstill and any other control deck with few or none creatures and therefore many ways to deal with opposite monsters misstep will not have that much impact. I have personally tested it and I'm 90% sure I won't play it in my thopters list in the big BoM in France next month.
Being able to stop Aether Vial and opposing Tops (I think we're going to see an uptick in CounterTop decks while the MM experimentation is ongoing) is enough for me to run it. Other 1cc spells are relevant too (Imp, Nacatl, etc), but there's almost nothing I hate worse than seeing a turn 1 Vial or turn 1 Top and I'm not holding FoW.