20 lands is fine against decks that do not pressure your mana. personally, i prefer to play 21 main, but i side out a plains against non-wasteland/blood moon decks.
Printable View
20 lands is fine against decks that do not pressure your mana. personally, i prefer to play 21 main, but i side out a plains against non-wasteland/blood moon decks.
I can't really seem to put what I want to say into words right now, but I definitely value seeing Counterbalance early and often. While I think it is definitely a mistake to lean too hard on the card, I think that it can help make or break a game in a fairly large number of matchups. If I was in a BUG infested Meta, I'd consider going down to three, and running the second counterspell.
I find 4 to be better in a meta filled with other miracles players, combo decks, and delver decks. It does probably lose value in a shardless infested meta if you aren't running more AD targets like blood moon in the board.
At the moment it comes down to deck building theory. Running ponder over, say, clique, removes a bit of power but increases my consistency, and I feel like Counterbalance is very important to help get the most value out of this added consistency.
i run 4 counterbalances, and i think that people started to play 3 because the rise (again ) of the bug decks, so they got the answer...but when they donīt? and when other decks donīt have decays? the counterbalance even by itself deemands the other player to play around it since most of the legacy decks runs high percentage of 1,2 and 3 cmc cards !Quote:
Originally Posted by Syntex
when playing agains decay they have 4 ( or even 3 ) and they have to spend it on countrbalance, so angels can win the game easly, they spend their turn a lot of the times by playing decay on their 2nd turn. So in my opinion its still better to run 4 cointerbalances
I believe Lossett has mentioned how important Counterbalance is on his stream several times. Yes, SDT is important as well. However, if you look at Miracles' card drawing vs. other decks, all the delver decks run Brainstorm and Ponder, so is Show and tell decks. The only card that actually creates a difference in resource is Counterbalance. This is THE card that can generate difference in resource management, thus creates advantages for you. Without it, how are you supposed to keep up with CA from other deck? Even with CB in play, you still want to get rid of every Dark Confidant and/or Silvan Library you see for the same reason: you want to create advantage in resource management and you dislike opponent generating CA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Syntex
When I used to run 3 CB, I realize that I'm a bit hesitant in jamming CB on turn 2. Say a turn-2 CB traded against a Daze, now I only have 2 CB in my deck and I might not get another chance to find it before these Delver decks kill me. My next CB, which is 2nd out of 3, absolutely has to resolve. This kind of pressure dramatically influences my decision on which battle to fight over, not to mention you have to take Abrupt Decay into account in some MUs.
Hence I would argue the opposite, in a BUG infested local meta, you definitely should run 4 CB. Running 3 tends to lead people like me into bad decisions.
Looking at taking this list to what I imagine will be a decent size tournament (30-40)with an unknown meta. Any advice?
4 Senseis Divining Top
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Counterbalance
2 Counterspell
2 snapcaster mage
1 Councils Judgement
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 Force of Will
4 Terminus
2 Entreat the Angels
2 Dig Through Time
2 Arid Mesa
4 Flooded Strand
4 Scalding Tarn
4 Island
2 Plains
3 Tundra
2 Volcanic Island
Sideboard
1 Pithing Needle
2 Spell Pierce
1 Pyroblast
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Wear//Tear
1 supreme verdict
2 Vendilion Clique
2 Rest in Peace
2 Stoneforge Mystic
1 Batterskull
1 Blood Moon
Imho, after 1 year of miracle, 4 counterbalance are better than 3 because the deck is more solid and i see, normally, 1 counterbalance in my first 5 turns. This give me a good early plan and my resource management are good. The cantrips help me to find counterbalance in the early turns and some deck goes trouble vs this enchantment. If he have abrupt well, i change my plan and win with angels.
i play almost the same list, but i m not sre yet if i prefer 2 DTT and 2 jace, or 1 DTT and 3 jace and play with 3 snapcaster, its small changes but i think its worth to test any way!Quote:
Originally Posted by insnebob1889
about the side, i would change spell pierce for flusterstorm, i assume they will be on same purpose so flusters is strcitly better!
i never played stoneforge sb in 3 years playing miracles ...well i tested in cockatrice for a couple of matches but didnīt like it the initial idea so that could influence the "test" results ! they are any good ? i knwo there are some games that could make a difference but donīt see a major advantage (over other slots) for having 2 of those hanging there
Monastery Mentor is strictly better for the slot in my opinion. It gives you another 3 drop to flip with CB, "combos" with the deck in that the whole thing other than 4 other cards trigger it, and it's virtual card advantage, so even your own terminii don't cause any real problems other than prolonging the game, something we already do. It also doesn't make you shuffle, and doesn't make you waste further slots on equipment.
From my phone. I do my best, dammit!
i can understand you statment, but campare those 2 i think its wrong, i know that one of the main reasons of playing sfm/skull is the life gain, and stop aggro stuff, a resolved batterskul agains rug its almost GG for example!Quote:
Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee
monastery its a good card indeed but it can serves different pourposes, i guess itīs not compared with SFM
ps: and donīt shuffle is more often than not, a bad thing :p
I get what you are saying, I just really disagree. For example, the life gain is a moot point if you can generate enough blockers to stop and even kill their creatures.
From my phone. I do my best, dammit!
If you listen to Braverman's point about running SFM in the SB, the reasoning is clear: you're punishing your opponent for SB-out Swords/Bolts/PFire. That's really the point. Life-gain is a nice bonus, but the point of the deck is about establishing control, having a BS token swinging isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancestral
Monastery is good in a pro-active deck. Miracles often just play draw-go with a SDT in play. Even if you have a SDT and Monastery, I would imagine you often still will do draw-go. In that case, you're running a creature card that's under-utilized, rather just run Clique for that slot.
sure, thatīs hat we like, so we can have a good discussion and take conclusions! i can see the monastery as a good card, but its a cmc3 and for the matchup it matters you wont have the time to sculpt a big monastery and for finisher isnt needed, thatīs my point of view of corse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee
i see that itīs a good reason, but opp never side out bolts or punishing fires! about the swords i agree that is sweet but only for DnT, even in the mirror i let swords in the deck (not all but its still there for this events ) itīs more probably that in the mirror people side out terminus. so the matchups that SFM can be good are so few that i can imagine run that card for so little value.Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
And i agree with your view on monastery in this deck, also clique its the best creature we have fr sideboard, i wouldīt compare it with no other :p
In regards to monastery mentor. I feel as though it can close out a game really quick if you get 2 tops going. You can sit there and put all your mana into it drawing a top then playing it then drawing the other ect making a leathal token count and making for some big tokens easily. Yea it's a little more narrow than anEoT entreat but against decks without mass removal it just beats them. I really like mentor and think he is underrated.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hey guys so off topic here by I have a friend locally who plays his BUG pox homebrew and I always have to play him and it's such a tough matchup. I'd say after 12 post and MUD, this is the next hardest matchup for miracles and then goblins. He has playset a of smallpox, sinkhole, and wasteland for land destruction. Also has playset of stifles which disrupts miracles, fetches, and jace ultimates. Entreat is also tough to pull off because of how he taxes our lands and he can make it even worse with tabernacle + LD. And of course a playset of AD to match my playset of CBs. Luckily he is the only person that plays the deck that I know of so in a bigger event I'll probably never have to face the deck but locally its a thing and Ive tried almost every build of miracles. I've played against the deck with lossett's legendary miracles build and have won quite a number of games vs the deck though I still lost to it more than I won. I also tried a triple dig not creatures list vs the deck and won occasionally when I could cast dig and find more lands. Recently I've been on 4 ponder with twenty-one lands and have not won a single game. So my question is that what build of miracles (that does not have to be the three main ones that I mentioned) seems most ideal for me to play locally and have a chance against this deck because I swear I always have to face this guy but also having a chance against the rest of my meta which is goblins, Maverick with black for DRS and discard, lots of Omnitell, Reanimator with AD, S&S, D&T, infect, Jim Davis bug delver, and occasionally MUD with post. Also with each build of miracles, how should I sideboard vs this deck? Finally, if there are certain cards that seem good to side for this guy locally I'm open for suggestions. I've tried blood moon in the past since this guy has not basics in his list similar to a shardless bug manabase. The legendary miracles list I played is basically like joe's current list with 3 swords but still playing with 23 lands and no mesas in the board. Also with three force main and two misdirection in the side. The three dig build I played was more or less what Shane remelt played a while back. And the 4 ponder list I played was Schonegger's main deck with angelo's sideboard with rip but the force of will in the board was a counterspell instead.
Also here is something close to what he currently plays but may not be exact since I'm typing this based on what I remember.
BUG Pox
Maindeck (60)
Creature [9]
4 Baleful Strix
3 Snapcaster Mage
2 True-Name Nemesis
Instant [12]
4 Abrupt Decay
4 Brainstorm
4 Stifle
Sorcery [14]
4 Smallpox
4 Ponder
4 Sinkhole
2 Life from the Loam
Planeswalker [2]
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Land [23]
4 Wasteland
4 Misty Rainforest
4 Polluted Delta
1 Creeping Tar Pit
2 Mishra's Factory
1 Tropical Island
4 Underground Sea
2 Bayou
1 The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale
Sideboard [15]
4 Force of will
4 innocent blood
2 flusterstorm
2 grafdigger's cage
1 The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale
2 spell Pierce
Looks like a middle-of-road BUG control deck between Loam deck and Pox deck with no MD counter capability. If you really want to hose this deck, just get to 5 Mana and drop Keranos. After that, he can only win by attacking via man-land or TNN. However, you know how to deal with those cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThanhHa
In general, the approach going up against any BUG control deck is to rely heavily on Red cards and minimize his Black cards. I would overload Abrupt Decay targets using both CB and RiP because he does run Loam. If Loam's not in his 75, RiP is probably unnecessary. Sinkhole and Smallpox are annoying, but they are not backbreaking. +3 Red Blast effect +1 Keranos +1 Blood Moon.
One rogue tech you can consider is Teferi's Response. This card is nuts against Sinkhole And Wasteland.
So I was looking at Ein's list and I was wondering what the impact would be if I took out a Tundra and an Arid Mesa for Island #5 and Plains #3? How does this affect the deck?
i dont think a 3rd plains is necessary because you only need double white for entreat and maybe a councils judgement. I have tried 5 islands and i really like it, especially in my delver infested meta. but for the 5th island i would cut a tundra instead of a fetch land. We need all the fetches we can possibly play. I think cutting the 3rd tundra for a 5th island is a reasonable thing to do if you are seeing a lot of wastelands on the other side.
The primary reason I want the 3rd plains is because of Rishadan Port. I'm still in the middle of testing it, but I wanted to know if anyone has tried it to any degree of success.Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeownyu
Well.. They can't port an arid mesa, though I doubt you'd want to just keep it sitting there all game.
I guess the question is whether you see yourself wanting 3 plains out at once, and how it'll effect your other matchups. Generally vs. port decks you can just Miracle in your upkeep.
True, Mesa is "unPortable", but Lands (the matchup I'm most afraid of) has expendable Wastelands, and in that situation Mesa becomes vulnerable to the Port + Waste combo.Quote:
Originally Posted by exallium