Miracle Control

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ocean

Well, if you want to be picky about it have it your way. Im just a human being expressing my frustration after being consistently humiliated by omni (it reaaaaally sucks to lose to damn show and tell, jesus). Fact is that after playing this deck for 2 years or so by time to time i always felt like it was the top deck (peaking with treasure cruise meta imo). Until now. I think dig is maybe more powerful than cruise in a cruisless metagame. At any rate its a nightmare scenario for our deck.

Its been quite a long time since i played legends, probably better matchup with that but still, having them casting dig at your eot must be painful (no poder also means that your digs are slower, right?). Oh, and postside they got to play the damn pyromancer without any drawback whatsoever that just wins the game by itself and we have to keep 2 shitty terminus which are only good right after pyro hits the table...

---

I think you should review what you are doing or how you are playing the matchup. It should not be that bad.. i would consider it favored post-board if you have a proper configuration. 40-60 pre board and 55-45 post board with good players both sides.

So does a sweeper make sense over a third blast effect or do I want a Moat?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ocean

Well, if you want to be picky about it have it your way. Im just a human being expressing my frustration after being consistently humiliated by omni (it reaaaaally sucks to lose to damn show and tell, jesus). Fact is that after playing this deck for 2 years or so by time to time i always felt like it was the top deck (peaking with treasure cruise meta imo). Until now. I think dig is maybe more powerful than cruise in a cruisless metagame. At any rate its a nightmare scenario for our deck.

Its been quite a long time since i played legends, probably better matchup with that but still, having them casting dig at your eot must be painful (no poder also means that your digs are slower, right?). Oh, and postside they got to play the damn pyromancer without any drawback whatsoever that just wins the game by itself and we have to keep 2 shitty terminus which are only good right after pyro hits the table...

---

And you also tried playing Meddling Mages?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raistlinim

So does a sweeper make sense over a third blast effect or do I want a Moat?

---

In my opinion, keep the third blast. It's too important vs mirror, omni, and other Dig decks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RogueMTG

In my opinion, keep the third blast. It's too important vs mirror, omni, and other Dig decks.

---

I'm a big fan of having at least one REB effect in the main and a couple more in the board. Especially if you're playing 2 or more Snapcaster Mages, it gives you a lot of play game one against the decks listed above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twndomn

Mirror matches can develop into these scenarios:

1. one person resolves turn 1 SDT, turn 2 CB
2. one person resolves CB-T after some turns
3. no one resolves CB-T lock, 30 min slug fest at the least.

For scenario 1, if your Miracles opponent did this to you, it will take you lots of effort to try to break out of CB-T lock. It might be better off to just go to game 2 if this were to happen on game 1, for the purpose of conserving time.

For scenario 3, if this is in the SB games, CB-T lock might not matter, since some Miracle players are on the Cavern plan.

Overall, the Mirror still revolves around CB. This debate regarding Terminus is really not that big of deal.

---

You forgot:

4. One person isn't playing 4-Ponder Miracles and obliterates the anti-aggro version with Vendilion Cliques and Venser.
5. One person plays Entreat and opponent isn't holding Force of Will. Dies with Counter-Top + Jace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raistlinim

Creatures [3]
2 Snapcaster Mage
1 Vendilion Clique

Instants [16]
2 Counterspell
2 Dig Through Time
4 Brainstorm
4 Force of Will
4 Swords to Plowshares

Sorceries [11]
1 Council's Judgment
2 Entreat the Angels
4 Ponder
4 Terminus


Enchantments [4]
4 Counterbalance

Planeswalkers [2]
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor

Artifacts [4]
4 Sensei's Divining Top

Lands [20]
1 Arid Mesa
2 Plains
2 Volcanic Island
3 Tundra
4 Flooded Strand
4 Island
4 Scalding Tarn

The only reason I'm considering 3 is because or the mirror and Omnitell.

---

I would cut 1 Counterspell for a REB/PyroB effect. That way, on the draw you have a 1 mana answer to any blue deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBMage

I think you should review what you are doing or how you are playing the matchup. It should not be that bad.. i would consider it favored post-board if you have a proper configuration. 40-60 pre board and 55-45 post board with good players both sides.

---

I've noticed this, too. Post board you have to have it in your hand (or mull to it) and you're favored. MB, especially if you're on a Ponder list, the MU is moderately unfavored.

So I am looking at this list as my final 75. Thanks for the input and I hope I can report decent success. If anyone else has any suggestions let me know as I am always open to other people's view points. I wanted to run Moat over Pyroclasm but as I am trying to be lean as possible I chose Pyroclasm. Thanks

Creatures [3]
2 Snapcaster Mage
1 Vendilion Clique

Instants [16]
1 Counterspell
2 Dig Through Time
4 Brainstorm
4 Force of Will
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Red Elemental Blast

Sorceries [11]
1 Council's Judgment
2 Entreat the Angels
4 Ponder
4 Terminus

Enchantments [4]
4 Counterbalance

Planeswalkers [2]
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor

Artifacts [4]
4 Sensei's Divining Top

Lands [20]
1 Arid Mesa
2 Plains
2 Volcanic Island
3 Tundra
4 Flooded Strand
4 Island
4 Scalding Tarn

Sideboard
2 Flusterstorm
1 Pyroblast
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Vendilion Clique
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Relic of Progenitus
1 Blood Moon
1 Council's Judgment
2 Containment Priest
1 Wear//Tear
1 Pyroclasm

Seems solid. If it were me, I love Moat, so I'd cut the SB CJ for it. But you don't have to.

So I have noticed that recently there has been a number of miracles list that have been playing only 20 lands. This personally seems too low for me because I know for every land we cut from 23 we add two ponders which gives us 21.
Can someone enlighten me on why they are comfortable with making this cut and also how it has worked out for them? For example how often do they feel they are not drawing enough lands? Because even with how efficient this deck can play on few lands, having a number of lands in play does not hurt when playing with top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThanhHa

So I have noticed that recently there has been a number of miracles list that have been playing only 20 lands. This personally seems too low for me because I know for every land we cut from 23 we add two ponders which gives us 21.
Can someone enlighten me on why they are comfortable with making this cut and also how it has worked out for them? For example how often do they feel they are not drawing enough lands? Because even with how efficient this deck can play on few lands, having a number of lands in play does not hurt when playing with top.

---

Well..., if I am not mistaken, the leading philosopher for this movement toward 20 lands would be Schonegger. The idea is the same as Omni-tell, you max out on cantrips, and you cut as many win-con as possible. As a result, your deck will have more of a... combo feel to it. In that sense, you don't emphasize or rely too much on the CB-T lock. You pretty much are doing what Omni-tell is doing, cantrip every turn, try to find another counter/land/combo piece.

Back to your question, will 20 lands Ponder Miracles unable to find lands? Based on what people have mentioned, very rarely. Even if you are missing land drops, as long as you will be cantriping into more cantrips, the top 3 cards of your deck will never be stale, right?

The only issue I have with this approach is that it's deviating from the concept of control. It's becoming very, very, combo-y and CB sometimes will be marginalized.

All will be explained when GP Lille is over. All questions answered, all doubts adressed and Ill obv show you my new list, just two more weeks of patience, please. :)

Greetings

I recently top 8 ed a 100 people event with 20 lands ponder miracles, all i can say about it is that from what i see the 21st land occurs only in heavy manadenial situations in marginal situatiins (3 or 4rishadan ports/Watelands) so in this metagame i assume you can go straight 20 lands if tcdecks goes rampant in youf place, in other case i'd run 21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Einherjer

All will be explained when GP Lille is over. All questions answered, all doubts adressed and Ill obv show you my new list, just two more weeks of patience, please. :)

Greetings

---

Good luck with Lille :) Hope your new list performs well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twndomn

Well..., if I am not mistaken, the leading philosopher for this movement toward 20 lands would be Schonegger. The idea is the same as Omni-tell, you max out on cantrips, and you cut as many win-con as possible. As a result, your deck will have more of a... combo feel to it. In that sense, you don't emphasize or rely too much on the CB-T lock. You pretty much are doing what Omni-tell is doing, cantrip every turn, try to find another counter/land/combo piece.

Back to your question, will 20 lands Ponder Miracles unable to find lands? Based on what people have mentioned, very rarely. Even if you are missing land drops, as long as you will be cantriping into more cantrips, the top 3 cards of your deck will never be stale, right?

The only issue I have with this approach is that it's deviating from the concept of control. It's becoming very, very, combo-y and CB sometimes will be marginalized.

---

Unless he changed his POV after the Miracle Boys Podcast, he isn't the one pushing for 20 lands. Both him and Tómas said 21 was the minimum with 4 ponder.

He's also been an advocate of boarding down to as low as 19 lands in certain matchups. So I don't think Ein is particularly adverse to having less than 21 lands in his deck. If the expected meta is very light on Wastelands, Rishadan Ports, and Stifles, 20 is probably right.

I have tested in small tournaments with 20 Lands and haven't has issues. I enjoy having access to more spells and action as opposed to more land. Once we hit 4-5 lands we can cast all of our spells. I feel the ponder version is like the RUG delver of control decks and we wage a resource battle with card versus card until we feel comfortable to drop our win con. I do not feel Counterbalance is as important as having answers to other cards. There our ALOT of decks using delve spells, abrupt decay, cast triggers, cascade, or uncounterable/vial effects. This may be an incorrect assessment but I would rather have cheap and lean effects to fight with and be less concerned with a fetch land to try to find a 3 drop to counter with. I hope I see some of you at indy this weekend and I will try out my theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by presquepartout

He's also been an advocate of boarding down to as low as 19 lands in certain matchups. So I don't think Ein is particularly adverse to having less than 21 lands in his deck. If the expected meta is very light on Wastelands, Rishadan Ports, and Stifles, 20 is probably right.

---

With 4 ponders and 21 lands vs any combo or control matchup where mana-denial isn't an issue, board out 2 lands. Usually the 2 lands are just 2 plains, except vs elves. I usually take out 1 island, 1 plains vs elves. And vs decks like infect, Shardless BUG or deathblade, where mana denial might be there, but it is a small element you can take out 1 land and go to 20 lands.

20 lands is totally fine if there are not a ton of waste/port decks out there. Anyone insisting that 19-21 lands in the 4 ponders list is too few has not tested that configuration properly.

I took a break from this deck for quite some time (treasure cruise ban ), so I have two questions ( would be nice if someone has an answer):

1) Is every Miracle Deck playing Dig Through Time now? Or are there still some people with bad reasoning?

2) What is the Main Plan against Boseju out of Show and Skill? How do people beat that? Hope they don't draw it or dilute their deck with Wasteland? I guess the best tech is still Canonist and Venser. Anyone ever tried Slaughter Games? Just a fancy idea. 1 Usea for an Island is ok I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adryan

2) What is the Main Plan against Boseju out of Show and Skill? How do people beat that? Hope they don't draw it or dilute their deck with Wasteland? I guess the best tech is still Canonist and Venser. Anyone ever tried Slaughter Games? Just a fancy idea. 1 Usea for an Island is ok I think.

---

I feel like 4 mana 1-of isn't what you want to be mulling into, especially considering they can combo off as early as turn 3 with Boseiju.

SG is a great answer in decks with fast mana (GSZ, Mox Diamond, aka Loam decks) that can cast the card before the opponent can SnT. Plus, those decks run Wasteland to slow down Boseiju. If Mono U Omnitell gets more and more popular, we might have to start playing the GP Kyoto list and stick in 2 Wastelands. But I would never play black in our decks.