Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sa17dk
Nice. Pernicious Deed with Countertop. So much synergy.
So I'll take the sarcastic tone in your post and reply, that anyone who has ever played the deck knows that the 2 cards work fine with each other, you should try it first before you criticize the choice. This deck did very well for its short run.
This isn't a countertop deck, this is a landstill build with countertop mixed in, you don't need and many of the times dont see the counterbalance, which is fine. That is the reason why the deck is so consistant, it doesn't always need a single card to win.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blueneverfails
Mainboard:
2 Tundra
4 Polluted Delta
2 Island
4 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
4 Flooded Strand
1 Plains
1 Volrath's Stronghold
1 Academy Ruins
1 Etched Oracle
1 Eternal Witness
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Intuition
1 Vedalken Shackles
1 Life from the Loam
2 Counterspell
4 Force of Will
4 Brainstorm
3 Pernicious Deed
4 Counterbalance
3 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Swords to Plowshares
2 Engineered Explosives
Sideboard:
2 Blue Elemental Blast
3 Krosan Grip
3 Extirpate
1 Hydroblast
2 Tormod's Crypt
4 Engineered Plague
Your new list
2 Tundra
4 Polluted Delta
2 Island
4 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
4 Flooded Strand
1 Plains
1 Volrath's Stronghold
1 Academy Ruins
1 Eternal Witness
4 Tarmogoyf
3 Intuition
1 Life from the Loam
2 Counterspell
4 Force of Will
4 Brainstorm
3 Pernicious Deed
3 Counterbalance
3 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Swords to Plowshares
2 Engineered Explosives
2 Jace 2.0
1 (im still iffy on this cuz of the double ww) Sun titan
I feel with the addition of jace and also with intuition and sun titan, this could be a dominant deck again, what does everyone think?
I think this looks like you took "Its the fear" and put it in the wrong forum. Its not in the Dtb forum for a reason. Go look at the established one. You also cut the best cards in the deck and added crap. Shackles are good. Draw power is good. You don't have standstill or even AK. Am I the only one seeing this?
-Miz
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mizeri
I think this looks like you took "Its the fear" and put it in the wrong forum. Its not in the Dtb forum for a reason. Go look at the established one. You also cut the best cards in the deck and added crap. Shackles are good. Draw power is good. You don't have standstill or even AK. Am I the only one seeing this?
-Miz
Did you even read what I wrote????????? I said I took ITF and changed it, And It has the same style of play and build of standstill, just without the standstill. Also Im not sure why you think you can act better than me when you instantly think the deck has to have AK just because of inuition. This deck is a very good deck, it is just very hard to pilot, so most people stay away from it. I asked for advice, not for people thinking they are smart with their sarcastic posts and thoughts that have no help what so ever towards the discussion.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blueneverfails
Did you even read what I wrote????????? I said I took ITF and changed it, And It has the same style of play and build of standstill, just without the standstill. Also Im not sure why you think you can act better than me when you instantly think the deck has to have AK just because of inuition. This deck is a very good deck, it is just very hard to pilot, so most people stay away from it. I asked for advice, not for people thinking they are smart with their sarcastic posts and thoughts that have no help what so ever towards the discussion.
They are right though, your list is definitively in wrong thread. It doesn't have mandlands, nor standstills - both of which are used in UBg(w) Landstill, hence the name of deck.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pippin
They are right though, your list is definitively in wrong thread. It doesn't have mandlands, nor standstills - both of which are used in UBg(w) Landstill, hence the name of deck.
Look someone who can read! :D tbh, I did miss what you said about you about putting its the fear in the wrong forum. I shoulda flammed harder. My point still stands, you took out a shackles an intuition and a cb for 2 shiny jaces and a sun titan. WOW! That's groundbreaking. Let's make a new thread called "Its not the fear its landstill without..landstill" Its not the same deck at all, plays COMPLETELY different!!1! It haz jace! Well. I apologize for everyone else having to read that. Maybe I need to go mellow out.. *bubble bubble* *cough cough*
Your deck is awesome man. Go post it in the ichorid thread too. Should get lots of good feedback. Gl with your changes!
-.-
-Miz
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blueneverfails
Did you even read what I wrote????????? I said I took ITF and changed it, And It has the same style of play and build of standstill, just without the standstill. Also Im not sure why you think you can act better than me when you instantly think the deck has to have AK just because of inuition. This deck is a very good deck, it is just very hard to pilot, so most people stay away from it. I asked for advice, not for people thinking they are smart with their sarcastic posts and thoughts that have no help what so ever towards the discussion.
Hate to be an echo (Echoing Truth?), but this doesn't belong in this thread. ITF plays a very different game than Landstill. ITF is more proactive, Landstill is more reactive. The counter suite is completely different, the threats completely different in conceptual terms, and Intuition and Standstill provide completely different card advantage pertinent to the synergies and strategies of their shell. This thread is not about shells that have Jace as a wincon or decks that contain UBgw, this thread is about decks that have a Standstill engine and the shell to support it. Standstill itself requires you to play the card in such a specific way to be beneficial, that a deck that does not contain the card will inherently play different.
I'm sure you can find a thread here on the source discussing ITF and its evolution. In fact, you might find people who want to talk about that deck constructively rather than point out you're posting in the wrong forum. So instead of starting a flame-war, just check out the other thread and you may get some positive feedback.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
How does this deck do against Zoo and Fish? I've put it together, but I'm having a rough time against both of these matchups.
(Standard UBG list, 4 deeds, 4 jace, 4 blood, 2 demise, 2 spell pierce, 3 snare)
Without lifegain / a clock, zoo blew me out in response to a late-game standstill.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mchainmail
How does this deck do against Zoo and Fish? I've put it together, but I'm having a rough time against both of these matchups.
(Standard UBG list, 4 deeds, 4 jace, 4 blood, 2 demise, 2 spell pierce, 3 snare)
Without lifegain / a clock, zoo blew me out in response to a late-game standstill.
Never lose to Zoo at a Champ(even when I got a GameLoss a started 0-1),at play testings I was like 70-30, Jace taking out their burns + factorys is the way to go, and try to save your life total insead of trying to do X-1 with deed.
About Merfolks I just played once and did 2-0, ScatmanX played my deck and did 2-0 too, and at play testing it was very good except they have a god hand with tons of vial,adepts,daze,fow and wastes/mutavaults.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
@ shimi
this is the list of your board you posted a couple pages back
1 Ravenous Trap
2 Relic of Progenitus
2 Extirpate
2 Krosan Grip
4 Engeneered Plague
2 Perish
2 Infest
what is your current/updated board?
my board currently looks like
3x extirpate
4x thoughtseize
2x perish
2x engineered explosives
2x blue elemental blast
1x hydroblast
1x innocent blood
please note that this is a Ubg landstill without cunning wish also only main deck 3 innocent blood
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
@jayman1515:
I'm still testing many SB options but I go up to 3 Extirpate cause there is a great chance to find Ug Madness at top tables and top8 , changed relic for nihil spellbomb(not tested but seems better except against white leyline of dredge) , i cut infests(BB is too hungry) and Trap(for 3º extirpate), I'm packing 4 plague cause it is broken against goblins and merfolks.Seize is nice but I never really wanted to have it except for control MU but I'm winning control games anyway(mirrors not included).I think I would play a basic forest in SB cause waste + extirpate at tropicals can hurt alot against BG and BGW decks(which are good against merfolks and vines , so it is becoming more popular).Hydroblast and BeB can be very good against burn/zoo/goblins I would like to know if they really help against this decks.Is 4 Seize really necessary?
I think Sb is very meta dependent so it is up to you to refine it, as soon as I finish some tests I will try to post some results.
PS:I'm packing 4 innocent blood MD.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Damn, when did this deck get put back in established? It still kicks ass.
Here's my tuned and refined list.
2 Strand
2 Tarn
2 Delta
2 Rainforest
4 Tundra
3 U Sea
3 Tropical
4 Factories
1 A Ruins
1 Island
4 BS
4 Standstill
4 Force
4 Snare
4 Jace
4 Swords
2 Path
4 Deed
2 Explosives
2 Life from the Loam
2 Tops
SB
1 Path
2 Explosive
3 Peacekeeper (MVP of the board)
2 Grip
4 Extirpate
3 Spell Pierce
Very Similar to Ivanpeis list. 4 colors is necessary for this deck to be truly competitive in a field of Madness, Fish, TES, CB, etc. Innocent blood and ghastly demise just suck. No if's, and's, or but's. Sword effects are neccessary to control, especially against fish and Madness. With 3 colors the deck STILL gets wastelanded' and gains nothing from it's supposed "stability". Life from the loam (or crucible if you prefer) REALLY help against the mana-denial stratagies and from getting manascrewed. I've loved Loam 85% of time I see it. Ensuring land drops, additional shuffles with fetches, extra factories to block with, dredge 3 if you have nothing but junk in your top 3, and the synergy with BS/Jace is nothing to scoff at.
4 Jace can be clunky, but more often than not, he either fogs+brainstorms giving me time to stablize and drop deed/explosives or he just wins the game. Double Jace openers can be annoying, but he always pitches to force, can always be shuffled away, and you always just drop him to bait a counter/removal piece or draw an attack. In this deck, with 2 loams and 2 tops to help with land drops, I will continue playing 4.
Besides, he's Jace, The Mother-Fucking Mind Sculptor.
Basic island is a necessary evil. As someone pointed out a couple pages back, it allows you to make sure you can drop t2 standstill/loam/spin the top.
Peacekeeper is off the hook. Flat wins games when you land it against Folk or Madness, both of which can be major headaches for landstill. Their just arent many answers to her in UG. There's echoing truth and not much else. Sower I guess? And even if they remove 1, you still have 2 more.
3 narrow cards dedicated to 2 or 3 matchups is something I don't like siding, but both of those matchups happen to be high-profile Tier 1 decks that blowout blue-based control (That's us!). With Peacekeeper, both matchups become significantly better, especially when backed up by extra EE's and Paths.
I still randomly get blown out by TES though. Maybe it's my bad luck, but I would like more than just 3 pierces and a couple extirpates in my board for them. Still looking for a versatile solution to this problem.
Re: [Deck] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Nice list, the loams and tops are meta calls. Imo with 4 jaces, I think you're 2 tops are expendable. Swords and paths are a must, they are awesome. You only have 4 force, 4 snares as counters, which IMO is insufficient (hence the hard combo MU). I'd cut either the 4th Jace and 2 snares for 3 counterspells, or 2 tops and a snare for 3 counterspells to help the combo MU. Try it out! You really need the counterspells vs combos like show and tell/TES as well as natural order. VS show and tell, your only relevant card is force, same for natural order, you have no outs other than force. As for TES, chant rapes you, hence why counterspell is needed. I hate the card too as its often terrible vs fish/other aggro, but its a necessary evil. Cheers.
Re: [Deck] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
I'm testing the 4c lists aswell now,as I feel UBg has a very rough g1 against UG Madness. The other thing is that u can play Ethersworn canonist now as hate for TES. The only thing im not so sure about is the manabase. I play 2loams aswell,but like to have atleast some wastelands.
@ivanpei How did the wastelands work out and why did u cut them?Mana base not stable enough or slowing urself down too much,also do u play loams/crucible? I think the best counterpackage would still be something like 4FoW,3snare,3spell pierce,3counterspell(or -1pierce +1cs).
I wouldn't be playing with 2SDT or any tops at all when u play 4Jace though. How do u like the EE's?
Re: [Deck] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Re: [Deck] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Horrible manabase:
10 colorless lands (how are you going to cast anything?)
4 CIPT lands
Only 4 fetches (!)
The manabase is likely to scoop to a single Wasteland on colored source.
Sub-optimal sorcery speed removal (and it doesn't really have enough of it).
Overloaded 3cc slot.
Sideboard space wasted with a lot of almost always useless Wish stuff
Highly vulnerable win-conditions (no Jace).
Re: [Deck] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Mana Drain
You seem to be missing a thing with Peacekeeper: both decks you mention it is good against happen to run mana denial. They don't need bounce. They Wasteland white source and its gone. The deck doesn't run basic Plains, and you can not always afford to fetch for multiple Tundras, since you still need that BG for Pernicious Deed. There is a Loam of course, but there are only two, you don't always have time and a fetchland.
Re: [Deck] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tinefol
Horrible manabase:
10 colorless lands (how are you going to cast anything?)
4 CIPT lands
Only 4 fetches (!)
The manabase is likely to scoop to a single Wasteland on colored source.
Sub-optimal sorcery speed removal (and it doesn't really have enough of it).
Overloaded 3cc slot.
Sideboard space wasted with a lot of almost always useless Wish stuff
Highly vulnerable win-conditions (no Jace).
a part from the manabase, (never had particular screw problems in say 30-40 testing matches) do you realize what ''4 CIPT lands'' are? they're here to cycle, not to be cast. What do you suggest to improve spot removals? and i cannot see any useless wish stuff, could you explain yourself? Also ''needs moar jace'' is not a helpful hint.
You are on a forum, explain your critiques.
Useful comment indeed.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
Alright, big question:
I've recently been testing a homebrew version of UWx Landstill. However, I find myself unhappy with the lack of ways to remove non-creature permanents. So, I want to play UBxx landstill with Pernicious Deed.
What are the advantages and disadvantages between UBg and UBgw? Which color combination do you feel is superior?
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
in my opinion, Ubg is strictly more solid, and playing 3-4 pernicious maindeck gives us more catch-all answers maindeck. Personally i play 3, alongside with 2 EE.
Re: [DTW] U/b/g/w and U/b/g Landstill
I'd rather play 3 colors. Sure, you will get Wastelanded just as much, but it's harder for your opponent to cut you off a certain color.
