Printable View
if CB serves you then play it by all means. I have played counterbalance before and I perfer to not play it. My zoo and ANT matchups are just fine and reanimator is still not being played by more then 2 players I know of.
Right now I do not feel to get any cards to imrpove any matchup except the merfolk mu.
I have tested it, just to let you know. I don't come on here and post bullshit. What tough matchups are these?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
When I said that, I was talking about Top without CB.Quote:
But Kuma, running Sensei's Divining Top hurts your blue count for Force of Will.
Sensei's Divining Top can be used to find blue cards. Counterbalance is blue. Survival can find blue cards. Despite a lower than usual blue count for a Legacy deck, I've never had problems finding blue cards before or after adding CounterTop.
This also costs more mana. I'm not saying it is terrible, but it is slower.Quote:
Running CounterTop hurts the creature count, making it harder to get an active Survival.
This is true, but Sensei's Divining Top can mitigate this by finding creatures. In three tournaments, I've had problems finding a creature for Survival in one game. CounterTop has earned me back that one game many times over.
You are misunderstanding what I said. If you read it again, you'll notice I said control and aggro. Meaning that if you want to play control, the deck can't play aggresively like it wants to at times, ie play out threats to attack or block swarms. Counterbalance isn't flexible and really limits how you play the game since it will tie up all your mana at times (Top does this actually, but its because of CB) and basically puts you on either control or having a dead card in hand. All the cards you listed are creatures and can still beat it. This deck isn't trying to play balls to the wall aggro, but it is still trying to beatdown. Stuff like Vendilion Clique, MM, Witness, and Predator are great at controlling the board while doing damage.Quote:
Running CounterTop hurts your ability to play both the control and aggro roles effectively.
Are you serious? Running CounterTop hurts your ability to be a control deck?
CounterTop has hurt my ability to go aggro inasmuch as Meddling Mage, Vendilion Clique, Eternal Witness, and Trygon Predator are aggro creatures. That is to say, not much.
Decks have definitions. Obviously all decks try to win first and foremost, but what sets them apart is how they do it. This deck tries to do it with Survival and when that fails it falls back on the powerful creatures and mana efficient spells to overrun the opponent. Counterbalance takes away from your primary way to win. I'm not saying that it takes away from the whole deck, since there are situations where it shines, but in my testing those never outdid the places where it was terrible.Quote:
This deck is a Survival deck first and foremost.
No, this deck is a deck designed to win games first and foremost. Either CounterTop helps it do this or it doesn't. I care about wins and losses, not "definitions."
You took that quote out of context. I don't care if the deck becomes harder to pilot effectively, it doesn't make it better, IMO. From testing it imporved 1 relevant MU and that was Zoo. Counterbalance was able to shut him down or distract his Pridemages and let Survival by. In all other ones, I felt it took away from the deck. This deck is good because of its aggressiveness which makes cards like Force of Will, Swords and the other tempo cards better. Slowing the deck down negates the tempo you gain from Hierarchs and those efficient answer cards.Quote:
It's easier not to run Counterbalance.
It would also be easier to cut Survivals and play Bant Aggro.
Running CounterTop makes the deck harder to play, but it makes the deck better too. Winning games is what's important. If you want an easy to play deck, go build Belcher.
This deck is flexible. It can switch in and out of roles easily while always applying beatdown. Counterbalance can of course come down with Top and win the game. Thats how Legacy made it. I know the combo is good. What isn't is when your deck can't facilitate its plan.
I never accused you of either thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Zoo, ANT, and Reanimator. It also helps with CounterTop, Canadian Threshold, Loam, the mirror match, and more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
What about the rest of my rebuttal? You know, the parts other than "Counterbalance is blue."Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Someone on here did the math for the probability of having a blue card and Force of Will in your opening hand, and the difference between 15 and 24 blue sources was something like 7%. Do you have issues finding that blue card? I switched to this deck from CounterTop with Progenitus which ran like 23 blue sources, and I haven't noticed much of a difference in my ability to FoW. Sensei's Divining Top and Survival of the Fittest might as well be blue cards after turn two.
True, but so far it's only been relevant in one out of thirty-something games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Why do you need to "play aggressively" if you have your opponent locked?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Having active CounterTop doesn't mean you can't play creatures. If you need an attacker or blocker you can still play one. Granted, CounterTop takes up creature slots, which hurts your ability to go aggro a little, but your ability to play control goes through the roof.
Who cares if their mana is tied up when their opponent can't resolve spells? It's not that hard to play a creature or two with CounterTop out --- CounterTop decks do this all the time. Also, our CMC curve is perfect for Counterbalance which helps us blind-flip. The flexibility of being able to play CounterTop or Survival is easily worth the occasional dead card, especially when we run a card advantage engine like Survival of the Fittest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
And it does so nearly as well despite cutting creatures for CounterTop. Removing your four worst aggro creatures doesn't hurt your ability to go aggro much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
It's often much better to take total control of the board instead of messing with your opponent's draw step a little while beating them for a few extra points of damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
I don't know about you, but Vendilion Clique, Meddling Mage, Eternal Witness, and Trygon Predator were my four most boarded out cards when I ran them.
It takes a little bit away from your primary way to win and gives you another strong secondary option.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
And I value the results of your testing. My testing has lead me to a different conclusion, and I think the topic needs more attention than the five posts in fifty-three pages it had. The reason I made my post was to provide stronger arguments on both sides to help people better make up their minds. Your post is a much stronger argument for not running Counterbalance than anything posted previously in the thread, and for taking the time to type it out, I thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
It's not like Zoo is really important or anything. Also, you don't consider ANT a relevant match?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Turn one Hierarch, turn two Counterbalance + Top/Brainstorm seems like a good use of tempo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
I don't know how else to state my case. My list can still switch roles and applies the beatdown nearly as well as it did before. Maybe I'll write some tournament reports to better demonstrate how the deck works with Counterbalance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
I haven't had any problems with Zoo or ANT, and since I dedicated a little SB hate to Reanimator, i haven't lost a single match to it. The only thing I've really disliked about the deck is that sometimes I want Meddling Mage to be Spellstutter Sprite, but overall, the only truly problematic matchup is Merfolk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
I mean, I can see the merits of playing CB/Top, but I don't think it necessarily makes the deck better or worse, but it does cater more to a different playstyle, which can drastically alter your results if you aren't comfortable with the way the deck plays without it.
I personally have tried builds with and without CB/Top and am more comfortable without it, and my results reflect this.
Had my first (small) tournament with this today and I'm surprised how good the deck is. I tested it a little while ago but it sucked (now I'm 100% sure this was because of my playskill)
Anyways, small report:
// Lands
4 [ZEN] Misty Rainforest
4 [ON] Windswept Heath
4 [A] Tropical Island
2 [B] Savannah
1 [A] Tundra
2 [UNH] Forest
1 [UNH] Island
1 [UNH] Plains
// Creatures
4 [CFX] Noble Hierarch
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
4 [ALA] Rhox War Monk
3 [ARB] Qasali Pridemage
3 [LRW] Spellstutter Sprite
1 [MM] Squee, Goblin Nabob
1 [ZEN] Iona, Shield of Emeria
1 [P3] Loyal Retainers
1 [MOR] Vendilion Clique
1 [LRW] Sower of Temptation
// Spells
4 [EX] Survival of the Fittest
4 [R] Swords to Plowshares
4 [AL] Force of Will
4 [BD] Brainstorm
2 [M10] Ponder
// Sideboard
SB: 3 [ZEN] Spell Pierce
SB: 3 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 3 [TSB] Tormod's Crypt
SB: 2 [LRW] Gaddock Teeg
SB: 2 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 1 [TO] Llawan, Cephalid Empress
SB: 1 [SHM] Faerie Macabre
This was what I wanted to play but I didn't get all cards so the list was
-2 Heath
-1 Savannah
+2 Flooded
+1 Temple Garden
Unfortunate, but was never relevant.
Round 1: Cephalid Breakfeast
G1: He is screwed and Iona on turn 4 ends it rather quickly.
G2: He misses the En-Cor so I just keep countering all attempts to find it, Goyf cleans up.
Round 2: Aggro Loam
G1: He has the nuts and I never felt like I had a shot.
G2: A little closer, I make a terrible decision midways so I deserve to loose.
Round 3: Hive/Pact wit NO
G1: I have a Goyf + Sprite + Force but he goes off the turn before I am able to take him down.
G2: Awkward, he takes about 16 dmg from his Vaults and a singe Hierarch. Some Goyf finished him (if I remember correctly)
G3: I have a crapload of disruption, but only a little preassure. He manages to get a Progenitus into play but he is on 4 and I have 3 Hierarch + Loyal Retainers, so he can't attack. We play Draw/Go for 5 turns or so until I rip a Clique, seeing nothing relevant after his drawstep and fly over for the win.
Round 4: Reanimator:
G1: I know what hes on, and I keep a hand with no disruption but Sower to beat Iona. Unfortunately he gets Leviathan with study and finishes me off.
G2: He gets SnT on Iona, but since I get RWM + exalted he can't attack. Survival gets countered and my Goyf gets big enough to smash through.
G3: Archangel turn two, but I get Survival and on 4 life I get Iona into play (Daze and FoW proof) which gets a little help from Hierarch and swings the game in my favour.
Overall:
6-4 3-1-0
3rd place for a foil Crusher (meh)
The meta was Combo heavy, so the Sower should have been a MM (as well as maybe a RWM) but the deck played well and in a vacuum I would play this list again I guess.
How do you guys side for/approach the mirror match?
I usually take out Meddling Mage, a Rhox War Monk, and something else for a Faerie Macabre or two and Gilded Drake, but I can't help but feel there's a better plan.
Since im the only survival player in NL I still have to find a mirrormatch.
But I think I would be boarding in jitte, sower, grips(no sure about these) and boarding out depends on what I expect and have seen on game 1.
Hey guys, just assembled Bant Survival (no Loyal Retainers/Iona though) and I really love the deck, I think it's one of my favorites now. However, I've been having a bit of trouble with the UW Tempo matchup, mainly because Rhox War Monk + Rafiq + Wonder is amazing, but it can't get past a Mother of Runes'd Serra Avenger. Other than Swords, what would be the best answer to it?
From the top of my head: Umezawas Jitte with at least 2 creatures that dont die to Avenger (read: RWM).
I play with CB/Top in my main, so my deck/sb might be a little different. When I play against the "mirror," I usually take out the Iona/Retainers package, and maybe a few War Monks depending on how many cards I have to bring in. The Iona combo feels like more of a liability because it requires an active Survival (Grip, Pridemage), no graveyard hate (Faerie Macabre), and gets completely blown out by a Gilded Drake or Sower. I'd rather have less dead cards in my deck than a really risky combo. Also, Rhox War Monk tends to be really small in general. Exalted is nice, so this could be wrong (side out stuff like Meddling Mage first), but he's been unimpressive whenever a Goyf sticks, as he needs a few exalted guys to be able to attack effectively. He also is expensive when you'd rather be spending mana on better bombs. As for what to bring in, stuff like Gilded Drakes, Sowers, and Threads are obvious additions. I'm not sure how many Macabres to bring in, one or two seems right to deal with the Squee/Genesis/Witness engines. Obviously stuff like extra Pridemages, Grips come in as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
Multiple Goyfs. I'm assuming you have a Survival going because you got this combo, so go find a few Tarmogoyfs and fly over with them, too (a la Wonder).Quote:
Originally Posted by akiratheoni
I've had some difficulties with this matchup as well (this and a UB variant of it have been showing up in my meta).Quote:
Originally Posted by akiratheoni
Jitte sounds like it would work well because all of their guys are relatively small and Mother can't protect them from it. However, you may have problems getting it to stick since they're running quite a few (especially with Stoneforge Mystic) as well.
I've liked 1 Taiga + 3x Firespout in the board for this deck as well as for Merfolk.
I play a slightly heavier fetchland build and just wait until I want to play the Firespout before cracking a fetchland for the Taiga and going wiping their board away. Even if they have Mother of Runes around, they can only save so many creatures.
I really liked the discussion of CB+Top.
I think adding these 2 cards has 2 reasons: 1) Improving our Combo MU 2) Improving Zoo and Burn
If we make break our meta down and realize these decks will be played a lot we should perhaps just switch to a Counterbalance deck and not try to squeeze it into our current deck ( whatever it may be).
More important for me is the 2nd counter we should play. I saw lots of build including Spellsputter and they had success wit it. I just can`t see how they did it. In the first 3 turns i want to drop sth relevant and apply pressure. So in these turns i don`t want to hold mana behind to perhaps play Sprite. Another reasons against sprite is our low count of Faeries. On the other side we can tutor for it, whicvh is great, but then we are in round 3 atleast.
But Daze, Pierce and Snare have all drawbacks aswell.
Yeah I was thinking about running SFM and Jitte as well. I also run Eternal Witness so if I have to get rid of Jitte with my own (or they get rid of mine with theirs) I can always fetch it back.
I personally have enjoyed Meddling Mage in that slot as it is proactive and extremely flexible. This is purely a meta choice though, and sometimes I do wish it were Spellstutter, but that's generally one game in ten. Spellstutter Sprite seems like it is better in metas infested with a variety of low casting-cost things, like Zoo critters or ANT, while Meddling Mage is better against decks with specific pieces that you want to shut down -e.g. NO, CB/Top, LftL, etc - while not being terrible against everything else (as long as you're well knowledgeable of your meta).Quote:
Originally Posted by unicoerner
I played Meddling Mage for a while.
Played two big Legacy tournaments last weekend, 1st one with Meddling Build, never searched for them and didn't feel need for the at all.. So i switched for Sprites in the second and there where awesome all tournament. But i think it's as majikal said a meta call and a matter of play style.
And what`s about Pierce and Snare?
Pierce fits very nicely into my Sideboard. I haven't missed Spell Snare at all; it was often a dead card against many, many matchups.Quote:
Originally Posted by unicoerner
CounterTop improves your matchup against the format. There are few decks where CounterTop isn't effective.Quote:
Originally Posted by unicoerner
Counterbalance decks have no real advantages over Bant Survival w/ CounterTop. Loyal Retainers/Iona is a better combo than NO/Progenitus. Survival of the Fittest is better than Daze. We run more creatures and have a better card advantage engine. Survival of the Fittest, with or without Sensei's Divining Top, gives us unparalleled card selection.Quote:
Originally Posted by unicoerner
I've goldfished a bit with Kuma's list and seems not so bad, I feel like testing it. Just a general question. Imagine you are on the play against an unknown opponent and drop a... let's say, a T1 Hierarch and your opponent opens with an uncracked fetchland and passes turn. If you have both Survival and Counterbalance in hand, which one would you play first?
It depends. If it's a non-blue fetch and I don't have Sensei's Divining Top or Brainstorm, I'll play Survival first and go for the turn three Iona. If I don't have a creature for Survival, I'll play Counterbalance first. If I have a Sensei's Divining Top, I'll play Counterbalance first. However, you have to be careful since a lot of blue lists run Windswept Heath.Quote:
Originally Posted by godryk
If it's a blue fetch and I don't have Top, I'll play Counterbalance first to try to draw out countermagic so I can safetly resolve Survival. If I have Top I'll play Survival first, let them counter it, and set up CounterTop next turn, hopefully with mana to spin Top as well.
If it's a Polluted Delta, I put them on either ANT or Reanimator and play the Counterbalance first.
Really, it's hard to go wrong here. Either card has a strong chance of winning you the game, although Survival is stronger if you don't have Top. This is the power of running both engines.