Gate is actually better that Fortress in most builds. There are very few keepable 1-landers at 6 and 7, and this + Karakas is still a T2 Counterbalance, and it allows you to fetch Islands and still cast your Entreats, or Tutor + StP, or whatever.
Printable View
Gate is actually better that Fortress in most builds. There are very few keepable 1-landers at 6 and 7, and this + Karakas is still a T2 Counterbalance, and it allows you to fetch Islands and still cast your Entreats, or Tutor + StP, or whatever.
Ok guys, I get that Mystic Gate is consensus better. I'm going to try both, I just had Glacial Fortress on me this week. I'll need to dig up some Gates to give them a try.
I board it in vs any sort of tempo deck (Rug, Patriot, Bug delver) and obviously combo. It's great at stopping stifles and ending counter wars. However I only run once since I dislike that it can't hit planeswalkers, enchantments like Sneak Attack, Counterbalance, and Oblivion Ring, and Artifacts like turn 1 Vial, Chalice, and equipment. All are commonly seen threats and so I run a 3-1 split with Spell Pierce. A 2-2 split is probably fine too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocean
Why doesn't every Miracle list start with 4 Ponders? When is 4 Ponders too "clunky"? Isn't Supreme Verdict superior to Terminus in Snapcaster Versions? Why split mass removal at all? Isn't there a better choice between Terminus, EE, and Verdict? I can understand wanting EE for its non-creature destruction aspect but I don't understand splitting Verdict and Terminus.
I can think lots of reasons why Miracle doesn't start the list with 4 Ponders, but I don't feel like typing a paragraph.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qweerios
Even with Snapcaster, do you actually expect to get to 4 Mana when you play against Rishadan Port(s) + Thalia + Wasteland(s), when you need to play mass removal?
You are not answering my questions here but i will go ahead and assume that what you are trying to tell me is that terminus is better than verdict against dnt and goblins, correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
I am also not asking for a whole paragraph on ponder, one good reason would be a good start.
Ponder is a cool card no doubt and its benefits are obvious. The reason you don't see any top8 lists running more than one/two alongside 4 BS 4 Top and Snapcaster into BS, is that including more cantrips decreases the chance of business cards in your opener. Imagine an opening seven with 2 BS, 1 Ponder, 1 Top: against Control this hand is actually kind of awesome, since you're not gonna be rushed to answer stuff anyway. Against fast Aggro and Comob however, you want your business spells "now", meaning spending your time to dig for answers during the first 3 turns instead of just being able to play them (with a higher threat density, sans 4 Ponders) is suboptimal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qweerios
Furthermore, the MD is very streamlined, with tons of full playsets so that digging for singletons via cantrips is something this deck hardly ever experiences. Post-board games certainly give Ponder a higher power level, since virtually increasing the density of your SB hate is cool.
Here's my current list for reference:
4 BS
4 Top
4 Jace
4 FOW
4 STP
3 Terminus
1 Verdict
2 Pierce
2 CS
3 CB
2 EE
3 EtA
1 Ponder
8 Fetch
4 Tundra
6 Island
2 Volc
1 Mountain
3 Plains
SB:
3 RiP
2 Pyroclasm
2 REB
1 Pyroblast
2 Bloodmoon
2 Wear/Tear
1 CB
1 Pierce
Mostly this, but to expand further... Ponder is better as an aggressive card. The aggressor ideally knows what they need to dig for to progress their game. Miracles is an extremely reactive deck. In order for Miracles to utilize Ponder, your opponent has to first deploy some sort of threat so you'll know what to dig for. Most aggressive decks in the format have some number of Dazes and Spell Pierces. As Miracles, I already have to wait and try to play around Daze and Pierce as patiently as I can. Spending a mana during your turn to cantrip only makes you have to wait that much longer to actually cast your business. This contrasts with Top, which lets you use mana during their turn and be fully untapped when it comes time for action.Quote:
Originally Posted by klaus
The exception is the Ponder/Entreat version of Miracles that pops up occasionally (mostly in Europe) which differs from most builds in that it does try to be the aggressor, therefore the Ponders. Likewise, Ponder can be very good in the control mirror, as the role of aggressor is usually up in the air for the first three or four turns. Against most of the field though, most Miracles builds will be reactive for the majority of a game.
Personally, I do dislike splitting removal in the main deck. I think Terminus is by far the best as you can cast it for :w: at Instant speed. Sure it requires some setup, but Miracles has a lot of setup it can accomplish and it can usually afford to be patient. The side board is a bit different and I actually prefer splits in the board. Each spell has a strength. I want my MD's removal to be consistently good against most decks. I don't want to find an EE when I'm needing to sweep a Deathrite, Baleful Strix, and a Tarpit or when they drop an Emrakul off of Sneak Attack. I want to rely on the SB to tune me to beat specific strategies, not variant draws.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qweerios
Against most decks, you'll bring in all of your sweepers or none, regardless. However in a few MU's like Sneak and Tell, Terminus is great while all other sweepers are dead. For example, Terminus is alright against Enchantress. Supreme Verdict is too slow and unnecessary. EE accomplishes what I'd want Terminus to do, plus much more. Pyroclasm is probably better than Terminus, but not as good as EE. I don't need to make my main deck less consistent to accomplish this, that's what the sideboard is for.
Really? Do you really want to attempt Terminus through Stifle, then through Daze/Pierce/FoW? How about just tap 4 lands and do the actual removal, none of that Delver's non-sense?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
I have no interest in fighting over some curse catcher/FoW, I play Verdict and Merfolks die.
Also, smart Goblin player would hold a Matron in hand while a Cavern in play. You can Terminus to buy yourself couple turns, it doesn't do much other than that against them Goblins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
I don't quite get what your main point is in regards to the removal suite. It looks like you are saying Verdict is situationally good, which goes to support Dzra's point of maindeck consistency with a support of additional removal from the sideboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
I looked through the past couple of pages and didn't see any discussion on the Italian miracles lists. Did I just miss it?
Anyways, what do people think of Biava's list (No CB, Crucible)? Has anybody done any testing with it?
http://mtgdecks.net/decks/view/58278
Scooping to Burn.dec and DRS? No thanksQuote:
Originally Posted by akatsuki
If I understand Dzra correctly, he's advocating MD more Terminus because he justifies it as consistency or swiss army knife, since it could sometimes be good, even against combos like Sneak and Show. However, I disagree by stating that Terminus is Not as diverse, or as consistent as he suggests. I've already listed problematic MU using Terminus above, there're considerably fair number of players who play above mentioned decks in any tournaments. Furthermore, the different versions of Miracle complicate the usage/decision making upon seeing a Terminus. I would rather have a diverse split of Mass Removal between Terminus and Verdict, in a tournament with unknown meta, even Oarsman has a 3-1 split MD, 2-2 split is certainly reasonable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Higgs
Terminus is actually pretty hard to counter if you even had Verdict mana to begin with. Just Force of Will, and I suppose Stifle. The fact that you can even flip it off a top at instant speed and get it countered is a testament to how powerful it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
Another thing to keep in mind is that miracle cards are played from top of the library, which means they are generally less vulnerable to discard, and also more likely to catch your opponent off guard.
I tested my new list, which is the 2nd one in the list:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Digital.../tourn/6044505
You just can't lose to decks with lots of creatures.
I think it's very good in a meta where you expect many decks with creatures (Shardless BUG, Jund, Esperdeathblade, Maverick, D&T, RUG Delver,...), some Control and Combo decks.
I really miss Vendilion Clique in the maindeck, but hey i just don't want to lose against Maverick, D&T, RUG Delver so i have them in the SB. I want to play a 3rd one but i have no idea what to cut (i also miss a 3rd Flusterstorm, but that's a different story^^)
As already mentioned in this thread i don't like the clunkyness of the RIP versions and i think my build is much stronger and more flexible. I think it is the opposite of Oarsmans Miracle list with 3 Clique and 1 Venser. His list is awesome against Control and Combo and okay against Tempodecks, Jund, etc. while mine is awesome against "Creaturedecks" and okay against Combo and Control. Of course it's not that black and white because Snapcaster is very good against Controldecks and very flexible, but just in general it's true.
Basically what I'm saying is that for a given meta, there is a "best" mass removal. Terminus is that best mass removal right now. I would recommend maxing it out to 3 or even 4 before considering other MD sweepers. Running a hodgepodge of sweepers is only opening yourself up to variance. Running 3 Terminus and 1 Supreme Verdict is slightly different than splitting your sweepers, as you are essentially porting one of your sideboard cards to the main deck in order to save SB space and hedge against creature strategies. This is fine because you aren't actually losing any Terminus. However, I think it's silly to have 2-1-1 or 2-2 splits when there is a pretty clear best. If you think Supreme Verdict is the best mass removal right now then max out and run 3-4. Otherwise, you are just making yourself less consistent in hopes that you will happen upon your situational card when the correct situation arises.Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn
Congrats on the 4-0. Choosing to run 3 Snapcasters and no Cliques MD is pretty interesting. Why'd you choose that route and how'd you like it? Also, you sure did go heavy on the sweepers. What were your matchups? I didn't think MTGO was that packed with creature decks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adryan
Has anyone been still running elspeth in the main or board? Or has the third entreat pretty much taken her place in the deck?
You can almost argue that MD Blood Moon spot could be Helm. This deck is not Imperial Painter, we don't run 6 Blood Moon effect cards. I still question the impact of that card as one-of, even with tutor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
The popularity of Elspeth seems to be correlated to the popularity of Shardless BUG.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherick
If you have room for both, Elspeth is probably better in the mirror. If you have only room for one then I'd go with the 3rd Entreat. It is better in more MUs and much higher impact. I've thought about running it MD, but most of the time it probably still isn't better than just more Entreats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetherick
One of the major problems is that you can't capitalise on her second ability all that well. If you run a version with Venser and Clique, you could do the aggro beats plan fairly effectively. EoT Clique into Elspeth on a relatively low-threat hand and board seems like it's going to cause problems, and jumping a Venser definitely helps push through. You also get to have a 1/1 on board post Terminus, and she makes Entreating for a smaller amount a little more threatening. (2 Angels on their own become a 2-turn clock, without any help from your opponent's fetchlands.)
She seems great, but you'd have to be making use of her second ability, or else it seems like wasted potential.
Or we could play Sun's Champion and really fuck with people.
I've beaten BUG more than once using her to jump Vensers. It is incredibly hard for them to deal with > 3cmc permanents. Again I'm not sure that an Entreat wouldn't have just been better, but she can definitely win games by going on the offensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by YamiJoey
Yep, exactly like my second sentence suggests. She'd be quite cool, and I may try her in the Bant shell I was looking into.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
Agreed. Elspeth is really good against fair decks. As a side note, always happy that i run her when my entreat gets hit by surgical extractionQuote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
I tested Elsepth and she was quite miserable except on an empty board which I would rather have jace anyway.
I have an Elspeth in the sideboard of my Punishing Legends build and she has been fantastic. I bring her in for the grind against fair decks and she has turned countless matches in my favour. She offers a great way to stall the game, apply pressure against opposing planeswalkers and ultimately finish the game efficiently. I've never tested the 3rd Entreat (though I'm sure it's effective) but I like running the Elspeth in its place in the sideboard. That slot, whether it's Entreat or Elspeth, is an additional bomb to help break open the game in grindy matches. I like that my additional bomb doesn't require any setup.Quote:
Originally Posted by KZhang
I dislike Elspeth as well. The 3rd Entreat is a little clunky sometimes, but that's its only real downside. Elspeth is a little clunky itself, and doesn't do a whole lot. Creating a 1/1 token when you're staring down multiple Goyfs isn't very good. Entreating for anything greater than 2 will hold off the Goyfs for a while. I wouldn't ever trade the crushing late game power of Entreat for Elspeth.
@oarsman- I was watching you stream the legacy daily and I can't make comments on my phone for some reason.
In round 3 against Elves why didn't you bring in the Blood Moon? They only play at max two basics, so it has potential to lock them out, especially if they don't see it coming. Even if it doesn't lock them out, it at least slows them down quite a bit and shuts off their Cradles. Just some food for thought, most people don't realize how effective it actually is versus the pointy ear deck.
Lol no. While it IS a good card against Elves because of all the Fetches, Arbors , Cradles and Duals, it's NOT good if you cast it turn 3+ If they already had their Glimpse or NO with a field flooded with dorks producing green mana.Quote:
Originally Posted by HammafistRoob
I'm seriously sick of seeing you degrade every idea you see, please stop acting like you've tested every build of every deck in every matchup.
It's obviously not good by itself, but this is a deck with a good amount of sweepers. If the field is flooded with dudes you're probably in a bad spot if you don't have the Terminus. If you land either a CB/Top lock or a Moon after taking out all their guys you have a massive advantage if they lack the Decay(they only play 3 max). Maybe it's not good enough, because the tough part is slowing them early, but it's worth some testing. I was hoping I could get a better explanation as to why Joe thinks it's not worth the inclusion. It could be stronger than something else.
I'm sorry that I degrade ideas which are unfitting or farfetched like the idea to have the pure lucky nuts of Terminus-their-board-turn2-or-3 and drop CB+Top+Bloodmoon with all their manacosts and setups against a combo-deck.
I DO play Elves, TES, Maniac Doomsday and Miracles myself, so I dare to give my 0.02$ to those threads and here I don't see the need to establish Bloodmoon AFTER you already traded 1-for-X with terminus. In fact, sweeping 1-2 times the board is more than enough to close out the game with 3 Entreat, therefore, if the matchup seems to be a problem, I'd rather have more Pyroclasm in my board (aside the fact that postboards focus of Elves is to bring down Progenitus).
With the return of Dark Maverick and tribal I recently cutted all MB Terminus for Pyroclasms for more relyable boardsweep against Goblins, Elves, Meerfolk, Maverick, Delver variants and nasty Synergy with RIP (KotR, Goyf, Goose). Obviously I upped the Entreat count to 4 for 3-mana-walls against Delver and shit and closing games fast in aggro mode. Top4 in the last 27 peeps tourney last week as a debut. Not that bad considering the loss agains OmniTell in the Semis
A little better, going by the logic in your first post half of the cards in the deck are bad. He didn't have access to Pyroclasm, which would obviously be better than Moon, but sometimes you gotta work with what you're given. I'm not sure if Vendilion Clique is really that good in the matchup either which was the main reason I brought it up.
I also wouldn't call sweeping the board once more than enough at all since they can usually bounce a guy or two and attempt another chain in a few turns. It's not a bad matchup but it's not the best either, and Elves has definitely been gaining more and more popularity as of late.
Since you've upped your.reliance on red mana, I assume you play the maindeck Mountain as well? Pyroclasm seems good in the right meta, it doesn't sweep stuff like Batterskull, Emrakul, or Goyf though so I'm not sold on playing 0 Terminus.
Yes, i altered my manabase according to that. I have Tithe in addition fixing that one and try to handle stuff like Emrakul, skull, Goyf and Reanimator targets with RIP, Jace, Venser, StoP and a grain of luck. ;)
I won't bore you with the manabase without a fixed MB and SB (some changes have to be made after the tournament obviously)
Found Blue elemental Blast insanly useful between battling Sneak Attack, Goblin Lackey, Burning Wish, Past in Flames as well as annoying Blood Moons
Edit: don't like Clique either here ... it's a 3-mana-may-catch-a-slow-NO
I don't think I hate Clique against Elves. They have a lot of redundancy at first glance, but I can imagine a lot of things I'd want to ship during their upkeep (Glimpse, NO, GSZ, etc). If you need the room then sure, but I'd probably cut Entreat before Clique.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Very interesting move. I could definitely see this being an improvement in the right meta. What actually makes me want to give it a shot is that Clasms smoothly pimp out the CB curve: the CMC2 slot has clearly been underrepresented in my SCM-less takes recently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
That was intended to support my 4 MD CB in game 1 against storm combo as well as catching Hymn, SFM and Goofy.Quote:
Originally Posted by klaus
Most of the creatures i want to get rid off with an early Terminus also fall victim to Clasm. This has proven crucial being on the draw against fast threats like Goblins, Elves, DRS, Geist, Confidant, SFM, Thalia and especially Teeg which Terminus can't solve
What up Miracle Control peeps,
I've been playing a 4 color not blue agro deck and I have NEVER won a match against this archetype (only 2 ties cause Top can make games go forever in the wrong hands). I was wondering which sideboard cards Miracle Control decks fears the most.
I run 4x abrupt decay in my sideboard, but it is not enough to win the long matches. I feel like planeswalkers, sulfuric vortex (which I probably shouldnt run cause I run Deathrite shaman) and some type of way to remove multiple enchantments and/or artifacts may be a good way to increase a mid range agro deck of having a chance in this match. Shutting down Top with a pithing needle is probably going to be the next card I will try but it seems kinda weak. Any feed back would be appreciated. I have 6 or so match losses against this deck, and this deck has been my worst match up in the legacy format.
Thanks!
Gaddok Teeg, Thalia, and Abrupt Decay are all excellent cards to play against us. Krosan Grip can also get there, as it pops our Top if we don't have a Counterbalance up, and that's pretty major, but I have played a version that had 4 Tops and 2 Tutors, so it's rarely difficult to find a second Top in a game if need be.
Aside from that, it's just about not overextending into Termini, but not applying so little pressure we don't care. You need to make sure we have to cast Spells to deal with the things you're doing, without losing to the cards we do cast, or else you're just going to let us put Lands into play and make 5 Angels to kill you, or we'll assemble one of our many contraptions and you'll lose from there on.
Try creeping tarpit. Also, shutting down Top is not weak.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strassbaw
He cannot play Creeping Tar Pit in a "4 color not blue agro deck".Quote:
Originally Posted by twndomn