Miracle Control

[M1n1stry]

Okay thanks for the explanation.

As i'm running predict and trying also some UA in my show&tell combo list, i was wondering if the addition of portent could be good, but as you said its best suited for pure control decks and not combo/sligh control ones.

[gh0st_b1rd]

Yeah. I actually had a rough draft of Terminal Omni Tell that had a playset of Portents because of being able to see 4 cards. It is honestly not as bad of a card as people think it is. If you're playing a deck and identify that Ponder is the 2nd best cantrip for the deck you should just jam some Portents into the list.

If you look at some old school Hatfield lists, even when the option of Preordain was available to them they still had Portents in those extra cantrip slots.

[twndomn]

Something is weird about the Mana base.

Too often when I feel the need to cast UA, I have a plains and a Scalding Tarn in play, facing my opponent's Wasteland. I don't want to break Scalding Tarn for Tundra to be wasted, just so I get to cast UA. Am I the only person having WW issue? I am currently running 2 Arid Mesa, perhaps the correct number is 3?

[Mzfroste]

Played 2 Leagues yesterday with a red (pyroblast) splash. Went 4-1, then 5-0, with my loss being to deathblade. Had trouble hitting any payoff spells to pull me ahead, and then the turn I could cast Verdict it got stripped by clique. Then I mulled to 5, so tough beats but I didn't feel it was a typical game. But I suppose I've had some wins that weren't typical for my opponents.

I wanted to test the blasts since I felt that this deck was having a tough time against the grindy blue midrange / control decks, but specifically other Jaces and Leovold. And then of course there are all the other things worth pyroblasting that we see often, like Snapcater, Delver, Show and Tell, True-Name, and protecting our payoff cards from FOW, that makes it worth running. Basically everything that made the red splash the correct decision pre-ban other than counterbalance. So the obvious problem is what to cut for it. I decided to cut the surgicals and the second clique from the board for 3 blasts. One thing that has been really driven home for me testing this deck is that Counterbalance can't be adequetley replaced for every matchup it was important, and we'll just have to stomach it that some formally good matchups aren't anymore, and ask ourselves how far and how many cards are we willing to dedicate to fixing those matchups, at the sacrifice of others. I think that not only are there more matchups where blasts are important over surgical (obviously), but also those matchups are both more common, and the win percentage increase we get from blasts is enough to make torpedoing the matchups that depended on surgical (Lands mostly, though BR Reanimator will get a bit more dicey) worth it from a net wins perspective. Some people recommended cutting the priests, I also considered cutting a disenchant or the 2nd ETA, and those might be correct choices, but I was curious to test a build that had made the matchup tradeoff and see how I felt, and I can say I definetley would've lost 2 of these wins of out of 10 without the blasts, and potentially 2 the draws had gone differently for them. Where as there was only 1 matchup where I wanted Surgical (Ant), and Surgical has always been the last and least powerful disruption spell, or atleast most inconsistent, that I brought against them. And it was still a win.

The actual matchups were, in the first league, were 2-1 against Red Splash w/ Chalice DnT, 0-2 vs Deathblade, 2-0 vs UR Delver, 2-1 against BG Depths, and 2-0 vs Nic Fit. The second league was 2-1 vs the mirror with red for Nahiri / Blasts, 2-1 vs Ant, 2-0 vs Bug Delver with TNN and Leovold main, 2-0 vs Bug Delver, and 2-1 vs 4c Control.

This was the list

4 Portent
4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
4 Predict
4 Fow
3 Counterspell
3 JTMS
3 Snapcater
3 STP
3 Terminus
2 UA
1 Supreme Verdict
1 ETA
1 Vendilion Clique
20 Lands, 4 Island, 2 Plains 3 Tundra 3 Volc, 8 Fetches

SB
3 Ethersworn Canonist
3 Flusterstorm
3 Pyroblast
2 Containment Priest
1 STP
1 Disenchant
1 Council's Judgement
1 ETA

The next 2 changes I want to test are a further red splash for Blood Moon, as it's also good against these grindy Bug / 4 Color decks that are resurging, as well as Deathblade which is definetely the toughest matchup I've been having with this deck, as well as Lands, which I do think I wouldn't be able to beat with this list. I'd probably cut the ETA as I only bring it in against those especially grindy decks, but find myself not really needing it, as I need Jace out to comfortably set it up, and once I've got control of the board with Jace, 1 is enough. The other cut I wouldn't be sure, maybe the disenchant, maybe a blast. Maybe cut something from the main to move the 4th stp back there and free up a spot that way. The second change would just be going to a 2-2 split on Terminus and Verdict, I really really like the singleton, though I do still find myself wanted the Terminus, but that change is less urgent. I also want to see if it would be better to cut the ETA over the surgical for the 3rd blast.


Anyways those are my thoughts, love to hear opinions.

[Jsang]

... One thing that has been really driven home for me testing this deck is that Counterbalance can't be adequetley replaced for every matchup it was important, and we'll just have to stomach it that some formally good matchups aren't anymore, and ask ourselves how far and how many cards are we willing to dedicate to fixing those matchups, at the sacrifice of others...

Nothing set in stone about the red splash, it is just about the meta call, imho. The loss of counterbalance is the primary reason I am testing and advocating main deck mentor, since we have lost our control lock and may not be afford to spend too long to finish the game.

[Kanti]

Something is weird about the Mana base.

Too often when I feel the need to cast UA, I have a plains and a Scalding Tarn in play, facing my opponent's Wasteland. I don't want to break Scalding Tarn for Tundra to be wasted, just so I get to cast UA. Am I the only person having WW issue? I am currently running 2 Arid Mesa, perhaps the correct number is 3?

Singleton Mystic Gate to help with your woes?

[rancOr_]

@Mzfroste
I agree with your statements about the red splash and the 3/1 terminus/verdict split is something I've been testing too, I like it so far.
Blood Moon can fix a lot of the problems this deck has (grindy 4c decks,Lands,Cloudpost/Eldrazi,..) as mentioned.
I would maybe try to put the Council's and 4th STP in the MD again (cutting UA). This way there's room for 2 Blood Moons.
I've only been playing one UA in UW Miracles with a Disenchant in the SB and it works fine.
If you have access to REB (for Jace,..) I think its reasonable to cut atleast one UA (or 2..) if we move the Council MD again.
Cutting the 2nd ETA sb for one Surgical Extraction seems pretty solid. Izzet Staticaster might also be worth a spot (-2nd CPriest perhaps)
Also Punishing Fire is a serious problem for the deck especially in g1's where we basically have to go for ETA.

I played in a 6 round tournament today with a UW Miracles list
R1:RUG Titi Control (0-2) G1 bolt+ pfire lock both my Jaces and I have no out as I dont find ETA in time.(staring at 3 Grove and 5-6 lands) G2 I dont find any cantrips after going through 1/3 of my deck..
R2: BUG Landstill w Hymn (0-2) G1 t1 DRS on play into t2/3 hymn then standstill. Have to break a standstill again in g2..
R3: Burn (2-1) G1 no chance G2/3 very close but I can stabilize just in time.
R4: Grixis Delver (2-0)
R5: Esper Stoneblade (2-1)
R6: ANT (2-0)

For me the 2 big problems with the deck are the Burn MU and Punishing Fire in G1
I'm pretty sure we just have to accept that our Burn MU is pretty bad now without CB and hope to get lucky . Mentors in the SB def help but it's still really hard. I think if we want to beat burn we need atleast 2SFM+Batterskull in SB but its hard to make spots here.
As for the Punishing Fire decks I'd atleast want acces to 1 Surgical here. Blood Moon would also be decent here most of the time.

[Scott]

Played 2 Leagues yesterday with a red (pyroblast) splash. Went 4-1, then 5-0, with my loss being to deathblade.

TheKniphoon also went 5-0 yesterday, also with a red splash, for 1X Pyroblast and 1X Blood Moon in the SB.

[talpa]

Quick post just to report that yestarday I lost a game to Gaddock + sylvan safekeeper dying with double terminus double jace and double UA in hand (fun fact: a Gaddock that I saw with a portent and predicted away in response to him cracking a fetchland, just to have it come back the same turn directly to the battlefield with a zenith for renegade rallier).

I get that UA has enables a lot of tricks, but maybe we should consider going back to council's judgement.

[twndomn]

Played 2 Leagues yesterday with a red (pyroblast) splash. Went 4-1, then 5-0, with my loss being to deathblade. Had trouble hitting any payoff spells to pull me ahead, and then the turn I could cast Verdict it got stripped by clique. Then I mulled to 5, so tough beats but I didn't feel it was a typical game. But I suppose I've had some wins that weren't typical for my opponents.

I wanted to test the blasts since I felt that this deck was having a tough time against the grindy blue midrange / control decks, but specifically other Jaces and Leovold. And then of course there are all the other things worth pyroblasting that we see often, like Snapcater, Delver, Show and Tell, True-Name, and protecting our payoff cards from FOW, that makes it worth running. Basically everything that made the red splash the correct decision pre-ban other than counterbalance. So the obvious problem is what to cut for it. I decided to cut the surgicals and the second clique from the board for 3 blasts. One thing that has been really driven home for me testing this deck is that Counterbalance can't be adequetley replaced for every matchup it was important, and we'll just have to stomach it that some formally good matchups aren't anymore, and ask ourselves how far and how many cards are we willing to dedicate to fixing those matchups, at the sacrifice of others. I think that not only are there more matchups where blasts are important over surgical (obviously), but also those matchups are both more common, and the win percentage increase we get from blasts is enough to make torpedoing the matchups that depended on surgical (Lands mostly, though BR Reanimator will get a bit more dicey) worth it from a net wins perspective. Some people recommended cutting the priests, I also considered cutting a disenchant or the 2nd ETA, and those might be correct choices, but I was curious to test a build that had made the matchup tradeoff and see how I felt, and I can say I definetley would've lost 2 of these wins of out of 10 without the blasts, and potentially 2 the draws had gone differently for them. Where as there was only 1 matchup where I wanted Surgical (Ant), and Surgical has always been the last and least powerful disruption spell, or atleast most inconsistent, that I brought against them. And it was still a win.

Anyways those are my thoughts, love to hear opinions.

I definitely understand cutting Legend creatures hence Karakas. Who knows, that might be the correct direction. One thing I dislike is the lack of From the Ashes. When you go red, you want to punish non-basic, it's the second biggest motivation, after red blast effect. Priest is just too slow and vulnerable to Unmask imho. I am not certain on the number of red sources lands. You have 2 EtA, 2 UA, 1 CJ, all require double W and the 3 Volcanic will not give you that Mana. I personally would not run that many WW cards to begin with.

[Whitefaces]

Something is weird about the Mana base.

Too often when I feel the need to cast UA, I have a plains and a Scalding Tarn in play, facing my opponent's Wasteland. I don't want to break Scalding Tarn for Tundra to be wasted, just so I get to cast UA. Am I the only person having WW issue? I am currently running 2 Arid Mesa, perhaps the correct number is 3?

Getting UU online is more important in the early game than WW, so it's gonna happen sometimes. More times than I can remember I've wished the Mesa could fetch an Island, so I think this is simply something you have to accept if playing UA. Definitely a big negative of the card, I've not found myself playing it before T4+ much though.

Played 2 Leagues yesterday with a red (pyroblast) splash. Went 4-1, then 5-0, with my loss being to deathblade. Had trouble hitting any payoff spells to pull me ahead, and then the turn I could cast Verdict it got stripped by clique. Then I mulled to 5, so tough beats but I didn't feel it was a typical game. But I suppose I've had some wins that weren't typical for my opponents.

I wanted to test the blasts since I felt that this deck was having a tough time against the grindy blue midrange / control decks, but specifically other Jaces and Leovold. And then of course there are all the other things worth pyroblasting that we see often, like Snapcater, Delver, Show and Tell, True-Name, and protecting our payoff cards from FOW, that makes it worth running. Basically everything that made the red splash the correct decision pre-ban other than counterbalance. So the obvious problem is what to cut for it. I decided to cut the surgicals and the second clique from the board for 3 blasts. One thing that has been really driven home for me testing this deck is that Counterbalance can't be adequetley replaced for every matchup it was important, and we'll just have to stomach it that some formally good matchups aren't anymore, and ask ourselves how far and how many cards are we willing to dedicate to fixing those matchups, at the sacrifice of others. I think that not only are there more matchups where blasts are important over surgical (obviously), but also those matchups are both more common, and the win percentage increase we get from blasts is enough to make torpedoing the matchups that depended on surgical (Lands mostly, though BR Reanimator will get a bit more dicey) worth it from a net wins perspective. Some people recommended cutting the priests, I also considered cutting a disenchant or the 2nd ETA, and those might be correct choices, but I was curious to test a build that had made the matchup tradeoff and see how I felt, and I can say I definetley would've lost 2 of these wins of out of 10 without the blasts, and potentially 2 the draws had gone differently for them. Where as there was only 1 matchup where I wanted Surgical (Ant), and Surgical has always been the last and least powerful disruption spell, or atleast most inconsistent, that I brought against them. And it was still a win.

The actual matchups were, in the first league, were 2-1 against Red Splash w/ Chalice DnT, 0-2 vs Deathblade, 2-0 vs UR Delver, 2-1 against BG Depths, and 2-0 vs Nic Fit. The second league was 2-1 vs the mirror with red for Nahiri / Blasts, 2-1 vs Ant, 2-0 vs Bug Delver with TNN and Leovold main, 2-0 vs Bug Delver, and 2-1 vs 4c Control.

This was the list

4 Portent
4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
4 Predict
4 Fow
3 Counterspell
3 JTMS
3 Snapcater
3 STP
3 Terminus
2 UA
1 Supreme Verdict
1 ETA
1 Vendilion Clique
20 Lands, 4 Island, 2 Plains 3 Tundra 3 Volc, 8 Fetches

SB
3 Ethersworn Canonist
3 Flusterstorm
3 Pyroblast
2 Containment Priest
1 STP
1 Disenchant
1 Council's Judgement
1 ETA

The next 2 changes I want to test are a further red splash for Blood Moon, as it's also good against these grindy Bug / 4 Color decks that are resurging, as well as Deathblade which is definetely the toughest matchup I've been having with this deck, as well as Lands, which I do think I wouldn't be able to beat with this list. I'd probably cut the ETA as I only bring it in against those especially grindy decks, but find myself not really needing it, as I need Jace out to comfortably set it up, and once I've got control of the board with Jace, 1 is enough. The other cut I wouldn't be sure, maybe the disenchant, maybe a blast. Maybe cut something from the main to move the 4th stp back there and free up a spot that way. The second change would just be going to a 2-2 split on Terminus and Verdict, I really really like the singleton, though I do still find myself wanted the Terminus, but that change is less urgent. I also want to see if it would be better to cut the ETA over the surgical for the 3rd blast.


Anyways those are my thoughts, love to hear opinions.

Glad to have you back on the deck!

I've been quite against the red splash so far, mostly on the grounds that it doesn't make our bad matchups any better, just makes OK to good ones better. But your arguments for it are sound. It's obviously an insane card in this shell and will break the mirror, but the cost is pretty high if you're running UA. I've watched a bunch of people stream the deck with the splash and seen them get wasted out by Delver because they wanted to fetch Tundras and Volcs. Now I know you can just fetch basics of course, but the tension between R and WW is not something to ignore. The obvious replacements for UA would be CJ (same WW problem) and EE, which I feel isn't the best at the moment. But I'll give the splash another try.

I like the 3/1 split of Terminus/Verdict a lot, I'm going to make that change for the next leagues.

Quick post just to report that yestarday I lost a game to Gaddock + sylvan safekeeper dying with double terminus double jace and double UA in hand (fun fact: a Gaddock that I saw with a portent and predicted away in response to him cracking a fetchland, just to have it come back the same turn directly to the battlefield with a zenith for renegade rallier).

I get that UA has enables a lot of tricks, but maybe we should consider going back to council's judgement.

This is definitely a 'lock' vs us now, it's tough. I don't think the upside of CJ here outweighs its negatives, but this is something to keep in mind. Luckily it won't come up too much. Pyroclasm is something that deals with it.

[laywer]

Went to a tournament last sunday using this list:

Planeswalker (3)
3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Creature (4)
3 Snapcaster Mage
1 Vendilion Clique
Sorcery (13)
1 Entreat the Angels
4 Ponder
4 Portent
4 Terminus
Instant (19)
4 Brainstorm
3 Counterspell
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Force of Will
3 Predict
2 Unexpectedly Absent
Land (20)
4 Flooded Strand
6 Island
1 Karakas
2 Plains
4 Polluted Delta
3 Tundra

Sideboard
3 Flusterstorm
2 Canonist
2 Surgical Extraction
1 Containment Priest
2 Mentor
1 Clique
4 White Leyline

31 players - 5 rounds plus top8

R1 vs Jund - Got the 2 games with EtA. The MU seemed better than pre ban Miracles, because they cant keep up with the great CA generated by predict. Hymm wasn't a big problem at all.
R2 vs Belcher - Got comboed T1 in the play, no FoW in hand. Got G2 and G3 with a combination of Counters and mentor.
R3 vs Death and Taxes - Terminus on their turn and jace got me G1. Mentor got me G2. 4 stp, 2 UA and 4 terminus really smooths the things in this MU.
R4 vs Elves - This MU is not a walk at the park anymore. G1 I got crushed, cause couldn't set up terminus on his turn. G2 I got it with terminus breaking the NO combo, plus surgical extraction on it. Won the MU with mentor. G3 we went out of time. Losing top plus CB in this MU really made things harder. I think we have a 50-50 Mu after all.
R5 - ID
Top8 vs UR Landstill - I found these MUs using standstill something to worry. Manlands are even harder to deal with right now and my oponnent had pyroblats in the sideboard. Anyway, missed my back to basics in the sideboard.

Felt the deck to be pretty strong, but we really need something to hate nonbasic lands. White Leyline isn't where we want to be. Maybe a R splash with pyro and moon is the way to go.

[Scott]

2 5-0s in today's published MTGO results. That's pretty good, I guess.

Ya know what's better? Going a perfect 14-0 in games (not me, someone else) in a 50-person paper GPT and taking it down Paper hurdle cleared.

There aren't deck lists, but a little bird (Kion) tells me that Miracles did that in Littleton, CO yesterday, I believe at Black Gold Magic.

It sounds like it went like:

1. RGB Lands
2. UW Miracles
3. Elves
4. Aggro Loam
5. Belcher
6. DnT
7. Czech Pile
8. Bantblade Standstill

After drops due to not needing the byes it played out like this.

Miracles over Lands
Czech Pile over Grixis Delver
Belcher over Burn
Grixis Delver over Bantblade Standstill

Czech Pile over Belcher
Miracles over Grixis (team concede as Grixis had 2 byes)

Miracles over Czech Pile

[tescrin]

It sounds like it went like:

Getting a "2-0" because Grixis conceded and a "2-0" Lands conceded reduces the claim by a bit. It's still impressive to go 5-0; but I await to see if it does something at the GP. I think it's quite possible it may (or that the numbers will be too low for it to get there), but I also think the deck has real weaknesses that it didn't before, and I imagine at a GP they're more likely to run into them (especially in the early rounds.)

[Scott]

Getting a "2-0" because Grixis conceded and a "2-0" Lands conceded reduces the claim by a bit. It's still impressive to go 5-0; but I await to see if it does something at the GP. I think it's quite possible it may (or that the numbers will be too low for it to get there), but I also think the deck has real weaknesses that it didn't before, and I imagine at a GP they're more likely to run into them (especially in the early rounds.)

It was 6 rounds, so it went 6-0 in matches and 12-0 in games in the swiss, and then beat Czech Pile in an actual match in the final, so the Grixis and Lands concessions aren't included. Either that or it went 5-0 in matches and 10-0 in games in the swiss, and beat Lands and Czech Pile in actual matches in the top 8. Either way, the 7-0 and 14-0 numbers are just from actual matches played.

[Kion]

It was 5-0 in the swiss with an ID round 6. 2-0 in the top 8 over Lands and Pile.

[shocked439]

Getting a "2-0" because Grixis conceded and a "2-0" Lands conceded reduces the claim by a bit. It's still impressive to go 5-0; but I await to see if it does something at the GP. I think it's quite possible it may (or that the numbers will be too low for it to get there), but I also think the deck has real weaknesses that it didn't before, and I imagine at a GP they're more likely to run into them (especially in the early rounds.)

I'm curious what you think the real weaknesses of the deck are. I've been trying to build some jeskai control and this paper list just wrecked at that tourney. It honestly feels more like a really good Jace deck then it does miracles. The four miracles slots are there because they can be and there isn't a better alternative but this is a much grindier deck than the top deck was. It is kind of gross to watch someone portent their opponent force shuffle after making something unexpectedly absent.

This deck has real teeth and i expect to see it do real well in Vegas.

[twndomn]

I'm curious what you think the real weaknesses of the deck are. I've been trying to build some jeskai control and this paper list just wrecked at that tourney. It honestly feels more like a really good Jace deck then it does miracles. The four miracles slots are there because they can be and there isn't a better alternative but this is a much grindier deck than the top deck was. It is kind of gross to watch someone portent their opponent force shuffle after making something unexpectedly absent.

This deck has real teeth and i expect to see it do real well in Vegas.

1. It cannot defeat Burn, even with CB from SB, it's still hard. You need something like Kor Firewalker.
2. It is no longer favorable against Lands. If the Lands player has Ghost Quarter over Ports, and he's smart enough to protect Loam via Tranquil Thicket, it would be difficult to stop Loam before his engine does too much.
3. Turn 1 deck like Griselbrand Storm (tin-fin) or BR Reanimator, can still win by speed.

[Whitefaces]

1. It cannot defeat Burn, even with CB from SB, it's still hard. You need something like Kor Firewalker.
2. It is no longer favorable against Lands. If the Lands player has Ghost Quarter over Ports, and he's smart enough to protect Loam via Tranquil Thicket, it would be difficult to stop Loam before his engine does too much.
3. Turn 1 deck like Griselbrand Storm (tin-fin) or BR Reanimator, can still win by speed.

1. Yes burn is a horrific matchup, it was bad before anyway. Luckily that deck isn't played enough currently to warrant dedicating sb slots to it. But if it for some reason picked up we could, Firewalker is much too low impact though.

2. Yes Lands is also worse, but again if it becomes such a huge obstacle to the deck we have a plethora of options. B2B, Blood Moon, Rest in Peace...honestly the list goes on and on.

3. The changes to the deck make zero different to these matchups. If anything, Portent is a better turn one play than SDT vs fast combo decks.

[IRS]

2. Yes Lands is also worse, but again if it becomes such a huge obstacle to the deck we have a plethora of options. B2B, Blood Moon, Rest in Peace...honestly the list goes on and on.

Noob here. Doesn't Rest in Peace turn off snapcaster mage, which we run at least 3?