Negate is better in some builds that can't support the UU early. Not because of Meddling Mage and Cabal Therapy.Originally Posted by Taishaku
Ajani is not just 2 life. Even if they do end up casting two burn spells on it to kill it, look how much time you have just gained to find additional counters, Ajanis, and other tools to help you win.
Why would you need to Wrath or lay EE at 2 versus combo?
I have no clue what you are replying to me about, but most people are assuming one of the pieces will get hit (I'm hoping for CB). Even though it can be hit by several highly played cards, it is still one of the most played cards in the format for a reason. Some builds of Landstill can support it.
I experimented with Counterbalance but it just wasn't what I was hoping for. Against Combo, it was too hard to find and get into play and I couldn't get both components at the same time. I may have just been unlucky but it seems my initial thought was correct on it.
Enlightened Tutor really goes alongside CounterTop in Landstill, if you're going to run Counterbalance at all. ET goes to get both sides of the combo plus Crucible of Worlds and it functions as a virtual counterspell once Counterbalance is in play because you have extra copies of Counterbalance in the deck to pull up to counter 2cc spells.
Wow, how did you beat solidarity... That is the combo deck designed to beat control decks... I am in the tourney so I you dont have to tell me but I am playing rock and also won 2-0 against fish. I am also very interested.
"eggs... why'd it have to be eggs"
*I made no mistakes.
*He had a hard time resolving key spells.
*I smashed him quickly.
Umm it is kind of bad form to tell everyone what your opponent is playing...
I disagree because its a swiss tourney with no dci points and no prize. If ANYTHING were on the line I would have said nothing.
@Jak.
No, Mana Leak fulfills whatever role Negate has quite well. I personally find a loss of late game viability preferable to not being able to counter creature spells.
That's bad rationalization. A Nourish does that, and it only costs 2cc. Ajani needs to do more to justify the 4cc. Pulse of the Fields or Life Burst can make it really tough to burn you to death.
I think I was talking about something else, not combo.
Some sections are not addressed to you, I sort of clump topics together. Sorry if it confused you.
@lavafrogg
Once you realize they're playing Solidarity, you're in control of the game. Just don't make dumb mistakes, and hope you draw enough permission.
Why bother to counter creature spells when you can just remove them? Your removal suite has disappeared? Negate says: "No. Period." Mana Leak says: "No. But maybe..." What are the Mu's, in which you'd side in negate, that you would prefer mana leak for its ability to counter creatures? Which incidentally can be dealt with stp, that's a card that hardly sees the sideboard? (even ant may bring in confidants...).
Life burst? 4 slots fo that card? What are we talking about? I'm a bit confused...That's bad rationalization. A Nourish does that, and it only costs 2cc. Ajani needs to do more to justify the 4cc. Pulse of the Fields or Life Burst can make it really tough to burn you to death.
I played solidarity now and then, and landstill is sort of a bye for that combo...Once you realize your opponent is playing landstill, you usually laugh. g1 there's too many dead cards and g2 it depends on the build. usually their CQ is better than ours. Talking theory, ofc. I can see vendilion clique as a bomb in this mirror match, since it filters the hand and put a clock on tide which, paired with an early factory, it's a good pressure.@lavafrogg
Once you realize they're playing Solidarity, you're in control of the game. Just don't make dumb mistakes, and hope you draw enough permission.
And BTW, if you plan to win with the HOPE you draw the cards you want...
Mana Leak is completely dead later on. Negate is at least a hard counter. I am not saying either one is all to great. I personally run a much bigger counter suit with 2-4 Counterspells on top of 4 Force and 4 SS.
Solidarity wins because you try to play the control game. You want to win fast. Don't wait to throw Elspeth out there. Once they build up to enough lands and have sculpted the perfect hand, only Counterbalance can really stop them. Things like Force and Spell Snare won't. It sounds like Mossivo played it right.
This is true, I had to add the ET back to the sideboard. I'm still not completely sold on Counterbalance though. What decks woul you side it in against? Burn and Storm mostly I imagine. Chalice of the Void does the same job, but its quicker and easier to cast without needing Top. It can also be recurred with Ruins if really needed.
That's fine. Then they're not hitting my Engineered Explosives, Sensei's Divining Top, Crucible of Worlds, Vedalken Shackles or Humility (and Back to Basics if I can decide what to cut in the sideboard) with Krosan Grip. Four of those are even recurrable with Academy Ruins. In all honesty, though, that's why I have four in the board right now. There's no guarantee that one will resolve and you can't waste resources digging for all your worth for it against matchups like combo because they'll just kill you in the interim. If they destroy one, I have a strong possibility of dropping another one shortly.@Hitman82, Jak.
I feel Counterbalance is easily foiled by Spell Snares and Krosan Grip. I mean, the deck tends to sacrifice its hand-based permission for board-based permission, putting it in a rather awkward position where it must act rather than react against other decks with permission. Also, let us not forget that it is technically a combo.
Regarding Spell Snare, that's one of the reasons I say it's a turn four play. You can't play the card like you do in Threshold style decks. There is no Daze to support tapping out. Counterbalance is there for after the initial assault to give you that staying power to deal with the onslaught of threats a deck can pose. Outside of graveyard removal, how do you consistently deal with recurring Life from the Loam? How do you deal with eight two casting cost tutors in combo? You only have half as many Spell Snares at best. If you're eating up your hand with Force of Will, you won't be able to keep up with them throwing bombs at you. Even decks like Zoo and burn can pose problems due to the lower casting costs those decks employ. Control decks can't always keep up with a deck that pumps out mana efficient threats. Outside of Swords, and now Path to Exile, we don't really have anything that can deal with threats as efficient as the threat itself. Path to Exile can be particularly poor in the early turns of a game because you're helping your opponent set up the spells that give them staying power like Ranger of Eos, Goblin Ringleader and the like. If you're counting on Engineered Explosives and Wrath of God, or similar effects, you'll find yourself weak to mana denial strategies.
What I'm saying is, in Legacy, you can't necessarily accurately predict what you're playing against because so many decks are viable. Because of that, a control deck needs to play spells that are generically good against a fairly large portion of the field. That's why people play cards like Vindicate and Cunning Wish. I just think that they're weaker to mana denial then cards like Counterbalance. It's relatively easy to have UU up by turn four, where you're generally ready to use cards like Vindicate, or turn six, where you're generally ready to use Cunning Wish. To me, having that kind of versatility in four cards across a group of matchups that aren't particularly good gives you a lot of staying power in this format.
@ Mossivo - I noticed that you said you didn't like Crucible of Worlds yesterday or two days ago. I was wondering why. I can't actually remember losing a game where I had Crucible of Worlds in play with Sensei's Diving Top. I've found it clutch against a large group of decks, even including Goblins (and not for Mishra's Factory), but most importantly in control mirrors. Crucible is the nuts in control mirrors. Just wondering what your thoughts were.
Its not directed to me but I'll throw my 2 cents in. I don't use it maindeck anymore but have it in the sideboard currently. I can't decide if I want to use it or not though. I don't side it in too much, but it can help when I do. At the moment, its taking up a slot for Fracturing Gust, Chalice of the Void, or Counterbalance and those may be better sideboard options. Sometimes I play matches where I wish I have it but thats not too common.
I wouldn't play Counterbalance in Landstill. It goes against the grain of a deck that wants to sweep the board clean. I can see why people do play it but I'd rather have the EE@2 game plan against a lot of the meta and Counterbalance makes you play that differently.
If you do play CounterTop maindeck and are using a couple of Enlightened Tutors then Rule of Law is just a house against a lot of the meta right now. Once you get CounterTop in play you go find Rule of Law and you can basically close to lock out your opponent, particularly another control player who does not have Counterbalance in play, from doing anything effective the rest of the game. Rule of Law also makes Threshold miserable on its own because they have to cast their threats and cannot back them up with counters. Against Storm it's powerful also.
Doesn't Countertop already achieve this without the aid of Rule of Law?
"Attack with Order of the Ebon Hand."
"K, block with Jotun Grunt?"
"It has pro white."
"Swords?"
"It still has pro white."
Team OMRIAIGTWYFEWARTCAE Team RTD
Twitter: @shawnldewey
It depends on what the opponent is playing. Rule of Law alone can shut down Threshold and Storm combo. Threshold because they lose the ability to land their threats and they don't have all that many of them to land in the first place. Storm combo because they can't go find Wipe Away and then cast it in the same turn, they can't cast Orim's Chant and then cast Wipe Away, etc.
Rule of Law breaks a lot of decks down because they depend on being able to sequence a few spells for maximum effect, including counters in a lot of cases. Landstill has a fairly unique opportunity to exploit this because its threats are not cast, they are dropped as land or off of a cycling or as a recurring non-Counterbalance-able threat. Also Landstill's counters become enormously more valuable since they will never be countered under Rule of Law unless the opponent has Counterbalance in play.
A normal NLU build wouldn't get as much out of Rule of Law because the changes it made to the game state would be largely symmetrical. In Landstill Mishra's Factory, Decree of Justice and Eternal Dragon (and the natural Landstill tendency to just sit back and deflect most of the time) make a card like Rule of Law highly asymmetrical in most matchups.
I think you need to be playing CounterTop though to put Rule of Law over the top, and I also think you need to be playing Enlightened Tutor. That makes Rule of Law a side-case in the Landstill archetype in something like Zvi's deck.
@gustha
"Why bother to counter creature spells when you can just remove them?"
Do I really need to address this question? It's such a straw man. You cannot expect anyone to satisfactorily answer your question, and it does not even prove your point.
Mana Leak is a more consistent "No" than Negate until they get 4 mana. And then, they can only play 1cc spells. Mana Leak sets them back three turns, and that's really good against aggro and combo decks. Negate, on the other hand, is almost dead against aggro.
I was talking about life gain. The rationalization of using Ajani Goldmane against burn is rather poor. It is simply too slow.
The thing about Vendillion Clique, in my opinion, is to know what is in their hand. Sure, getting rid of a Reset or Force of Will is great, but typically, knowing WHEN a Solidarity can go off is more important.
There's a degree of luck to every game. That's how it is. For instance, you HOPE you draw enough lands. Does this always happen? No. I remember the days when Goblins were around. You HOPE you had a Swords to Plowshares in your opening hand or that the opponent does not have a Lackey.
@Jak.
Many cards are entirely dead later on. But later on is also when Landstill is strongest; early on is when it is weakest. But Mana Leak is superior to Negate early on, and even later on in many matchups, as aggro and aggro-control decks often have some sort of creature they may be depending on. Therefore, I do not feel Negate is the best use of those 3-4 slots.
@Hitman82
Wouldn't the recurrability just be another argument to shut down the Counterbalance rather than the artifacts (at least until you're ready to attack)? The problem with Counterbalance variants is that they tend to have less hand-based permission.
The variety is also why I favor Counterspell and Mana Leak over Negate.
I keep Crucible of Worlds in my sideboard.
@FoolofaTook
I used to run Arcane Laboratory for the same reason. Totally shuts down a deck like Solidarity. Forces them to fight or die.
@mossivo1986
"Reason: I'm going to assume you were drunk when you posted this."
LOL. Lay off the poison. xDDD
Man, excuse but I'm a philosopher, you can't expect to confute my opinions if you don't address to them correctly. Your answer proves one of the two: a) you don't understand my answer; or b) you willingly misunderstand my answer. Just for beginning, a question is not a statement, so you won't expect it to prove anything (nor my point, in this case). That was simply ironic: I don't see the point in bothering to counter creature spells since you should run 9-16 removal total MD and SB, of which at least 3 are recurrable with ruins, and at least 4-5 are mass removal, and also you should play board keepers (that sometimes act as wincon) as Elspeth, Doj, Humility/Moat. That does a total of a third of your deck or so, and Landstill is famous for the board control strategy, that means crushing down aggro decks (with the exceptions we all know).
That said, I should recall that landstill is a complicate balance between two souls, one of which is a monoW control (board control) and the other is monoU (stack and deck manipulation, card advantage). The other question, which was far more important and you have completely bypassed, pretending to make my objections no more than silly words, was:
And the reason is simply: no one.The reason why this is not an argument is that is stupid to play monoU against aggro, where you want to play the W part of your deck, and the U part is purely there to counter the bombs and making card advantage in the form of a cascade of removals. I don't see any aggro Mu in which you'd want to side in more U spells instead of more removals. No one fucking minds to take in negate (aside from, say, aggroloam) or other counter against aggro, but takes care to side in more removal to manage better the board position. My point was precisely that if you side in more counters than more removal against aggro, then I don't know how the hell you're playing landstill. I don't really mind to bring in counters against aggro, so the point that mana leak counters creature is of no use: you would barely never side in counters against aggro decks, they're here to help other Mu's (say burn, e.g., combo, even the mirror, etc.). Negate is a more consistent "No" than mana leak because, given the fact that no one wants more counters sb to counter creatures, leaves no choices to the opponent.
To sum up: why do you want to counter creatures post-side, given the fact that a good third of your deck is already specifically focused on managing them? Mana leak in the place of the Sb negate is just a waste of slots, in the place of a stronger counter (for the purpose of a SB counter, that's not to counter creatures).
I hope this proves the point enough.
Or you just mull to swords, or to Force, if they start with vial. I use a 5th sword MD, speedstill does use more, it makes a total of 8-10 at least answers to a t1 lackey. 1/6th of the deck, meaning the percentage of having a t1 answer to lackey is not peroperly left to luck. Sure there's a degree of luck in every game. But I mean with "luck" winning against landstill when the oppo is in topdeck mode, not using 1/6 of your deck to manipulate your drawing, 1/6 of your deck to forbid the opponent spells, 1/3 of your deck to manage the board position and another third as your landbase. If landstill does not work correctly then I speak of "bad luck", I don't claim to be lucky if I don't miss my land drops, I don't claim to be lucky if I can mantain board position or win some counterwar. Hope in a control deck might be significatively reduced by its balancing. Look at konsultant's list: I think he wins because his deck is very well balanced and he is a skilfull player, not because of his hope or luck, though sometimes this may happen, sure. If you don't draw enough lands this is bad luck in a deck that has more than a third dedicated to the manabase. If you draw enough, this is not luck, but the way in which your deck should work.There's a degree of luck to every game. That's how it is. For instance, you HOPE you draw enough lands. Does this always happen? No. I remember the days when Goblins were around. You HOPE you had a Swords to Plowshares in your opening hand or that the opponent does not have a Lackey.
God do I hate it when people justify running weak cards that by saying they shore up the early game. No, Mana Leak doesn't. It is still a turn too slow to counter Tops, Kird Apes, Lackey, Vial, Nacatl. Mana Leak is a mid game card. The fact that it becomes completely dead later in the game is horrible.
Personally, I wouldn't run either of them. If you are looking for a heavier counter suite, go for Counterspells. Build your mana base correctly so that you can get the UU on turn 2 when you need it.
QFE
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote